Open Tennis Serve

jm1980 · Mar 19, 2017

Bottom line is, and I'm sure you've heard this a million times already, if this were a better way (or even a feasible way) to serve, there would be more pros adopting it. But no, you only see this kind of stuff with low-level amateurs with crappy serves. This should tell you a lot.

SinjinCooper · Mar 20, 2017

oserver said:
How do you know "Open serves suck" if you never tried? Or if no elite players have tried it?

They've all tried it. They tried it when they were five. Now it's just a matter of counting how many stuck with it.

mbm0912 · Mar 20, 2017

Who's is better?

pabletion · Mar 20, 2017

oserver said:
Guess what, Venus and Stan are changing this now. More players will follow.

After watching today's match, I made a few photos of Stan's serves to prove that he was not using a typical pin-point stance for his first serve. He opened somewhat, not to the extend of Venus's first serve, but nevertheless, it is one step toward openness.

http://www.tennis-points.com/photos.html 03/19/2017 photo

Guess what, YOURE ABSOLUTELY WRONG, about Venus and Stan. Your serve is nowhere NEAR similar to any of them, I dont know if you dont have the eyes to catch that or just are really really bad at observing. And this is coming from a guy who is a BIG FAN of Wawrinka's serve and who is trying to emulate it. You are focusing on the WRONG part of his serve (his right foot), and missing the whole point of the complete motion.

....And you keep sayin that Wawrinka doesnt use a continental grip to serve... even though, in the pics you point out, indeed he is holding the racquet with a conti (I seriously doubt that you understand what a continental grip is, if you cant see it on Stan).

GuyClinch · Mar 20, 2017

SinjinCooper said:
They've all tried it. They tried it when they were five. Now it's just a matter of counting how many stuck with it.

This. +1.

Rather then being some advanced serve of the future this is an ordinary serve of the beginner. As soon as the OP figures this out he can advance his serve. But he is amazingly too stubborn to believe it. Supposedly the guy is into computers.. I wonder if he writes all his software php?! LMAO.

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

SinjinCooper said:
If you really don't want to hit a real serve, at least turn your grip a little bit more from Eastern FH toward continental. Maybe halfway. Then aim at the net post instead of the middle of the box (for ad side). You'll accidentally get a little spin on there, which should make your serve a bit more consistent, give it a bit more movement, and stop it from going 12 inches long every time.

And then never tell anyone I suggested you serve that way.

Now you are putting one foot into the cold water. If you put both feet in, maybe the water was actually not cold at all. Stan is using that grip to produce efficient and powerful serves, much better then Roger's.

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

jm1980 said:
Some players with the pin point stance will drag their back foot a little past their front foot, but the stance is nowhere near open; it's not even a "step" towards open!

You can see even Andy Murray will occasionally do that

And you've got to be kidding me with the grip.

Murray's back foot is very closed to the front foot, even the back foot passes a little to the right side of front foot. Stan's feet are much more apart to be qualified as a typical pin-point stance. His feet forms a angle with the ball path. This angle and the distance between the two foot is for creating a torque (for rotating along the axis) not seen by typical pin-point stance servers or platform stance serves. Nothing is happening by accident. Players and coaches will eventually analyze this deviation from the norm and start to change. Rotating along the axis using upper body is becoming a dead horse by now, after so many years of development/improvement. Now new changes have to start with the lower/middle body. Feet/stance will be the focus point for the foreseeable future. If you guys refuse to see it, what can I say?

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

jm1980 said:
Bottom line is, and I'm sure you've heard this a million times already, if this were a better way (or even a feasible way) to serve, there would be more pros adopting it. But no, you only see this kind of stuff with low-level amateurs with crappy serves. This should tell you a lot.

Haha, real LOL. You need to know some tennis history. Did you see Bjorn Borg or any elite players in his era (or era before) hit open stance topspin shots like current pros? Player, however great, are product of his/her environment (court surface, racket/string technology, playing rules, etc.)

The focus point of this thread is tennis forms - stance and grip. This is different from discussion of techniques. My main point is that both open stance and open grip have been proven to be effective for ground strokes. It will be proven to be effective for serves too. Since biomechanically, I have not found reason what applicable to ground strokes cannot be applicable to serves. I asked repeated the "why not" question and sadly, no one can offer some plausible arguments.

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

pabletion said:
Guess what, YOURE ABSOLUTELY WRONG, about Venus and Stan. Your serve is nowhere NEAR similar to any of them, I dont know if you dont have the eyes to catch that or just are really really bad at observing. And this is coming from a guy who is a BIG FAN of Wawrinka's serve and who is trying to emulate it. You are focusing on the WRONG part of his serve (his right foot), and missing the whole point of the complete motion.

....And you keep sayin that Wawrinka doesnt use a continental grip to serve... even though, in the pics you point out, indeed he is holding the racquet with a conti (I seriously doubt that you understand what a continental grip is, if you cant see it on Stan).

See below -

Attila_the_gorilla · Mar 20, 2017

SinjinCooper said:
They've all tried it. They tried it when they were five. Now it's just a matter of counting how many stuck with it.

Correct. One of the biggest issues with bad servers is that they start their motion very front-on.

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

pabletion said:
Guess what, YOURE ABSOLUTELY WRONG, about Venus and Stan. Your serve is nowhere NEAR similar to any of them, I dont know if you dont have the eyes to catch that or just are really really bad at observing. And this is coming from a guy who is a BIG FAN of Wawrinka's serve and who is trying to emulate it. You are focusing on the WRONG part of his serve (his right foot), and missing the whole point of the complete motion.

....And you keep sayin that Wawrinka doesnt use a continental grip to serve... even though, in the pics you point out, indeed he is holding the racquet with a conti (I seriously doubt that you understand what a continental grip is, if you cant see it on Stan).

You still cannot get it. I'm a 4.0 player; where did I say or imply I'm "NEAR similar" to elite players in techniques or skills. All I said were some similarities in forms - stance or grip. Venus and Stan did what they did for a reason, not by accident. I saw they did something similar (not the same) to what I do; that gave me some encouragement and delight. As this debate goes on, more players will follow their foot steps (don't copy me as you guys know, my serve sucks, at least by a 4.5 standard).

Shroud · Mar 20, 2017

oserver said:
Haha, real LOL. You need to know some tennis history. Did you see Bjorn Borg or any elite players in his era (or era before) hit open stance topspin shots like current pros? Player, however great, are product of his/her environment (court surface, racket/string technology, playing rules, etc.)

The focus point of this thread is tennis forms - stance and grip. This is different from discussion of techniques. My main point is that both open stance and open grip have been proven to be effective for ground strokes. It will be proven to be effective for serves too. Since biomechanically, I have not found reason what applicable to ground strokes cannot be applicable to serves. I asked repeated the "why not" question and sadly, no one can offer some plausible arguments.

The thing you are over looking and i thibk Attilla mentioned it is that the ground strokes are moving and the serve isnt.

Pros hit closed on groundies all the time when they have time

oserver · Mar 20, 2017

Shroud said:
The thing you are over looking and i thibk Attilla mentioned it is that the ground strokes are moving and the serve isnt.

Pros hit closed on groundies all the time when they have time

I love it - beside one is overhead and another is not, we now have one is standing and another is moving?! What about from time to time, you opponent hit a easy forehand at you so you just stand there to hit your forehand shot with a open stance and open grip? You like to move just for the sake of moving? Be careful not to jam your arm if you don't need to move.

Anyone have better arguments to my previous question -

"Since biomechanically, I have not found reason what applicable to ground strokes cannot be applicable to serves. I asked repeated the "why not" question and sadly, no one can offer some plausible arguments."

Shroud · Mar 20, 2017

oserver said:
I love it - beside one is overhead and another is not, we now have one is standing and another is moving?! What about from time to time, you opponent hit a easy forehand at you so you just stand there to hit your forehand shot with a open stance and open grip? You like to move just for the sake of moving? Be careful not to jam your arm if you don't need to move.

Anyone have better arguments to my previous question -

"Since biomechanically, I have not found reason what applicable to ground strokes cannot be applicable to serves. I asked repeated the "why not" question and sadly, no one can offer some plausible arguments."

You misunderstood. The ball is moving toward you on ground strokes. Not on the serve.

Bender · Mar 20, 2017

So this is what happens when the good folk over at 4chan decide to leave their neckbeard nests for the tennis courts....

Attila_the_gorilla · Mar 21, 2017

There is no fundamental similarity between an open stance forehand and Venus Williams' serve.
The main feature of an open stance forehand is that the outside leg is the loading leg, ie your right leg if you're a righty. The rotation takes place around your right leg. There's compromized distance of separation (lever length) between the rotational axis (right leg) and the rackethead. The benefit of the open stance is that it frees up your trunk rotation well past the point of contact, giving you the chance to swing faster.

But things work very differently on the serve. On the serve, the racket needs to be vertical when it contacts the ball, as opposed to on a groundstroke, where the racket is horizontal. This means that you must be swinging the racket upwards and in a vertical alignment just prior to contact. Because the racket needs to swing upwards and be vertically aligned, rotating past the point of contact is not only pointless, but actually counterproductive. As opposed to a forehand, where contact is made with a horizontally aligned and sideways swinging racket, which allows you to keep rotating right up to and even past contact without much issue.

Every decent right handed server pushes off their left leg, or when in a pinpoint stance they may put a bit of load on the right leg, but still mainly the left. The required rotation takes place around the left leg. There's maximum separation between the rotational axis (left leg) and the rackethead.

Try hitting a serve when you load only or mostly your right leg, like in an open stance forehand, and then I may admit you can hit an open stance serve. It will be rubbish, but it will be an open stance serve. And it will be nothing like Venus Williams'. I have no idea if your serve already "qualifies" as an open stance serve, can't make myself watch it closely enough, it makes my eyes hurt. But neither Stan's nor Venus' do, that's for sure.

Ash_Smith · Mar 21, 2017

oserver said:
Now you are putting one foot into the cold water. If you put both feet in, maybe the water was actually not cold at all. Stan is using that grip to produce efficient and powerful serves, much better then Roger's.

Federer's serve is THE model for efficiency. In what way is Wawrinka's serve "much better" (and please don't say speed as that is probably the least important variable for measuring effectiveness of serve at an elite level)

Ash_Smith · Mar 21, 2017

oserver said:
Haha, real LOL. You need to know some tennis history. Did you see Bjorn Borg or any elite players in his era (or era before) hit open stance topspin shots like current pros? Player, however great, are product of his/her environment (court surface, racket/string technology, playing rules, etc.)

Yes, they did actually. You need to know some tennis history. Manuel Orantes is just one example (as you don't know your tennis history he won the US Open in 1975 beating Connors in the final)

OW talks about this a lot as part of the inspiration for his "modern tennis methodology", he talks about players going back into the 30's and 40's hitting from open stance positions if I recall correctly)

Ash_Smith · Mar 21, 2017

oserver said:
Anyone have better arguments to my previous question -

"Since biomechanically, I have not found reason what applicable to ground strokes cannot be applicable to serves. I asked repeated the "why not" question and sadly, no one can offer some plausible arguments."

Yep, I posted them earlier (3 times) and you ignored them

Interestingly, the serve form you demonstrate has less in common with an open stance forehand groundstroke then the serves you choose to denigrate. Look at the relationship between the upper arm and the side of the body at contact of both - you will see that on the groundstroke there is an angle of something around 90 degrees. If you look for the same relationship in the serve, you will also see that because of the shoulder-over-shoulder rotation the same angle of around 90 degrees is maintained. By starting with open feet and hips you actually limit the ability to go shoulder-over-shoulder and end up with an angle of 45 degrees or less - which incidentally greatly increases the risk of an impingement injury.

GuyClinch · Mar 21, 2017

Yes, they did actually. You need to know some tennis history. Manuel Orantes is just one example (as you don't know your tennis history he won the US Open in 1975 beating Connors in the final)

+1. This. Again everyone on this board has tried open stance serves. It's actually far more natural - its how a naïve person would serve. It's how beginners serve. A neutral or closed stance serve takes some practice - but it pays dividends. you should go out and experiment with it - it will help your serve OP..

If you really are a computer scientist - you can spend an extra hour coding and make some money for a private lesson. Then you can finally learn to serve..

Bender · Mar 21, 2017

Ash_Smith said:
Federer's serve is THE model for efficiency. In what way is Wawrinka's serve "much better" (and please don't say speed as that is probably the least important variable for measuring effectiveness of serve at an elite level)

Is it though? It's certainly a very aesthetic serve, certainly very textbook, ie familiar, but efficiency means to produce more with less, and Sampras / Federer's motions are loopy and more complicated than they appear when you break them down.

Of course, part of it is because the serve itself is a relatively complex shot to begin with, but I'd have thought the most efficient serves would be the ones with minimal 'garnish' as possible.

To my understanding, how you get to trophy position is not usually all that important to the serve itself so long as the trophy position is correct, so surely players like Andy Roddick, Monfils, and to a lesser extent Tsonga, whose abbreviated motions bring their racquet and tossing arms straight to that position to get the job done (and none of whom have serving techniques that require you to be some sort of Übermensch like Dolgopolov's), could bring a reasonable case for having even more efficient motions than Federer's?

Ash_Smith · Mar 21, 2017

^^^ I would argue that the serves of Roddick for example involve quite a bit more brute force than Federer's and are therefore less mechanically efficient - the best test of mechanically efficiency is to repeat the swing with only thumb are forefinger on the grip - a mechanically efficient action should be pretty much repeatable at full speed like this and the ball effect should be very close to when serving normally (Bolletieri has been using this "test" for years). My guess would be that Roddick would lose his racquet trying this and Federer wouldn't. Just because Federer has a longer path to the ball than the abbreviated servers, doesn't mean it is less efficient mechanically.

Deleted member 23235 · Mar 21, 2017

I came back looking for updated videos 360 degree spinning serve/fh, disappointed not to find any

Can we give the 360 serve a nickname? I vote for "the Shoryuken Serve"

Deleted member 23235 · Mar 21, 2017

mbm0912 said:
Who's is better?

it needs a 360 spin to make it complete... @oserver can you team up with this guy to make it happen?

Deleted member 23235 · Mar 21, 2017

pabletion said:
The main reason that your serves are (barely, BARELY!) reaching the back wall is because practically ALL OF THEM ARE OUT! You made like two or three serves in!

I know you're just enjoying that this ridiculous thread is still very much alive, but cmon man. Your serve is just no good at all. Its not a "beginners" serve, and it really bothers me a USPTA teacher reffers to this kind of serve as a "begginers serve".

nm, found it... THANK YOU so much @oserver ! this made my day!

joking aside, and ignoring the 360 (which is comedy relief, thank you)... if you named this thread, "how to make the best of your frying pan serve"... i'd support you.

pabletion · Mar 21, 2017

oserver said:
You still cannot get it. I'm a 4.0 player; where did I say or imply I'm "NEAR similar" to elite players in techniques or skills. All I said were some similarities in forms - stance or grip. Venus and Stan did what they did for a reason, not by accident. I saw they did something similar (not the same) to what I do; that gave me some encouragement and delight. As this debate goes on, more players will follow their foot steps (don't copy me as you guys know, my serve sucks, at least by a 4.5 standard).

Not "near" in terms of speed/placement/consistency/spin etc etc... (cause that is obviously a STUPID comparison), but in terms of setup, preparation and technique/form. It is nowhere NEAR in terms of that either, and THAT is what you have tried to compare with:

1. Feet nowhere near: Wawrinka starts his motion with a CLOSED feet stance, then uses a PINPOINT motion, where he drags his back foot (right foot) forward and across his body axis. When you see Wawrinka stand to serve, his right foot is BEHIND him (left side with regards to his axis).

Gary doesnt do that. Gary starts his motion already OPEN. Right foot already accross his axis (on right side) when hes preparing to toss ball. Gary drags his FRONT foot a bit towards his right side, contrary to what Wawrinka (and Venus) do.

2. Knees: Wawrinka has a slight, not exaggerated knee bend (which I really like).

Gary doesnt do that. Gary bends his knees not too bad also (maybe THIS is the only similarity between the two). When he drags his front foot towards his right side, his position looks WAY better than at startup. Actually CLOSES his feet stance from a previous OPEN position (not so much an OPEN STANCE SERVE then).

3. Hips: Wawrinka has definitely a CLOSED stance regarding hips. Even though he drags his right foot across his axis, he loads up with his hips still closed to coil his torso.

Gary doesnt do that, he opens his hips, so no power will load up on the torso.

4. Shoulders: Wawrinka, having a closed torso, also closes on his shoulders, loading up and allowing him to snap the torso around when he goes for the serve.

Gary doesnt do that. No rotation from the shoulders means Gary arms the ball. No way to hit a 100mph, a 80-70 mph serve even, with this motion (since theres no way to rotate THE ARM ALONE to a 70-80 mph speed).

5. Tossing arm: Wawrinka does a perfect pose, extending up, thus raising his front (left) shoulder up, and dropping his back (right serving) shoulder down. This will add up on the kinetic chain.

Gary doesnt do that. His shoulders are practically leveled, no rotation no explosion.

6. GRIP: Wawrinka, textbook, points his racquet straight up to the sky when hes at "trophy position". No way to do this with an open grip (racquet would fall back, not point up). Wawrinka uses a CONTINENTAL GRIP, like a textbook serve calls for.

Gary doesnt do that. Gary uses an open, forehand grip, which makes it impossible to serve using a correct serving motion, rotating accross the whole body, in a throwing-like motion. This forces Gary to only arm the ball, slapping it with the hand and elbow, transferin an enormous stress, specially to the elbow, with very little result: No power, no spin, no placement, no consistency. Im worried you're gonna hurt that elbow eventually, hurts just to look at it.

GuyClinch · Mar 21, 2017

^^^ I would argue that the serves of Roddick for example involve quite a bit more brute force than Federer's and are therefore less mechanically efficient - the best test of mechanically efficiency is to repeat the swing with only thumb are forefinger on the grip - a mechanically efficient action should be pretty much repeatable at full speed like this and the ball effect should be very close to when serving normally (Bolletieri has been using this "test" for years). My guess would be that Roddick would lose his racquet trying this and Federer wouldn't. Just because Federer has a longer path to the ball than the abbreviated servers, doesn't mean it is less efficient mechanically.

Roddick is far more efficient - and has a far superior motion. Part of that is because Roddick is far more flexible - these leads to a better angle on his forearm after/during the drop. These gives him both a longer path where the racquet is accelerating and more stretch shortening reflex from the shoulder.

Length of racquet path doesn't matter much if speed is not carried through.

It's not fair to Federer who doesn't have the same quality of throwing motion Roddick had. Roddick could have thrown in the bigs. Great arm on that guy.. Roddick is 1 in a million. Fed is just a guy with average flexibility who learned to serve well.

Roddick's narrow platform also enables him to use his legs far better - again this is responsible for his nearly 30% better serve speed. That's a HUGE difference.

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

pabletion said:
Not "near" in terms of speed/placement/consistency/spin etc etc... (cause that is obviously a STUPID comparison), but in terms of setup, preparation and technique/form. It is nowhere NEAR in terms of that either, and THAT is what you have tried to compare with:

1. Feet nowhere near: Wawrinka starts his motion with a CLOSED feet stance, then uses a PINPOINT motion, where he drags his back foot (right foot) forward and across his body axis. When you see Wawrinka stand to serve, his right foot is BEHIND him (left side with regards to his axis).

Gary doesnt do that. Gary starts his motion already OPEN. Right foot already accross his axis (on right side) when hes preparing to toss ball. Gary drags his FRONT foot a bit towards his right side, contrary to what Wawrinka (and Venus) do.

2. Knees: Wawrinka has a slight, not exaggerated knee bend (which I really like).

Gary doesnt do that. Gary bends his knees not too bad also (maybe THIS is the only similarity between the two). When he drags his front foot towards his right side, his position looks WAY better than at startup. Actually CLOSES his feet stance from a previous OPEN position (not so much an OPEN STANCE SERVE then).

3. Hips: Wawrinka has definitely a CLOSED stance regarding hips. Even though he drags his right foot across his axis, he loads up with his hips still closed to coil his torso.

Gary doesnt do that, he opens his hips, so no power will load up on the torso.

4. Shoulders: Wawrinka, having a closed torso, also closes on his shoulders, loading up and allowing him to snap the torso around when he goes for the serve.

Gary doesnt do that. No rotation from the shoulders means Gary arms the ball. No way to hit a 100mph, a 80-70 mph serve even, with this motion (since theres no way to rotate THE ARM ALONE to a 70-80 mph speed).

5. Tossing arm: Wawrinka does a perfect pose, extending up, thus raising his front (left) shoulder up, and dropping his back (right serving) shoulder down. This will add up on the kinetic chain.

Gary doesnt do that. His shoulders are practically leveled, no rotation no explosion.

6. GRIP: Wawrinka, textbook, points his racquet straight up to the sky when hes at "trophy position". No way to do this with an open grip (racquet would fall back, not point up). Wawrinka uses a CONTINENTAL GRIP, like a textbook serve calls for.

Gary doesnt do that. Gary uses an open, forehand grip, which makes it impossible to serve using a correct serving motion, rotating accross the whole body, in a throwing-like motion. This forces Gary to only arm the ball, slapping it with the hand and elbow, transferin an enormous stress, specially to the elbow, with very little result: No power, no spin, no placement, no consistency. Im worried you're gonna hurt that elbow eventually, hurts just to look at it.

You are really into this topic. I guess me or anybody in this board can also do a thorough technique comparison analysis on your serve and Stan's if you can provide your serve video. I admitted that my serve sucks compare to 4.5 or higher level players, how about yours? To 3.5, 4.0, 5.0...?

Raul_SJ · Mar 22, 2017

You are using a forehand grip? What is your first serve %?

I think you must be DF a lot. If you change to Continental it would be better.

Bender · Mar 22, 2017

mbm0912 said:
Who's is better?

With the effort it must have taken to come up with that sort of motion and mastered it, you'd think he'd have learned how to hit a proper serve with a proper grip, but no.

Bender · Mar 22, 2017

Ash_Smith said:
^^^ I would argue that the serves of Roddick for example involve quite a bit more brute force than Federer's and are therefore less mechanically efficient - the best test of mechanically efficiency is to repeat the swing with only thumb are forefinger on the grip - a mechanically efficient action should be pretty much repeatable at full speed like this and the ball effect should be very close to when serving normally (Bolletieri has been using this "test" for years). My guess would be that Roddick would lose his racquet trying this and Federer wouldn't. Just because Federer has a longer path to the ball than the abbreviated servers, doesn't mean it is less efficient mechanically.

Interesting you'd see it that way.

My line of reasoning was that since the (relatively) longer windup that Fed and Sampras had doesn't actually influence the forward swing at all (since the racquet decelerates to trophy before accelerating again during the actual forward swing), that windup is more of a style choice than a technical one. From trophy to follow-through, Fed, Sampras, Roddick, Monfils, Tsonga, etc all have virtually identical strokes, so I'm curious why you feel that Roddick's serve is a matter of brute force? Arm strength is nice but it sucks for consistency, and Roddick's serve was a reliable weapon his entire career. I can get behind the fact that Roddick had TNT for arms, but from what I gather, you consider Roddick's arm strength to have overpowered proper technique?

I used to use a windup more similar to Tsonga and Berdych for a while, but ended up using the more traditional full pre-trophy windup (like Federer / Sampras / Djokovic) because it actually worked better for me for timing. But I don't consider that to be more of a mental / timing thing and a style mismatch, rather than a matter of technique, since the old windup caused my trophy pose to be rather erratic. That same abbreviated takeback would have worked perfectly fine for someone else, and my current loopier takeback similarly might not work for them.

AllCourtHeathen · Mar 22, 2017

I'm just gonna do a 360 and walk away from this thread

pabletion · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
You are really into this topic. I guess me or anybody in this board can also do a thorough technique comparison analysis on your serve and Stan's if you can provide your serve video. I admitted that my serve sucks compare to 4.5 or higher level players, how about yours? To 3.5, 4.0, 5.0...?

I dont have an actual serve vid, will post it whenever for your pleasure (since youre into measuring.....). I have this old vid, I've changed my serve motion since then, taking Wawrinkas serve as an example (much more simple, not so much knee bend, short back motion into trophy position, doesnt jump up as much...).

You can check out this old video if you like and tell me how much better I would serve with an Open Stance Serve....

Sequence is: 1st serve down the T, 2nd serve down T; then 1st serve out wide, 2nd serve out wide... (not randomly just trying to hit INSIDE serve box like your vids).

Wether my serve sucks or not, compared to a 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 5.0 level is irrelevant to what I've discussed regarding YOUR SERVE, which YOU promote as a valid good alternative (which is NOT). Im not the one flashing around a USPTA certificate and trying to "teach" a revolutionary (BOGUS) tennis technique.

Ash_Smith · Mar 22, 2017

^^^ Pretty decent looking serve there @pabletion - like your rhythm.

Power Player · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
You are really into this topic. I guess me or anybody in this board can also do a thorough technique comparison analysis on your serve and Stan's if you can provide your serve video. I admitted that my serve sucks compare to 4.5 or higher level players, how about yours? To 3.5, 4.0, 5.0...?

Nice try. His serve is clearly better than yours by a wide margin.

Now when you are going to play LeeD like you said you would?

Deleted member 23235 · Mar 22, 2017

AllCourtHeathen said:
I'm just gonna do a 360 and walk away from this thread

but a 360 will always bring you back... just like i am back... looking for more spinny vids... it's hump day, and i need my weekly fix to get me through to friday.

mcs1970 · Mar 22, 2017

nytennisaddict said:
but a 360 will always bring you back... just like i am back... looking for more spinny vids... it's hump day, and i need my weekly fix to get me through to friday.

Agreed. The OP is wasting his time publishing stuff and banking on his open serve as the thing to get him the attention he craves. The solution for that attention is in front of his eyes. Post a new weekly spinny video.. I'll guarantee he'll have tons of subscribers (I would) and it would go viral like the cat videos.

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

pabletion said:
I dont have an actual serve vid, will post it whenever for your pleasure (since youre into measuring.....). I have this old vid, I've changed my serve motion since then, taking Wawrinkas serve as an example (much more simple, not so much knee bend, short back motion into trophy position, doesnt jump up as much...).

You can check out this old video if you like and tell me how much better I would serve with an Open Stance Serve....
Sequence is: 1st serve down the T, 2nd serve down T; then 1st serve out wide, 2nd serve out wide... (not randomly just trying to hit INSIDE serve box like your vids).

Wether my serve sucks or not, compared to a 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 5.0 level is irrelevant to what I've discussed regarding YOUR SERVE, which YOU promote as a valid good alternative (which is NOT). Im not the one flashing around a USPTA certificate and trying to "teach" a revolutionary (BOGUS) tennis technique.

That was a video in 2008, nine years ago. Pace wise, the corner shot could not bounce to the fence to be qualified as decent 4.5 serves. Care to post a video of this year to see how much you've improved nine years later. If not much, open tennis serve will give you some alternative ways to improve. (I was a 2.5 player in 2007).

Doc Hollidae · Mar 22, 2017

AllCourtHeathen said:
I'm just gonna do a 360 and walk away from this thread

Shouldn't it be a 180 otherwise you'll just end up back on this thread.....

mbm0912 · Mar 22, 2017

Bender said:
With the effort it must have taken to come up with that sort of motion and mastered it, you'd think he'd have learned how to hit a proper serve with a proper grip, but no.

yea, pretty weird..

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

Doc Hollidae said:
Shouldn't it be a 180 otherwise you'll just end up back on this thread.....

Haha, you are not as dizzy as me!?

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

Power Player said:
Nice try. His serve is clearly better than yours by a wide margin.

Now when you are going to play LeeD like you said you would?

My old offer still stand, a match, not a drop-in into his home court.

mcs1970 · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
That was a video in 2008, nine years ago. Pace wise, the corner shot could not bounce to the fence to be qualified as decent 4.5 serves. Care to post a video of this year to see how much you've improved nine years later. If not much, open tennis serve will give you some alternative ways to improve. (I was a 2.5 player in 2007).

Your shots are certainly good for your age bracket. What has probably held you back from moving even higher is your obsession with a crappy serve that 99% of beginners already use, before they decide to get serious about Tennis. Anyway, either you're just too stubborn to see that or you're probably having a good time trolling all of us. The fact that you actually posted some papers about this shows that it's probably the former than the latter.

pabletion · Mar 22, 2017

Doc Hollidae said:
Shouldn't it be a 180 otherwise you'll just end up back on this thread.....

I see youre not that fluent in sarcasm.....

Topspin Shot · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
That was a video in 2008, nine years ago. Pace wise, the corner shot could not bounce to the fence to be qualified as decent 4.5 serves. Care to post a video of this year to see how much you've improved nine years later. If not much, open tennis serve will give you some alternative ways to improve. (I was a 2.5 player in 2007).

Lmao, his serve is way better than yours. The wide serves aren't supposed to hit the fence on the first bounce.

Power Player · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
My old offer still stand, a match, not a drop-in into his home court.

What's the difference? You made a weak offer and he countered by telling you when and where he plays. He has even posted his phone number on this website before. It seems to be a very popular place to play and you could probably meet some other players as well. But, I guess posting fantasy on the internet and not having the ego shattered is a safer thing to do.

pabletion · Mar 22, 2017

oserver said:
That was a video in 2008, nine years ago. Pace wise, the corner shot could not bounce to the fence to be qualified as decent 4.5 serves. Care to post a video of this year to see how much you've improved nine years later. If not much, open tennis serve will give you some alternative ways to improve. (I was a 2.5 player in 2007).

!!!!!!!!!

I guess an Open Stance Serve magically produces a slice spin that goes WIDE first, then inverts and spins towards the back wall/fence?

(I was a 5.0 player in 2007, now Im a 4.0, 4.5 on a great day.............).

Shroud · Mar 22, 2017

pabletion said:
I dont have an actual serve vid, will post it whenever for your pleasure (since youre into measuring.....). I have this old vid, I've changed my serve motion since then, taking Wawrinkas serve as an example (much more simple, not so much knee bend, short back motion into trophy position, doesnt jump up as much...).

You can check out this old video if you like and tell me how much better I would serve with an Open Stance Serve....
Sequence is: 1st serve down the T, 2nd serve down T; then 1st serve out wide, 2nd serve out wide... (not randomly just trying to hit INSIDE serve box like your vids).

Wether my serve sucks or not, compared to a 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 5.0 level is irrelevant to what I've discussed regarding YOUR SERVE, which YOU promote as a valid good alternative (which is NOT). Im not the one flashing around a USPTA certificate and trying to "teach" a revolutionary (BOGUS) tennis technique.

While it looks like a great serve i do see some issues oserver can fix for you!

1. The balls are landing IN the box
2. The serve is fast
3. Bare legs are offensive
4. No spinning.

Overall a great rec level serve in need of fixing with futuristic theory

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

SinjinCooper said:
They've all tried it. They tried it when they were five. Now it's just a matter of counting how many stuck with it.

Not true, they tried it when they were five, then all coaches taught them the C serve (close stance and closed grip), never taught them A, B, D serves using some of techniques used in C serve. Now things are going to change. Once elite serves like Venus and Stan started open a little, people will ask why. I'm sure players and coaches are looking closely what are differences among their serves and all other players serves. Interesting time are here in a few years.

oserver · Mar 22, 2017

Raul_SJ said:
You are using a forehand grip? What is your first serve %?

I think you must be DF a lot. If you change to Continental it would be better.

Yes, current I'm using semi-western grip (my forehand grip) to serve. You get more spin than using continental grip so the first serve in can be better.

Played 5 post season matches (at district/sectional level) just a few months switching to open stance serves.

Open Tennis Serve

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Professional

Professional

Professional

Professional

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest

Legend

Legend

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Deleted member 23235

Guest

Deleted member 23235

Guest

Deleted member 23235

Guest

Hall of Fame

Legend

Professional

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

AllCourtHeathen

Guest

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Deleted member 23235

Guest

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Professional

Similar threads