Difference between 1st and 2nd serve with pros

[chapufo1]

When I hear about how I should hit 2nd serves from other people, they all say "for second serve, use all spin". However, today, I met a person that is at least a 5.0 player and he told me that I don't have enough pace on my second serve and that I should throw it into the court more. This makes me wonder, exactly how do pros hit their 1st and 2nd serve? I thought tossing more into the court was for 1st serves only and if the pros do toss the ball into the court for both 1st and second serves, I'd imagine that the 2nd serve would have more spin but how could this be if they throw it in the same place for the 1st serve? Or is it that all of them hit flat on the first serve and hit with topspin/slice on second serve? thx for your feedbacks.

 

[x Southpaw x]

Well you just want a reliable 2nd serve I guess... more consistent you are... more pace you can afford to put in. But if you put in more pace and it goes long quite a bit, go ahead and use all spin I say.

 

[RiosTheGenius]

the swing speed should be the same in both, first and second, but for the second serve change your grip a bit so you put more spin and the ball curves more so there is a higher percent chances of getting the ball in play. but the swing speed and the follow through should be the same.
still have to go after it. better double fault with a nice serve than double fault with a 50mph candy.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

the rackethead trajectory is different for the 2nd, but its speed should remain the same.

also the leg work is different.

thus for a kick, one must have an much elongated trajectory arc, starting earlier and completing later than 1st, with a contact from "7 to 1", the arc being orientated much more to your right. also the knees must flex lower.

check the Sticky at the top for my posting on the Kick Serve, including clips of AA and others.

also, the neuromuscular patterns of activation are different
(e.g. the triceps is activated earlier, for longer and at higher levels for
kick than for the flat):
Upper Limb Muscles in the First (Flat) and Second (Topspin) Serve
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=73690

 

[nickybol]

You should serve with speed you can handle. The toss should be the same but you come under it with your body differently. This is very difficult and most amateurs prefer a different toss then on the first serve. But the basic function of a second serve is to get the ball in the court with some spin and placement. If you have reached this, you can work on speed. But speed shouldn`t be your basic goal.

 

[tennisplayer]

What Marius has pointed out is exactly what I do for my second serve. In addition, it helps me to toss the ball slightly higher than for a first serve, so I get a little longer time for the longer swing (for a topspin serve), and also be able to hit with more of an upwards trajectory. This way, not only is there a lot more spin for safety, but also considerable pace because I am still hitting as hard as I do for a first serve. But of course, it's never as fast as the first serve.

Thanks Marius, for confirming what I have thought was true! I lack the credentials to make definitive statements like you, though!

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Edberg

you might want to check this new thread:

Edberg: The Toss
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=74693

where the difference in toss for the various serves is show in clips.

 

[Roforot]

the rackethead trajectory is different for the 2nd, but its speed should remain the same.

also the leg work is different.

...

also, the neuromuscular patterns of activation are different
(e.g. the triceps is activated earlier, for longer and at higher levels for
kick than for the flat):
Upper Limb Muscles in the First (Flat) and Second (Topspin) Serve
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=73690

Could you help w/ the translation of some of this:
I get more triceps but...

"The antagonist muscles of horizontal adduction of the arm activate earlier in the topspin serve."

? is this muscle the deltoid?

"he duration of the co-contraction between elbow agonists and antagonists is longer in the topspin serve."
Sorry not a physics major, how do you co-contract an elbow which is a joint and not a muscle?

Also I may have missed the difference in footworks, can you elaborate?

thanks!

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Could you help w/ the translation of some of this:
I get more triceps but...

"The antagonist muscles of horizontal adduction of the arm activate earlier in the topspin serve."

? is this muscle the deltoid?

"he duration of the co-contraction between elbow agonists and antagonists is longer in the topspin serve."
Sorry not a physics major, how do you co-contract an elbow which is a joint and not a muscle?

Also I may have missed the difference in footworks, can you elaborate?

To first question:
I think it's anterior deltoid and the pectoralis major, as mentioned earlier in the article.

To 2nd:
This is not physics but anatomy and physiology
(which is not my specialty either):
the agonists and antagonists refers here to the groups of muscles working on the elbow joint in opposing ways to each other.

from a dictionary:
--------------
2 [back-formation from antagonist "a muscle"] : a muscle that on contracting is automatically checked and controlled by the opposing simultaneous contraction of another muscle
-------------

To 3rd:
On the kick
the knee flexion is lower (and I think) longer.
Check the pics at:
Edberg: The Toss
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=74693

Also suggest reading my
Kick Serve
serving in the Sticky (topmost thread) here.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

I fear you may be getting answers which are way more technical than you had hoped. (Sometimes these replies can be both correct ... and not much use ... because they are much deeper and more detailed than you may have wished.) If not, my “broad brush” reply will not be worth reading....

When I hear about how I should hit 2nd serves from other people, they all say "for second serve, use all spin".

This is generally good advice. As a recent HS Coach, I would advise my boys “The 2nd Serve is hit with more energy than the 1st; but that energy goes more into spin -- which helps control and placement -- than power.”

However, today, I met a person that is at least a 5.0 player and he told me that I don't have enough pace on my second serve and that I should throw it into the court more.

So far, these two objectives are not necessarily in opposition to each other. Your OP question referred to a belief, "for second serve, use all spin.” Your 5.0 friend and I probably agree that “all” should be changed to “more”.

IOW, if your 1st Serve normally has your energy being expended (say) “70% Power / 30% Spin” the problem with your stated “all spin” 2nd Serve is “0% Power / 100% Spin” is too dramatic a change. The Receiver thinks “Oh goodie! Lunch!!!” when you miss your first.

I’d say a better distribution of your energy for your 2nd Serve might be “50% Power / 50% Spin.” This will still put some “Umph!” on your serve, and the increased attention to spin will aide your percentages.

This makes me wonder, exactly how do pros hit their 1st and 2nd serve?

This really varies by the Pro too much to give you a general rule. (Dementiava’s 2nd is a disaster. Venus’ varies from being still good and forcing ... to a coin flip. Roddick’s 2nd is hardly distinguishable from his 1st. Coria’s 2nd is a “soft ball.”)

I thought tossing more into the court was for 1st serves only...

This is true at the Club levels.

... and if the pros do toss the ball into the court for both 1st and second serves, I'd imagine that the 2nd serve would have more spin but how could this be if they throw it in the same place for the 1st serve? Or is it that all of them hit flat on the first serve and hit with topspin/slice on second serve?

I’d say the Pros with serves we admire toss into the court just about the same as for 1st Serves. The difference is the “distribution of energy” as I posted above.

(Generally) somewhere between 4.0 and 4.5 is where a player should be able to have his 2nd Serve becoming a “weapon,” rather than “just a way to get the point started.” Can you already place your 1st Serves in all six targets? (Wide ... Jam ... Up-the-T. Two Service Boxes equals six targets.) Can you already hit all six with your 2nd Serve? If your answer is “Yes” to both questions ... get to work on making that 2nd Serve into a weapon!

Hope this helped.

- KK

 

[misterg]

When I saw Rafter play the final at Roma against Kuerten his second serve was "faster" that his first serve but he was not gowing for the lines and angles. And because he played s&W on every point the average speed of his server (1st and 2th) was only about 140-160 km/h but with tons of spin.

 

[Mattle]

I fear you may be getting answers which are way more technical than you had hoped. (Sometimes these replies can be both correct ... and not much use ... because they are much deeper and more detailed than you may have wished.) If not, my “broad brush” reply will not be worth reading....


This is generally good advice. As a recent HS Coach, I would advise my boys “The 2nd Serve is hit with more energy than the 1st; but that energy goes more into spin -- which helps control and placement -- than power.”

So far, these two objectives are not necessarily in opposition to each other. Your OP question referred to a belief, "for second serve, use all spin.” Your 5.0 friend and I probably agree that “all” should be changed to “more”.

IOW, if your 1st Serve normally has your energy being expended (say) “70% Power / 30% Spin” the problem with your stated “all spin” 2nd Serve is “0% Power / 100% Spin” is too dramatic a change. The Receiver thinks “Oh goodie! Lunch!!!” when you miss your first.

I’d say a better distribution of your energy for your 2nd Serve might be “50% Power / 50% Spin.” This will still put some “Umph!” on your serve, and the increased attention to spin will aide your percentages.

This really varies by the Pro too much to give you a general rule. (Dementiava’s 2nd is a disaster. Venus’ varies from being still good and forcing ... to a coin flip. Roddick’s 2nd is hardly distinguishable from his 1st. Coria’s 2nd is a “soft ball.”)

This is true at the Club levels.

I’d say the Pros with serves we admire toss into the court just about the same as for 1st Serves. The difference is the “distribution of energy” as I posted above.

(Generally) somewhere between 4.0 and 4.5 is where a player should be able to have his 2nd Serve becoming a “weapon,” rather than “just a way to get the point started.” Can you already place your 1st Serves in all six targets? (Wide ... Jam ... Up-the-T. Two Service Boxes equals six targets.) Can you already hit all six with your 2nd Serve? If your answer is “Yes” to both questions ... get to work on making that 2nd Serve into a weapon!

Hope this helped.

- KK

Looks good, can you tell me the next level after club level?

 

[Kaptain Karl]

Looks good, can you tell me the next level after club level?

How interesting! I am one of those who has been using the phrase "club level" for years ... and just assuming everybody meant the same thing I did by it. I've never actally "defined" it. But "here goes...."

I'd say the level beyond "club" is ... competitive. It's the level where you start competing *outside* your own club; you start entering tournaments and playing "in a bigger sandbox." (This subjectivism is probably why more people like to use the NTRP levels to describe different abilities.)

3.5 - 4.5 is probably "club".
4.5 + is "competitive. (Yes. I overlapped on 4.5 intentionally. Some 4.5s are entering tourneys. Some are not....)

- KK

 

[Boris]

I'd say the level beyond "club" is ... competitive. It's the level where you start competing *outside* your own club; you start entering tournaments and playing "in a bigger sandbox." (This subjectivism is probably why more people like to use the NTRP levels to describe different abilities.)

3.5 - 4.5 is probably "club".
4.5 + is "competitive. (Yes. I overlapped on 4.5 intentionally. Some 4.5s are entering tourneys. Some are not....)

- KK

Hi, I apologize for the OT question. Here in Italy we don't have the NTRP rating system, so I'm just trying to understand better. I guess I am a good 4.0 and I am playing tournaments. I thought that the focus and consistency you need to get 4.5, you would only get them by playing tournaments. And the people I "rate" as 4.5, perhaps 5% of them don't play tourneys. So what would be in your view the percentage of 4.5 players not playing tourneys? Just asking in order to understand better the NTRP system.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

Hi, I apologize for the OT question. Here in Italy we don't have the NTRP rating system, so I'm just trying to understand better. I guess I am a good 4.0 and I am playing tournaments. I thought that the focus and consistency you need to get 4.5, you would only get them by playing tournaments. And the people I "rate" as 4.5, perhaps 5% of them don't play tourneys. So what would be in your view the percentage of 4.5 players not playing tourneys? Just asking in order to understand better the NTRP system.

According to this conversion chart, the Italian equivalent is about 2.7 or 2.8. I'd say at least 50% of 4.5s in the USA don't play tourneys. (That's a complete "guess" though....)

- KK

 

[munk3y]

aww, that sucks, it doesnt have a conversion for australia
or does australia just use the ITF number?

 

[Boris]

aww, that sucks, it doesnt have a conversion for australia
or does australia just use the ITF number?

KK,

thanks for the link. Unfortunately that ITF conversion chart is totally screwed up as far as the Italian system is concerned. A 2.7 or 2.8 player in Italy is a hell of a player. As an example, our former Italian pro Paolo Cane', who had a best ranking of kindof n. 21 in the world, is now a 2.7 player (at age 35 or so). I guess you would not call him a 4.5... otherwise my tennis improvement plans will need to be heavily revised This is just an example, but shows that the conversion table is not correct. No idea about the conversions for other countries.

We do have a conversion table between the italian and NTRP systems, but I don't know how accurate it is either. According to that table, and IMO, about 50% of the people that would be rated 4.0 do not usually play tournaments. I also did not play them in the past. IMO, playing tournaments and being more fit has been the main driver of my improvements, and I see it is the same for most of my buddies. In my understanding of the NTRP system, for an average player, if your fitness is a bit suspect you can perhaps get away with it at the 4.0 level, but you'd lose most matches at 4.5 because of the lack of consistency. Is that reasonable?

Again, I apologize for being OT.

Cheers!

 

[equinox]

KK,

thanks for the link. Unfortunately that ITF conversion chart is totally screwed up as far as the Italian system is concerned. A 2.7 or 2.8 player in Italy is a hell of a player. As an example, our former Italian pro Paolo Cane', who had a best ranking of kindof n. 21 in the world, is now a 2.7 player (at age 35 or so). I guess you would not call him a 4.5... otherwise my tennis improvement plans will need to be heavily revised This is just an example, but shows that the conversion table is not correct. No idea about the conversions for other countries.

We do have a conversion table between the italian and NTRP systems, but I don't know how accurate it is either. According to that table, and IMO, about 50% of the people that would be rated 4.0 do not usually play tournaments. I also did not play them in the past. IMO, playing tournaments and being more fit has been the main driver of my improvements, and I see it is the same for most of my buddies. In my understanding of the NTRP system, for an average player, if your fitness is a bit suspect you can perhaps get away with it at the 4.0 level, but you'd lose most matches at 4.5 because of the lack of consistency. Is that reasonable?

Again, I apologize for being OT.

Cheers!

It wouldn't suprise me if the italian ITF conversion chart is incorrect.
Your former pro is probably 6.0 NTRP or ITN 2-3 depending on his age fitness.

Already i've seen one major change of ITN -> NTRP numbers. From ITN 4-9 all went up .5 NTRP.
ea.

Former 2004 chart.
ITN4 = 4.5 NTRP
ITN5 = 4.0 NTRP
etc..

Newer 2005 chart.
ITN4= 5.0 NTRP
ITN5 = 4.5 NTRP
etc..

The same will likely happen to italian conversion chart.

A question, are you reading the latest chart?

Because on mine, it says italian 2.7 is ITN 3 or NTRP 5.5.

NTRP 5.5 is an open level capable player or tca advanced coach level.

NTRP 5.0 is an high district A grade or tca development coach level.

 

[equinox]

Don't use the other link above. It's using the old charts..

Use the ITF link
http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/pdf/original/IO_3274_original.PDF

 

[Kaptain Karl]

equinox - Does the newer chart come in a non-PDF link? Thanks.

We do have a conversion table between the italian and NTRP systems, but I don't know how accurate it is either. According to that table, and IMO, about 50% of the people that would be rated 4.0 do not usually play tournaments.

This seems to jive with my "guestimate" too.

In my understanding of the NTRP system, for an average player, if your fitness is a bit suspect you can perhaps get away with it at the 4.0 level, but you'd lose most matches at 4.5 because of the lack of consistency. Is that reasonable?

"Not exactly." But your question reveals more about the failings of the NTRP, IMO, than any deficiency in your own understanding. This ETPRS Chart is one of the better systems I've seen. Does it help?

- KK

 

[Bungalo Bill]

When I hear about how I should hit 2nd serves from other people, they all say "for second serve, use all spin". However, today, I met a person that is at least a 5.0 player and he told me that I don't have enough pace on my second serve and that I should throw it into the court more. This makes me wonder, exactly how do pros hit their 1st and 2nd serve? I thought tossing more into the court was for 1st serves only and if the pros do toss the ball into the court for both 1st and second serves, I'd imagine that the 2nd serve would have more spin but how could this be if they throw it in the same place for the 1st serve? Or is it that all of them hit flat on the first serve and hit with topspin/slice on second serve? thx for your feedbacks.

It is a combination of spin and speed. You have to develop a good, tough, second serve. It needs to bite, be placed well, and be able to mix up speeds and spins to keep the opponent guessing.

 

[Boris]

Don't use the other link above. It's using the old charts..

Use the ITF link
http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/pdf/original/IO_3274_original.PDF

Yes, the chart has changed. It is definitely more reasonable now, though I think the conversion is still biased. I mean, in Italy a 3.5 or 4.1 player (equivalent to a NTRP 4.5) woiuld *never* get there without extensive tournament activity. I think there is a difference of 0.5 with respect to reality, which is IMO much closer to what KK claims.

 

[Boris]

e
"Not exactly." But your question reveals more about the failings of the NTRP, IMO, than any deficiency in your own understanding. This ETPRS Chart is one of the better systems I've seen. Does it help?
- KK

Hi,

and again, thanks for the info. I find the ETPRS partly useful (I did not know it before). It is a bit self-referential, e.g. when it says a 4.5 should be able to beat a 4.0 6-2 6-2 most of the time... I mean, this is relative and not absolute, if I do not know what a 4.0 is. Then, scores also depend on matchups; pushers, I beat them most of the time, but almost never 6-2 or 6-1. Hard hitters that donate a few points here and there, I could win 6-1 or 6-0. Moreover, my lack of knowledge of US college tennis does not help me there (but obviously the ETPRS can't be blamed for that...). That said, the ETPRS system seems to have a complimentary approach to NTRP, and is more focused on game style than on stroke production. I'd prefer the ETPRS if it was a bit more accurate in the style description; as it is, without the NTRP to help, I'd find it hard to rate me. Sorry for being so verbose

Regarding my remark on fitness: what leads me to believe that a 4.5 should be very fit is that, seemingly, an NTRP 4.5 does not "lose rallies due to impatience" anymore. IMO, one of the keys to being more consistent, besides better technique, is fitness, since it gives you the confidence that you'll be able to run down the opponent's shots as long as necessary. Just my .02

 

[mucat]

For 2nd serve, you need to at least swing as hard as your 1st serve. Tossing into the court more usually results in a flatten serve. It is always a tradeoff, spin or pace. I don't know if you already do this, but it is very important to swing hard on the 2nd serve. Then if your opponent can still hit good returns from it, you can mix it up by changing your toss from time to time to change your serve's speed and spin.