Brush the ball form 6 to 12 o'clock for topspin serve and topspin FH ground stroke?

[tanventure]

What are the differences to pay attentions to create topspins for these two rather different strokes?

Also I understand in many situations that you hit/brush the ball at the same time, making the ball moving with mixed motion: moving up (topspin) and moving forward (flat stroke), therefore, so brush and hit are both in actions.

Like to have your suggestions or corrections on this. I understand it's hard to control how to hit/brush, but at least mentally I would like to know more about this. So far seems to me it's harder to hit the topspin serve.

thanks in advance for your comments/suggestions.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

It's harder to hit a topspin serve because there's no such thing as a topspin serve. It's mostly slice. Whereas on the groundstroke, it's very easy to lift from low to high. On a serve, when you get closer to the peak of your swing, the racket starts to move out to the side. The closer to the top of the swing, the more sidespin there is. The lower/earlier in the swing path you go, the more pure topspin you get, but the less racket head speed you get.

Bottom line, the idea is to focus on swinging up on a topspin serve and not focus so much on the type of spin you're generating, but rather getting good net clearance and ball drop. There's a good drill where you get on your knees and serve with a super choked up grip (as far up on the handle as you can go). In order to get the ball over, you need to swing up and out. There is no significant forward swing, just up and out to the side.

While I don't like the finish he preaches or the "dirty diaper" concept, the drill is very useful. You'll also find that if you toss into the court, it's very hard to get the ball over the net. So don't be afraid to actually toss the ball over your head while doing this. Later on you can toss over the baseline or a little inside when you get the swing down.

 

[Chas Tennis]

The clock face word descriptions for stoke impacts are not enough for describing the complex 3D racket string path and impact characteristics. That being said -

The racket strings on the forehand can move from what looks like '6 to 12'.

The racket strings on the high level serve never appear to move from '6 to 12' in high speed videos.

High level serves don't brush straight up on the back of the ball given the biomechanics used for the high level serve. Straight forward over the top is not done either.

High speed videos can show what is happening. But observing details of exactly where the racket first touches the ball and seeing the entire impact is not easy. With a racket head speed of 100 MPH the racket moves 7" between frames. Obviously faster frame rates are needed to get first impact. (edited from original)

Technical Tennis is a great reference on this subject. The Cross article on the kick serve is also very good with gems of information here and there throughout the article.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/kickserve.php
The link under "improve" above on this page does not work. Search title on Google.

I have not yet found high speed videos showing the theoretical racket-ball contact paths. But I believe what Cross says and the Technical Tennis drawings.

These are measured resulting spin axes for the slice, kick and flat high level serves. There could be other spin axes also. ? Very simplified, the effective racket movement during impact is probably roughly perpendicular to the resulting spin axes. The racket cannot go straight up the back of the ball and videos never show that for a high level serve.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_tennis_serve_Spin_rate_and_axis_of_rotation

Notice:

1) the kick serve has more sidespin than the slice serve.

2) the kick serve has more sidespin than topspin.

3) the slice serve has almost as much gyrospin as the kick serve.

I believe by definition that if there were a pure Topspin serve its spin axis would be horizontal. The spin axes of these measurements are all more vertical than horizontal.

Seeing the difference between a kick serve and a topspin serve is very difficult in high speed videos.

Frames before, during and after impact.

I believe the descriptions of 3D racket string paths in Technical Tennis (Cross & Brody). But have never seen videos to confirm the difference between a kick serve and a topspin serve. I believe the kick serve has more gyrospin than a topspin serve. I believe that it is difficult to get videos of kick serves and topspin serves that are accurate enough to distinguish between the two by where exactly the racket first contacts the ball.

Also the 'string path' has much more detail in that the ball squishes and the strings form a very brief 'pocket' during the 4 milliseconds of impact. The racket still appears to have a general path when frames before, during and after impact are viewed at a few hundred frames per second.

Effective kick serve with 3600 RPM from a club player. High level technique as it uses ISR and gets heavy spin. The strings go up an to the right during impact. The forward component of string motion is not shown well.

If you want a logical view of the string path on the ball get Technical Tennis, 2005, by Cross and Lindsey.

It would be great to see some high speed videos supporting exactly where the racket strings first contact the ball. That spot is determined by the angle (in 3D space) of the plane of the racket strings at first contact (a plane contacting a sphere). After first contact things get more complicated............

Players with other serving techniques, such as the Waiter's Tray, can get spins on serves. Serving techniques, other than the high level serve based on ISR, are not described anywhere that I have found.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

I think a high level flat serve in itself has a high amount of topspin, simply due to the racket pronating upwards and through the ball at high speed and the tip of the racket winning the collision. The racket face is in the process of moving upwards and closing when it contacts the ball, this results in topspin. Generating topspin by brushing up the back of the ball from 6 to 12 is a lower level technique.
Pat Rafter made a comment about his kick serves, saying that he makes contact on the top half of the ball. People ridiculed him for it, but I think he was correct.

The problem with brushing up on the back of the ball is that it would mean they need to lose a lot of pace to get the ball in. Instead, what they do is they apply some sort of sidespin to control the pace but still keep the trajectory pretty flat.

 

[Chas Tennis]

I think a high level flat serve in itself has a high amount of topspin, simply due to the racket pronating upwards and through the ball at high speed and the tip of the racket winning the collision.

This shows the motion of the racket head from the Big L position to after impact. I believe the upward component of racket head speed involves the rapid elbow extension that precedes the Big L frame and the continuing wrist & racket motions that follow from Big L. Note wrist position from Big L to after impact. Best to view high speed videos. (Imagine throwing the racket like a tomahawk with no internal shoulder rotation (ISR) and its upward motion.)
http://www.hi-techtennis.com/serve/nalbandian_l.php

The kick serve is impacted a few milliseconds before the racket head reaches its highest point. See high speed videos and the gif in the quoted thread.

The racket face is in the process on closing when it contacts the ball, this results in topspin. Generating topspin by brushing up the back of the ball is a lower level technique.

I don't agree as the gif in the quoted post shows. The gif shows the racket strings clearly going up and to the right. Some topspin might also result from the racket closing at impact as Cross has discussed. But how much topspin? Videos?

Pat Rafter made a comment about his kick serves, saying that he makes contact on the top half of the ball. People ridiculed him for it, but I think he was correct.

The Technical Tennis (reference book) detailed discussion is in agreement with contacting the top half of the ball for a kick serve. See reference.

On the other hand, when Rafter said that he contacted the ball from "11 to 5" (I believe) I ridiculed that word description and asked for an explanation. If the "11 to 5" path could be shown in high speed video it would be fascinating. I'm still confused and interested by what was actually meant by Rafter.

The problem with brushing up on the back of the ball is that the pros tend to play with very powerful rackets and hitting the serve upwards with a high trajectory would mean they need to lose a lot of pace to get the ball in. Instead, what they do is they apply some sort of sidespin to control the pace but still keep the trajectory pretty flat.

It would be nice to see initial impact from two orthogonal camera angles at 1000 or more frames per second so that we could see the angles for ourselves. A clear vertical plumb line would be necessary in the video (or after the video before the camera is moved).

High speed video of kick serve. Is the first contact on the top of the ball? But there is no vertical reference.

Note that the racket closes as it moves from left to right. Note that the racket head is also rotating significantly from internal shoulder rotation (ISR). Those are two independent rotations with two very different directions of the rotation axes. An estimate of the ISR rotation rate is 3000 d. per second or 3 d. per millisecond.

Another thread
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...e-ball-contact-position.570272/#post-10548150

 

[shindemac]

You need to swing low to high for a topspin groundstroke; and you need to swing from 6 to 12 o'clock for a topspin serve. Actually, there is no topspin serve; it's called a kick serve. Maybe it's a better name even though no one can agree what it means. At least we don't confuse whether it has "topspin" or not. I guess this is how some people call a slice a kick serve.

 

[Rfedisthegoat]

What are the differences to pay attentions to create topspins for these two rather different strokes?

Also I understand in many situations that you hit/brush the ball at the same time, making the ball moving with mixed motion: moving up (topspin) and moving forward (flat stroke), therefore, so brush and hit are both in actions.

Like to have your suggestions or corrections on this. I understand it's hard to control how to hit/brush, but at least mentally I would like to know more about this. So far seems to me it's harder to hit the topspin serve.

thanks in advance for your comments/suggestions.

There's an AMAZING tool called "The Eye Coach" made by Billie Jean King. Get one if you can... it'll show you if you're getting both (the ball spins... and the "T" Moves)... great to practice your strokes on! Hope that helps

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Onthe other hand, when Rafter said that he contacted the ball from "11 to 5" (I believe) I ridiculed that word description and asked for an explanation. If the "11 to 5" path could be shown in high speed video it would be fascinating. I'm still confused and interested by what was actually meant by Rafter.

I think he was referring to his first serve as being 11 to 5, or it may have been 12 to 5? This IMO would mean simply hitting down and slightly across on the ball, as opposed to a purely flat serve where you theoretically go from 12 to 6 (rarely happens). Whereas on the second serve he tries to hit across the top of the ball from 10 to 2 with a slightly closed racket face.

His first serve is more of a flat one with a bit of slice, like Andy Murray's for example. His second serve is clearly a kick or slice, depending on how he manages to make contact.

 

[Chas Tennis]

I think he was referring to his first serve as being 11 to 5, or it may have been 12 to 5? This IMO would mean simply hitting down and slightly across on the ball, as opposed to a purely flat serve where you theoretically go from 12 to 6 (rarely happens). Whereas on the second serve he tries to hit across the top of the ball from 10 to 2 with a slightly closed racket face.

His first serve is more of a flat one with a bit of slice, like Andy Murray's for example. His second serve is clearly a kick or slice, depending on how he manages to make contact.

The thread I had in mind with the '11 to 5' comment was about Rafter and the Kick serve. Why do you think that Rafter was referring to a flat serve?

Can you find a high speed video to show

first serve (flat?) - 11 to 5 or 12 to 5?

second serve - 10 to 2?

Are these paths too small to see in high speed videos?

-------------------------------------------------------------

The clock face descriptions are ambiguous. Is the clock face always vertical? Or does it always face the server? How is the clock face oriented for a server looking up at 45 d.? How many people interpret it their own subjective way? Most often, I think of a clock as facing me.

What do you mean by '10' or '2' ? Is '10' literally on the edge of the ball somewhere? Is the racket face closed to go from 10 to 2? If it went from '7 to 1' would the racket first touch '7'. Then it would be open correct?

For a logical way to view the paths see reference Technical Tennis. However, it shows a 2D version of 3D space and ball.

Video is also a 2D image of 3D space and ball.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

We're both talking about the exact same video. Rafter said that he tries to add a bit of spin on his first serve as well. He rarely goes for a pure flat serve. More often than not it would have a bit of slice on it, rather than twist. But his second serve, will usually have twist on it.

That's correct, the reason why he talks about 10 to 2 for high level servers and 7 to 2 for rec players is because 10 to 2 allows you to have pace and spin on the ball, due to the lower trajectory. 7 to 2 means contacting the ball with an open racket face for a high trajectory, which is a low level technique that robs you of pace.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

A bit like with topspin groundstrokes, high level players rarely "brush up" on the back of the ball. That only when they want to take the pace off it for short angles, passing shots etc.

 

[tanventure]

Bottom line, the idea is to focus on swinging up on a topspin serve and not focus so much on the type of spin you're generating, but rather getting good net clearance and ball drop. There's a good drill where you get on your knees and serve with a super choked up grip (as far up on the handle as you can go). In order to get the ball over, you need to swing up and out. There is no significant forward swing, just up and out to the side

The youtube video is very nice, very helpful!

Thanks

 

[Chas Tennis]

We're both talking about the exact same video. Rafter said that he tries to add a bit of spin on his first serve as well. He rarely goes for a pure flat serve. More often than not it would have a bit of slice on it, rather than twist. But his second serve, will usually have twist on it.

That's correct, the reason why he talks about 10 to 2 for high level servers and 7 to 2 for rec players is because 10 to 2 allows you to have pace and spin on the ball, due to the lower trajectory. 7 to 2 means contacting the ball with an open racket face for a high trajectory, which is a low level technique that robs you of pace.

This is from a very long thread on this issue.

Hi Tony. I'm 5'8" and it works just fine for me (in reverse - I'm a lefty!). Just keep in mind that 11 - 5 is what it should feel like. It's not a reflection of how the racket actually moves across the ball, nor is it really necessary to understand exactly what is happening as long as you get the result you want. It's like a black box ;-)

- Will

(Obviously if you're interested in the minutia you should dig deeper.)

Thread - "Anyone tried the 11 to 5 Rafter kicker."
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/anyone-tried-the-11-to-5-rafter-kicker.461208/

See also the many posts in this thread.

wihamilton is Will Hamilton of Fuzzy Yellow Balls. I did not find the original thread or post where wihamilton posted the Rafter video.

Will Hamilton said "Just keep in mind that 11 - 5 is what it should feel like."

As I said at the end of that long thread we need a higher quality video to show how the racket first touches the ball.

 

[Chas Tennis]

Another thread on the subject.
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...e-ball-contact-position.570272/#post-10562494

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

This is from a very long thread on this issue.

Thread - "Anyone tried the 11 to 5 Rafter kicker."
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/anyone-tried-the-11-to-5-rafter-kicker.461208/

See also the many posts in this thread.

wihamilton is Will Hamilton of Fuzzy Yellow Balls. I did not find the original thread or post where wihamilton posted the Rafter video.

Will Hamilton said "Just keep in mind that 11 - 5 is what it should feel like."

As I said at the end of that long thread we need a higher quality video to show how the racket first touches the ball.

With all due respect, Will is a low level rec player, he's just surprised at Rafter's advice. Like a lot of people on this board.
No doubt high level players could hit second serves by brushing up the back of the ball from 7 to 2 at 50 miles an hour. But they cannot afford to do that cos they'll get smacked. Rafter says so much in that video if I recall correctly. Good players play with relatively small margins, even on second serves. They can do that because they are more accurate than low level players.

 

[tanventure]

Another thread on the subject.
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...e-ball-contact-position.570272/#post-10562494

thanks for the thread, very interesting

 

[tanventure]

You need to swing low to high for a topspin groundstroke; and you need to swing from 6 to 12 o'clock for a topspin serve.

Is "swing low to high" the same as "swing from 6 to 12 o'clock"? I thought they are the same.
Can you elaborate it a bit more? Like to know more about how they are different.

Thanks

 

[shindemac]

Is "swing low to high" the same as "swing from 6 to 12 o'clock"? I thought they are the same.
Can you elaborate it a bit more? Like to know more about how they are different.

Thanks

I don't know, since i didn't make up the analogy. But people say swing 6 to 12 for serve and swing low to high for groundstrokes, and then it's parroted. I don't know why people don't say swing low to high and whether there is meant to be a difference. I think clockface can be very confusing to beginners too. But it's the accepted terminology so best to stick with it.

 

[Chas Tennis]

Rafter second serve frames.

Frame before impact. Use the palm tree as a reference to measure racket positions on your computer screen.

Impact frame.

Frame after Impact.

Rafter's racket strings when viewed from behind appear to go up and to the right much like this kick serve.

From behind it is hard to see much difference between Rafter's kick serve and the other.

But from behind the forward tilt of the racket is not well shown so there is some doubt about Rafter's racket forward tilt and where exactly it first touches on the ball.

This side view is better for seeing how much the racket is closed for impact. Racket closing and already closed before impact.

Impact frame. Racket tilt at first touch was less than this frame with the ball squished. The closed racket will first contact the top half of the ball. I don't if the serve was good or a fault. I don't know how typical this frame showing racket tilt at impact is of kick serves.

Frame after impact or last touch. (The racket could be falsely bent by a camera scanning distortion called Jello Effect.)

I have not seen large racket forward tilts at impacts for topspin or kick serves (where the racket is seen rising). But I have not been looking for tilts until recently so they may still be there.

Can anyone find a video of a confirmed kick serve with a large racket tilt forward?

Finding high speed Rafter kick serves viewed from the side could show the angle on his serves.

I can't see how the term "11 to 5" could possibly apply to the serves above. In fact, the ball is a sphere (3D) and the clock face is a plane (2D) so I don't see how the analogy is useful for the kick serve. As I interpret it, Technical Tennis shows contact paths inferring a 3D path on the ball surface. Attila_the_gorilla used other clock face terms but I could not find the video where they were originally stated.

Some more careful high speed video of a strong kick serve is needed. When a plane contacts a sphere there is a certain relationship between the tilt of the plane and how high the sphere is first contacted.

I attempted some side view experiments on a better topspin or kick serve and found the racket tilts to be smaller than I could accurately measure - considerably smaller than Federer's forward racket tilt shown above.

If anyone nearby has a strong kick serve with a strong side jump open a TW 'Conservation'.

 

[tanventure]

Toly analysis.


I have not seen large racket forward tilts at impacts for topspin or kick serves (where the racket is seen rising). But I have not been looking for tilts so they may still be there.

I tried to play this video, but got a message: this video is private, not sure what's wrong.

thanks

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Is "swing low to high" the same as "swing from 6 to 12 o'clock"? I thought they are the same.
Can you elaborate it a bit more? Like to know more about how they are different.

Thanks

8 to 2 is still low to high, and is roughly the motion of the racket for all forms of topspin serves (kick, topspin slice, etc). This is also roughly the motion of the forehand used for balls around mid-shin-height.

But from behind the forward tilt of the racket is not well shown so there is some doubt about Rafter's racket forward tilt and where exactly it first touches on the ball.


I don't know how typical this frame showing racket tilt at impact is of kick serves.


I have not seen large racket forward tilts at impacts for topspin or kick serves (where the racket is seen rising). But I have not been looking for tilts so they may still be there.


Can anyone find a video of a confirmed kick serve with a large racket tilt forward?


I can't see how the term "11 to 5" could possibly apply to the serves above.

Looks tilted to me.

Seen it on nearly every Federer serve, not just kick serves.

Define huge. It's a relative term. Though even with your consideration of what's "huge", I wouldn't be able to measure the angles I see anyways. Anything with a "huge" angle probably went into the net, it wouldn't have enough pop on it to go over the net. With a forehand, we have significantly more leverage to lift the ball, so it's possible to get the ball over with a "huge" tilt. But with the serve, we have very little leverage to swing up on the ball, which is why we can only get about 35% topspin at max, which is around a 30 degree angle, so an 8 to 2 spin. And that's unique to Pete Sampras. Federer and Roddick get a 25% topspin component. With so little leverage to hit up, I can't imagine getting the ball over the net with a significant tilt unless you are hitting from really high up and well inside the court (so someone like Isner or Karlovic).

Probably can't find a video of it unless you look at practice videos. Commentators won't slow motion a second serve that went into the net unless that player consistently has serving issues and they're trying to point it out (they don't even slow motion to point out good motions anymore, so why point out bad motions at this point?). And if you found it, it'd be a massive fault. Hard to imagine it'd be in the warm up serves either. I'd imagine most players would exaggerate the upward motion during the warmups of a kick serve. It's such a large mistake I'm sure that the pros would've worked it out. If you found one it'd be like winning the lottery.

Some players have really weird mental cues. Very rarely do people with fast swings actually do what they think they're doing. These mental cues help them do what they do and what they need to do, but for the really weird ones, they aren't actually happening. What Rafter's probably thinking of is catch the outside of the ball, pull across, and finish down (basically pronate). If you hit through the ball enough to get it over, it's a proper kick serve (at least on the ad court). On the deuce court, I have massive problems getting the ball into the box if I feel like I'm catching the left side of the ball, so I usually aim for the top-right corner of the ball. Do I actually do that? I don't know. I probably hit the back of the ball, slightly skewed to the top-right.

 

[Chas Tennis]

General theoretical picture of racket contact location and string path on ball.

Assume that the red dot is the ball's trajectory as it would appear coming out the back of the ball. Let's say that the arrow is to be taken literally and it represent the contact of the ball.

If you get a racket and a ball you can place the racket on the arrow shown. The racket angles to touch the ball there are very large, >45 d I believe. Because this does not agree with videos I've seen I assume that the arrow is a representation and not to be take literally, not based actual measurements.

If the arrow were located closer to the red dot then things might make sense. But I would like to see high speed videos to make sense of all this. But if the arrow is too close to the red dot it becomes very difficult to see directly in videos. But the racket angle at contact can show us where first contact is - you can see this easily with a ball and racket.

The Federer video seems to have the racket more closed to me that what I remember seeing in many high speed videos.

Now add Rafter's comment that he hits "11 to 5". (I can't find the original video is a wihamilton post or thread). What the clock face itself means is not clear.

Knowing what the initial contact point is for a typical kick serve technique - verified by high speed videos - would be useful for knowing how the ball is actually first contacted. As of now, I have not seen any good high speed videos that locate first contact on the ball for a kick serve.

This is a wonderful project for those with Phantom high speed cameras and an available high level kick serve that jumps sharply to the right for a right hand server.

 

[Dragy]

Assume that the red dot is the ball's trajectory as it would appear coming out the back of the ball.

This approach is most correct, eliminating varaince of the deuce/ad court serve. If we align "clock face" square to the ball deployment trajectory, not related to the baseline or server's point of view, we can determine the contact point (or zone, due to ball and stringbed deformation) with a meaningful approach.

Now, if we hit the ball with "absolutely slick" board, that would deploy square to this board, irrecpective to swing path. With racquet stringbed, the ball trajectory is adjusted by the "drag" produced by the across path. The direction of adjustment from square is determined by the direction of swing solely. The degree (angle) is determined by relation of forward and across components, as well as particular action of the stringbed for the speed and direction of swingpass.

Therefore, if we look at the ball in such a way that the red dot is the ball deployment trajectory (think down the T serve from very close to the mid hash), the actual contact zone on the ball for kick serve will be up and to the right of the red dot, with swing direction like 8 to 2. Hitting the left side of the ball is either referred to the baseline when hitting ad court out wide kicker, or just a mental que for all other cases. If you actually hit left side of the ball with left-to-right swing, it goes way to the right, no other chance.

 

[Chas Tennis]

This approach is most correct, eliminating varaince of the deuce/ad court serve. If we align "clock face" square to the ball deployment trajectory, not related to the baseline or server's point of view, we can determine the contact point (or zone, due to ball and stringbed deformation) with a meaningful approach.

Now, if we hit the ball with "absolutely slick" board, that would deploy square to this board, irrecpective to swing path. With racquet stringbed, the ball trajectory is adjusted by the "drag" produced by the across path. The direction of adjustment from square is determined by the direction of swing solely. The degree (angle) is determined by relation of forward and across components, as well as particular action of the stringbed for the speed and direction of swingpass.

Therefore, if we look at the ball in such a way that the red dot is the ball deployment trajectory (think down the T serve from very close to the mid hash), the actual contact zone on the ball for kick serve will be up and to the right of the red dot, with swing direction like 8 to 2. Hitting the left side of the ball is either referred to the baseline when hitting ad court out wide kicker, or just a mental que for all other cases. If you actually hit left side of the ball with left-to-right swing, it goes way to the right, no other chance.

Interesting points for the kick serve.

At this point I'm just trying to get the location of the first point of string-ball contact with certainty and in a way that shows. What follows with the sting bed and ball distortions is much more complicated.

My definition for 'swing path' is the path of the center of the racket strings. I can see two components of the racket path from the behind viewpoint, and it is up and to the right (examples shown).

Besides swing path of the center of the racket strings, the racket clearly also has two rotations at impact for the serve. One from the arm swinging forward and closing the racket and the other from the upper arm rotating from internal shoulder rotation. There are two axes.

The full interaction is too complicated, I'd like to see the first contact point. Getting the racket angle an instant before impact is equivalent to having the contact point.

 

[Dragy]

Is there any sense in considering the complicated full swing pass with all the rotations while we know that interaction time is that short? It's more practical (for those who even bothers to think of the contact, not just developing the swing with general guidline, practice and experience) to apply a simple model referring to swingpass from first instance of contact to last instance as linear, combined of forward and accross components?

 

[Chas Tennis]

Is there any sense in considering the complicated full swing pass with all the rotations while we know that interaction time is that short? It's more practical (for those who even bothers to think of the contact, not just developing the swing with general guidline, practice and experience) to apply a simple model referring to swingpass from first instance of contact to last instance as linear, combined of forward and accross components?

If we knew the first contact point for a kick serve and how to video it we would have a new feedback checkpoint. Also, we would have another firm piece of information for understanding the kick serve. We might discover variety in first contact points, racket head speed requirements, racket orientation requirements, etc. As it is now, there is a lot of incomplete and often conflicting information and even some with high speed videos that still don't answer a most basic question - where do the racket strings first contact the ball?

A feedback checkpoint is practical and important. Somehow learn and perform the stroke as best you understand it and can do it. Video the test serve in high speed video and compare it to a known high level serve. If the feedback checkpoint does not match that for a high level stroke find out why or decide to ignore it.

If you are interested in this subject the clock face analogy does not lead to the details in my opinion.

 

[Dragy]

If we knew the first contact point for a kick serve

In by belief, first contact point, mid contact with deformed ball, last instance of contac - better to be considered same in the model where the ball is a sphere and the stringbed is a board. There's hardly any "carving around", and in no way this is controllable, especcially with ISR/pronation providing opposite action to such carving...

Then, having no 100% precise video reference for the kick serve impact, we still can do some "reverse engineering". If we speak twist serve with side kick, we know the ball should have gyrospin. Gyrospin cannot pe impared with vertical racquet face - obviously, gyrospin axis is square to racquet face in such a case. So the racquet face shall be tilted, which means contact with upper part of the ball.

Now the ball "drag" by strings is an agreed concept - analogous to launch angle in topspin groundstroke being always higher than square to the stringbed. Depending on how you "look at the ball" you can say if you hit right or left side or whatever. I prefer referring to the ball departure trajectory, as most uniform. To hit forward with left-to-right brushing action you must contact the ball more on the right side. However, widespread mental cue is hitting left side of the ball. For any real player it's important what helps him perform, not what actually happens))

 

[Chas Tennis]

In by belief, first contact point, mid contact with deformed ball, last instance of contac - better to be considered same in the model where the ball is a sphere and the stringbed is a board. There's hardly any "carving around", and in no way this is controllable, especcially with ISR/pronation providing opposite action to such carving...

Then, having no 100% precise video reference for the kick serve impact, we still can do some "reverse engineering". If we speak twist serve with side kick, we know the ball should have gyrospin. Gyrospin cannot pe impared with vertical racquet face - obviously, gyrospin axis is square to racquet face in such a case. So the racquet face shall be tilted, which means contact with upper part of the ball.

Now the ball "drag" by strings is an agreed concept - analogous to launch angle in topspin groundstroke being always higher than square to the stringbed. Depending on how you "look at the ball" you can say if you hit right or left side or whatever. I prefer referring to the ball departure trajectory, as most uniform. To hit forward with left-to-right brushing action you must contact the ball more on the right side. However, widespread mental cue is hitting left side of the ball. For any real player it's important what helps him perform, not what actually happens))

The racket face has an angle vs time during the impact. The ISR might have a rate of 3000 d/sec, and that would appear in the racket head rotation (azmuthal). That component would be 3 d per milliseconds. In 4 milliseconds of impact, the racket would have rotated 12 degrees if it weren't for impact interactions and their effects .......

But the clean problem is the racket face angle at the instant of first contact. Also, measuring the racket angle at impact is simpler if we consider the sphere and plane as representing the ball and string plane and how they first touch. The racket face angle tells us where this first contact point must be and we don't have to do super videos and try to see the actual spot directly on the ball. Also, the racket motion can be seen with reasonable rate high speed video, say, 240 or 420 fps, and the racket progresses forward in a predictable way.

So far it looks as if the racket face angle would be easy to video.

Azumthal Angle. But seeing the azmuthal angle (the ISR rotation) of the racket face on the serve works better with camera views above the server. These videos are very rare. Set ups to hold a camera above a server are possible but cumbersome.

(I just went to a wedding where the groom had a stabilized drone and friend to operate it. He used the drone to video his wedding. The next day he used it to video wedding guests sliding down a long rope slide on the side of a mountain.)

Forward Racket Tilt. The forward tilt of the racket strings should be much easier to video and should tell us how far on the top half of the ball the first contact is.

I attempted to measure forward racket tilt for someone with a stronger topspin or kick serve but the racket always appeared vertical to the accuracy that I could measure. Forward tilt did not look like the Federer serve. It was either a topspin serve where the racket face can be vertical, or a kick serve with a smaller angle than I believed I could measure. ?

 

[Chas Tennis]

...................There's hardly any "carving around", and in no way this is controllable, especcially with ISR/pronation providing opposite action to such carving...
....................................................

For the "carving" I believe it may be very common, but not for a high level serving technique with ISR rotation.

The most common serving technique in serving videos posted here has been the Waiter's Tray technique. Also, Dennis Van DerMeer estimated that 50% of servers were using a WT technique.

The WT technique is identified with some checkpoints but how it is performed has not been well described. There are not many videos describing how to properly perform a WT serve. An exception is the Pat Dougherty video Hammer That Serve. (He does not use the term "Waiter's Tray".)

Players with other techniques can add spin by going across the ball or carving, somehow. With WT there is no problem with the "ISR/pronation providing opposite action.......". But how each server may be adding spins to their techniques is not well known.

I believe that servers that don't use ISR often describe 'carving' or 'going across' and I find their comments very believable. But there are few high speed videos.

A player that I know has a nasty slice serve. Indoors, it gets into the side netting between courts and he even considers it unfair indoors and avoids using it unless he really wants the point. He has a WT and an effective slice serve at 4.0 NTRP level.

I refer to

1) the Waiter's Tray technique - most common technique is rec tennis,
2) other miscellaneous techniques and
3) high level serving techniques

and what most players understand about these distinct techniques and the information widely presented without reference to serving technique as the Tennis Serve Nuthouse.

 

[morandi]

I believe when Rafter is talking 11 to 5 on kick serve he is thinking about the finish of the stroke, or the second part of his swing. I find it allows you to generate more racquet head speed. Kind of like on the forehand when they say focus on the finish and the rest of the stroke takes care of itself.

 

[morandi]

you can't argue with this:

 

[Chas Tennis]

I believe when Rafter is talking 11 to 5 on kick serve he is thinking about the finish of the stroke, or the second part of his swing. I find it allows you to generate more racquet head speed. Kind of like on the forehand when they say focus on the finish and the rest of the stroke takes care of itself.

During this thread I saw a different interpretation.

Suppose that he meant his racket orientation was at impact. That is about 11 o'clock. Could that be?

That seems possible for 11 o'clock.

But then there is the 5 o'clock. That would have to be somewhere in the follow through. I don't usually consider the follow through as I believe that players can vary that a lot with identical racket work on the ball. Also, usually in communicating the clock face is pictured in some way on the ball. But I believe that I have seen some larger clock faces used on the internet.

I think this would have been discussed in the original wihamilton thread which I can't locate. We did ask what Rafter meant and I don't recall an answer being presented other than the 'feels like' explanation already quoted from a later thread. I don't find the 'feels like' explanation very useful for communication. To begin, it's subjective and hardly ever described.

 

[morandi]

I found the thread. Apparently it was not 11 to 5. The guy who started the thread misquoted. It was 11-4 for 1st serve and 10-2 for 2nd kick.
Here it is: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/anyone-tried-the-11-to-5-rafter-kicker.461208/

 

[Chas Tennis]

I found the thread. Apparently it was not 11 to 5. The guy who started the thread misquoted. It was 11-4 for 1st serve and 10-2 for 2nd kick.
Here it is: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/anyone-tried-the-11-to-5-rafter-kicker.461208/

What post has the 11-4 and the 10-2 information?

There was an earlier thread or maybe a post. Will Hamilton was promoting instruction based on Rafter. There was a video. Maybe the comment was in the video.

 

[Chas Tennis]

I believe that this is the link. You have to sign in now.

Will Hamilton from Fuzzy Yellow Balls has a new kick serve video with Pat Rafter.
KICKIN' IT WITH PAT http://www.patrafterserve.com/fe/46400-kickin-it-with-pat?authenticity_token=lzrR16SaH33QhWJbaJ5VTmH9O3vpizbXecRvegtGFTU=&custom kjbfe=46313&custom squeeze_page_name=B_plain&email=charlespaniszyn@yahoo.com&from=charlespaniszyn@yahoo.com&listname=fyb_rafter&meta_adtracking=&meta_message=1&meta_required=email&meta_tooltip=&name=&x=94&y=31

When I saw it, I thought of your post.

Don't know if you remember Pat, but he was one helleva serve and volleyer.

In the video he says he patented his game after Stefan Edberg (I always thought so.)

In the video, he demonstrates a "hard" kick as his first serve.

He has varients of the kick from an exaggerated kick left to even a slice - all off the same tossing motion!

If you are looking for success in doubles, I think you would really like this free video series.