Difference between 90 mph and 120+ mph serve?

[Syfo-Dias]

Maybe I'm wrong, but from what I've observed there seems to be some evolutionary leap between someone who can serve 90 mph and somebody who can serve 120+ mph on a consistent basis. Is the main difference between the two basically leg drive and weight transfer? It seems to me that people who primarily serve from the upper body have a maximum ceiling of about 90 mph, depending on height and strength of course. Not to over simplify, but is that basically the biggest difference?

 

[SaunderS]

30mph.....

 

[WBF]

Is the main difference between the two basically leg drive and weight transfer? It seems to me that people who primarily serve from the upper body have a maximum ceiling of about 90 mph, depending on height and strength of course.

What do you mean by weight transfer? Legs don't make a huge difference. Form.

 

[Roddickalltheway]

What do you mean by weight transfer? Legs don't make a huge difference. Form.

I hope you are being sarcastic. Watch any pro that has a decent serve, aside from Wawrinka, and you will see that legs are the reason they can't hit it so hard. All of the pros have different serve motions, but they all have one thing in common, a lot of legs in their serve.

 

[Tennis Dunce]

Legs might add like 5 or 6 mph...thats it. But the appropriate knee bend and explosion upwards provides extra leverage to get the ball over the net more consistently.

 

[mtommer]

Maybe I'm wrong, but from what I've observed there seems to be some evolutionary leap between someone who can serve 90 mph and somebody who can serve 120+ mph on a consistent basis. Is the main difference between the two basically leg drive and weight transfer? It seems to me that people who primarily serve from the upper body have a maximum ceiling of about 90 mph, depending on height and strength of course. Not to over simplify, but is that basically the biggest difference?

My guess (and it's just a guess) is flexibility and timing.

 

[WBF]

I hope you are being sarcastic. Watch any pro that has a decent serve, aside from Wawrinka, and you will see that legs are the reason they can't hit it so hard. All of the pros have different serve motions, but they all have one thing in common, a lot of legs in their serve.

Uhhhhhh... All pros with a good serve have another thing in common: they have eyes. Is everyone with eyes a pro with a good serve? No. Please don't make absurd leaps in logic.

 

[Lotto]

Flexible shoulder, efficient loading, timing and two big things, supination and pronation are the biggest things. Supination and pronation are HUGE though, add timing to that aswell.

Look at the pros smashes. Sampras could hit a 110mph smash from just timing, supination and pronation.

 

[tennisdad65]

Flexible shoulder, efficient loading, timing and two big things, supination and pronation are the biggest things. Supination and pronation are HUGE though, add timing to that aswell.

Look at the pros smashes. Sampras could hit a 110mph smash from just timing, supination and pronation.

pronation.. yes..
supination.. i have not heard much about this during a serve or smash.. unless you mean the way edberg etc. held their wrist inwards before the toss..

 

[wihamilton]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/4221210.html

80% upper body.... legs and core make up only 20%. Assuming Roddick's fastest serve is 140 mph (and yes, I know he can serve harder), if he just used his upper body he could hit 112 mph.

Syfo, the probable reason it looks like there is an "evolutionary leap" between someone who can serve 90 mph and someone who can hit 120 mph is that the latter demands very very good technique, while the former doesn't. So you can hit a 90 mph serve even if you cheat on a few technical elements (which many players do), but you can't hit 120 mph unless you have close to flawless technique -- great racket drop, leg drive, contact, follow through, and so on.

 

[Lotto]

pronation.. yes..
supination.. i have not heard much about this during a serve or smash.. unless you mean the way edberg etc. held their wrist inwards before the toss..

I hadn't heard of supination either until I came across hi-techtennis.com

I totally recommend you check it out if you haven't or are not a member. I think it's like $40 a year which is a total bargain for what you get.

It's run by Jeff Counts who is a member on this forum actually aswell.


That's where I first heard of supination on the serve though......

 

[Nellie]

Maybe I'm wrong, but from what I've observed there seems to be some evolutionary leap between someone who can serve 90 mph and somebody who can serve 120+ mph on a consistent basis. Is the main difference between the two basically leg drive and weight transfer? It seems to me that people who primarily serve from the upper body have a maximum ceiling of about 90 mph, depending on height and strength of course. Not to over simplify, but is that basically the biggest difference?

I think that speed gets inflated in people's mind. Most players, with very good form, with serve, at best about 90 MPH You need to be someone with phyiscal skills (strong arm) and great form to get to 120. I would bet that you cannot imagine receiving a 120 MPH serve - if you are the least bit off balance or leaning the wrong way, the ball is past before you can even move.

 

[charliefedererer]

Obviously great form in all phases of the kinetic chain can maximize a player's potential to generate maximum racquet head speed. (Thank you wihamilton for that link to popular mechanics.) But so far what I've failed to see in this thread is an admission that a person's genetic make-up is an ultimate limit to their serving speed. If you don't have enough fast twitch muscle fibers, you can exercise and practice serving endlessly, but you're going to reach a ceiling for your maximum speed. A lot of baseball pitchers would like a 100 mph fastball, but few achieve it, or can achieve it. But unlike pitchers, tennis players are both pitchers and hitters. You can overcome a limitation on maximum serving velocity with other weapons to be successful, the prime example being Nadal.

 

[Grizvok]

It's is ALL about coiling and coordination.

 

[Slicendicer]

Every person on TT who thinks they serve +120 MPH...

 

[Fedace]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/4221210.html

80% upper body.... legs and core make up only 20%. Assuming Roddick's fastest serve is 140 mph (and yes, I know he can serve harder), if he just used his upper body he could hit 112 mph.

Syfo, the probable reason it looks like there is an "evolutionary leap" between someone who can serve 90 mph and someone who can hit 120 mph is that the latter demands very very good technique, while the former doesn't. So you can hit a 90 mph serve even if you cheat on a few technical elements (which many players do), but you can't hit 120 mph unless you have close to flawless technique -- great racket drop, leg drive, contact, follow through, and so on.

Will, i am really confused by what you are saying. If Upper body is what really matters then why does the Short guys have much harder time serving big. and it seems to me that taller pros have much easier time getting the MPH up in the 130's.

 

[BU-Tennis]

Will, i am really confused by what you are saying. If Upper body is what really matters then why does the Short guys have much harder time serving big. and it seems to me that taller pros have much easier time getting the MPH up in the 130's.

The taller you are then the angle with which you can hit the ball in is increased. So a tall guy can hit hard and the ball drop in but a short guy who hits the same speed will hit the ball long because he isn't able to get up as high to let the ball drop.

And to comment on other posts, the legs are very important when serving. It develops consistency but most importantly when you explode up, this is the action that loads the arm and creates the racquet drop which allows you to get more power in a serve.

 

[NLBwell]

wilhamilton is right - it is technique. Any decent sized man can swing hard and hit a 90 mph serve. It takes a smooth efficient delivery where the energy goes into racket (and so ball) speed to get to 120. As far as genetic fast-twitch muscle fibers, CharlieFederer is wrong at 120 - most people with generally good athleticism and correct form can hit that speed, but probably right at hitting 140 or 145mph - to get that fast you have to have something special. That is probably more like throwing a baseball at 100 mph.

 

[WV_tennis22]

It's is ALL about coiling and coordination.

This is so true. But simple physics also shows that the energy must be transferred from the ground, through the player, and up through the racket and into the ball. The load-up in the legs maximizes the energy potential, and when coupled with the coiling of the body, and up through the whip of the arm, flick of the wrist, you have an amazing display of power. I'd say, everypart of the body is equally important

 

[WV_tennis22]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/4221210.html

80% upper body.... legs and core make up only 20%. Assuming Roddick's fastest serve is 140 mph (and yes, I know he can serve harder), if he just used his upper body he could hit 112 mph.

Syfo, the probable reason it looks like there is an "evolutionary leap" between someone who can serve 90 mph and someone who can hit 120 mph is that the latter demands very very good technique, while the former doesn't. So you can hit a 90 mph serve even if you cheat on a few technical elements (which many players do), but you can't hit 120 mph unless you have close to flawless technique -- great racket drop, leg drive, contact, follow through, and so on.

And oh, as far as this goes, yeah, the forearm might be 40% of it or whatever, but its a very very tiny 40%. I mean, the power capable of being exerted through the forearm is considerably small compared to the huge muscles of the legs. This diagram is so flawed in the fact that it doesnt take into account the size and power of the muscle groups

 

[wihamilton]

Will, i am really confused by what you are saying. If Upper body is what really matters then why does the Short guys have much harder time serving big. and it seems to me that taller pros have much easier time getting the MPH up in the 130's.

Couldn't tell you. A scientist is probably better-suited to answer that question. I can speculate and say that bigger guys have bigger muscles so they serve harder. That said, Benjamin Becker is 5'9" and hits 130+. Also, keep in mind that shorter guys have a smaller window to hit into (less of an angle to work with), so typically they will put some extra spin on the ball to pull it in.

And oh, as far as this goes, yeah, the forearm might be 40% of it or whatever, but its a very very tiny 40%. I mean, the power capable of being exerted through the forearm is considerably small compared to the huge muscles of the legs. This diagram is so flawed in the fact that it doesnt take into account the size and power of the muscle groups

I'm not sure what you mean by "tiny 40%." 40% is 40%. It doesn't really matter if your leg muscles are much bigger than your forearm muscles -- your forearm / hand / wrist are what is doing most of the work to accelerate the tennis racket. In other words, I can still hit harder with my "weaker" forearm because it's in more direction control of how the racket moves based on how my body is built. If your forearm was as strong as your leg muscles then, wow, you'd have a big serve. But it isn't.

 

[WV_tennis22]

ok, well, as far as body part "importance", 40% makes sense...but not as far as any power or strength is concerned. I'm just an avid believer that legs make a good serve great. I mean, aside from the way the ball is hit (kick, slice), look at the diff between the first and second serve. So much leg action and power in the first, not so much in the second. And the serve is just like any forehand or backhand. Why do you think you're taught to stay low, transfer into the shot and extend through the legs? Again, its just all working together in the energy transfer.

 

[drakulie]

Please keep in mind that besides great technique, pros also have very *VERY* fast swing speeds. Their racquet head is traveling at well over 100 mph.

 

[wihamilton]

ok, well, as far as body part "importance", 40% makes sense...but not as far as any power or strength is concerned. I'm just an avid believer that legs make a good serve great. I mean, aside from the way the ball is hit (kick, slice), look at the diff between the first and second serve. So much leg action and power in the first, not so much in the second. And the serve is just like any forehand or backhand. Why do you think you're taught to stay low, transfer into the shot and extend through the legs? Again, its just all working together in the energy transfer.

Well the technique for a first serve and second serve is basically the same. Pros don't slow their swing down on a second serve. They just swing in a different direction. Instead of swinging for power they're swinging for spin. So they don't have "less legs" in the second serve.

Staying low (generally) is more than just weight transfer. For example, a lot of it has to do with balance, which is vastly under-discussed as an critical factor to fundamentally-sound groundstrokes. One of the reasons Federer is so dirty is because his balance is impeccable.

 

[WV_tennis22]

yeah, no kidding, but you're not getting it. If any of them sat in a chair, using all upper body, they would never be able to generate the speed that they do when they have their legs. I hate to keep bringing up the physics of it, but its the only argument. Your body coils, you bend your knees and load up, and you become a compact spring. The energy comes from the ground, and when you load, its transferred into your body, and released from the racquet, causing mind-numbing racquet speed and such

 

[Nellie]

Please keep in mind that besides great technique, pros also have very *VERY* fast swing speeds. Their racquet head is traveling at well over 100 mph.

Sorry - this seems like a chicken/egg situation. Doesn't the technique enable the fast swing speed? Or do you mean that you need considerable phyiscal talent (height, strength, flex) to swing that fast anyway (to which I totally agree)?

 

[wihamilton]

yeah, no kidding, but you're not getting it. If any of them sat in a chair, using all upper body, they would never be able to generate the speed that they do when they have their legs. I hate to keep bringing up the physics of it, but its the only argument. Your body coils, you bend your knees and load up, and you become a compact spring. The energy comes from the ground, and when you load, its transferred into your body, and released from the racquet, causing mind-numbing racquet speed and such

Heh. I don't think the chair analogy is a good one because you can't hit a technically-sound forehand sitting down -- can't rotate, etc. There's a difference between your legs putting you in position to swing correctly and the power that part of your body generates. Most of your racket-head speed doesn't come from your leg muscles.

 

[drakulie]

Sorry - this seems like a chicken/egg situation. Doesn't the technique enable the fast swing speed?

Yes, it absolutely helps. However, two different players with exact technique are not always going to get the same result. One player may swing faster, enabling them to have a faster serve. Again, technique is not the only factor. One must also be able to swing faster to go from 90 to 120.

Like I said, for a serve going 120, the racquet must be traveling at over 100 mph, regardless of technique.

as for the leg discussion going on, the whole leg thing is a bit over-hyped. There is a study I read from easitennis.com. They showed that the legs only provide an additional 5-7 mph to the serve speed. In the video I posted showing a 108 mph serve, I was barely able to lift off the ground because I had a injured arch in my foot. The serve, btw, was actually proven to be about 113 mph, because the radar I used picks up the ball when it approaches it, and not when it leaves the racquet.

 

[wihamilton]

Yes, it absolutely helps. However, two different players with exact technique are not always going to get the same result. One player may swing faster, enabling them to have a faster serve. Again, technique is not the only factor. One must also be able to swing faster to go from 90 to 120.

Like I said, for a serve going 120, the racquet must be traveling at over 100 mph, regardless of technique.

The whole leg thing is a bit over-hyped. There is a study I read from easitennis.com. They showed that the legs only provide an additional 5-7 mph to the serve speed.

Hyperlink to story? And I think the legs are over-hyped as well (that's not to say they aren't important).

I agree with what you're saying drak -- physical ability plays a big part in how fast you can swing a racket. I also think it's worthwhile to note that regardless of physical ability, for the vast majority of players out there technical improvements in their swing will give them more racket-head speed. Pretty much anyone out there can serve 100 mph if their technique is flawless.

 

[Nellie]

I think that proper leg drive does not provide the power, but instead, put you in the position to use your arm and torso for the kenetic chain

 

[drakulie]

wihamilton, here is the serve I referenced. You could see my feet are barely leaving the ground.

here is the serve at 108:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDNhhzaj3wc


In this video, if you forward to 2:59-3:04 you could see how much more lift I'm getting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgoCWFnS5kU

I agree with you whole-heartedly on this whole issue.

As for the legs, I'm not getting much faster speeds by jumping up and exploding into the ball. If anything, I get more control. Go figure.

Look at Sheng Shalken (spelling), he served well over 120 and had no leg bend what so ever.

 

[WV_tennis22]

even if this squashes my whole argument, here are the answers straight from the leading authority of this crazy tennis world we live in

http://www.playerdevelopment.usta.com/content/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=116178&itype=7418

 

[gzhpcu]

wihamilton, here is the serve I referenced. You could see my feet are barely leaving the ground.

here is the serve at 108:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDNhhzaj3wc

Very nice drakulie, I really like your style. Good drop and great arm movement.

 

[gzhpcu]

even if this squashes my whole argument, here are the answers straight from the leading authority of this crazy tennis world we live in

http://www.playerdevelopment.usta.com/content/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=116178&itype=7418

Note again that Bruce Elliot brings up "wrist snap". Don't forget that he has defined (in more extensive articles) this as: first, wrist extension, then, simultaneously, ulnar deviation and wrist flexion. The ulnar deviation reduces the extent of wrist flexion.

 

[drakulie]

even if this squashes my whole argument, here are the answers straight from the leading authority of this crazy tennis world we live in

http://www.playerdevelopment.usta.com/content/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=116178&itype=7418

Just a thought>> but has the USTA developed anyone of significance?????

 

[EikelBeiter]

Look at Sheng Shalken (spelling), he served well over 120 and had no leg bend what so ever.

No he did not. Sjeng Schalken almost never served faster than 115 and he averaged 111. I remember Venus Williams had a higher average speed on Wimbledon.

Also look at 1:08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaDm3QN5rOE

He has more leg bend than you my friend

 

[WV_tennis22]

Just a thought>> but has the USTA developed anyone of significance?????

I'm not entirely sure what you mean...professional players? who knows, but if you're talking about the oh, idk, hundreds of thousands of players beginner through advanced, who participate in USTA leagues and camps and clinics with USTA instructors, or the numerous publications put out by leading members of the USTA staff that give a solid basis for instructors everywhere....then yes, I'd say they've developed plenty of people.

 

[mental midget]

timing and a live arm.

 

[drakulie]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean...professional players? who knows, but if you're talking about the oh, idk, hundreds of thousands of players beginner through advanced, who participate in USTA leagues and camps and clinics with USTA instructors, or the numerous publications put out by leading members of the USTA staff that give a solid basis for instructors everywhere....then yes, I'd say they've developed plenty of people.

In other words, they haven't developed anyone other than providing a basis for clinics. As for USPTA certified instructors, all you need is 80 bucks and a weekend to get a certification. It's a joke, as is the USTA.

BTW, participating in leagues has nothing to do with player development. If the USTA was so good at developing players, Bolleteri, Macci, Evert, Solomon, Diego, etc would be out of business.

again, just a thought.

 

[wihamilton]

In other words, they haven't developed anyone other than providing a basis for clinics. As for USPTA certified instructors, all you need is 80 bucks and a weekend to get a certification. It's a joke, as is the USTA.

BTW, participating in leagues has nothing to do with player development. If the USTA was so good at developing players, Bolleteri, Macci, Evert, Solomon, Diego, etc would be out of business.

again, just a thought.

I would consider that Bruce Elliot has a PhD. I suspect he knows what he's talking about =)

 

[drakulie]

^^^Again, just talking about player development. PHd or not, he hasn't developed anyone,,,, or has he???? or has the USTA?????

 

[drakulie]

No he did not. Sjeng Schalken almost never served faster than 115 and he averaged 111. I remember Venus Williams had a higher average speed on Wimbledon.

Also look at 1:08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaDm3QN5rOE

He has more leg bend than you my friend

I may be wrong but am almost positive when he played Sampras at the US Open 2002???? he was serving in the 120's in that tourney. Also, his delivery was very different. perhaps he changed due to injury, or am I possibly thinking of someone else???

 

[WV_tennis22]

"just a thought", but maybe theres a chance, drakulie, that you dont know what you're talking about and just like to argue about nothing? just thinking

 

[EikelBeiter]

I may be wrong but am almost positive when he played Sampras at the US Open 2002???? he was serving in the 120's in that tourney. Also, his delivery was very different. perhaps he changed due to injury, or am I possibly thinking of someone else???

You must be thinking of someone else. Sjeng had a back problem which didn't allow him to make the proper upper body movements required for a good serve.

But what he lost with his serve he made up with hitting the ball clean and hardly making any errors.

On a side note, when our tennis club existed for 75 years, a few years ago, they paid Sjeng Schalken to give some clinic to the kids. He also played a demonstration doubles match together with the club champion, which happened to be me that year I've had worse double partners in my life, I can tell you that

 

[WV_tennis22]

I may be wrong

 

[stormholloway]

I think the whole percentage chart for the serve is a bunch of nonsense. All the parts are working together, transferring energy. That upward energy starts with the legs, which is why so many credit the legs like they do, but I don't see how one can put certain percentages on these things. Energy merely moves throughout these body parts.

 

[thursdayisgod]

I have definetly noticed this too, I am one of the people that cap at 90mph no matter how much force I try to put into the ball I can't get it up there. My form isn't very good and my toss is too low, but I certainly use a lot of legs and forward momentum, so I am in the camp that thinks its more variables then that.

 

[WV_tennis22]

I think the whole percentage chart for the serve is a bunch of nonsense. All the parts are working together, transferring energy. That upward energy starts with the legs, which is why so many credit the legs like they do, but I don't see how one can put certain percentages on these things. Energy merely moves throughout these body parts.

God bless you sir, im glad SOMEONEEEE understands

 

[wihamilton]

I think the whole percentage chart for the serve is a bunch of nonsense. All the parts are working together, transferring energy. That upward energy starts with the legs, which is why so many credit the legs like they do, but I don't see how one can put certain percentages on these things. Energy merely moves throughout these body parts.

While it's obviously true that the various parts of the body work together to create / transfer energy during a proper service motion, it's not nonsense to know where most of the power comes from. Again, the upper body is doing most of the work.

 

[drakulie]

"just a thought", but maybe theres a chance, drakulie, that you dont know what you're talking about and just like to argue about nothing? just thinking

Just want to point out that when one sees "USTA Player Development" or "Head of USTA Player Development", they understand these people being referenced are **not** "developing" top players, or "top juniors". The USTA is very self-righteous and self-promoting, and yet haven't done anything to help develop better players in the USA. That's all.

You must be thinking of someone else. Sjeng had a back problem which didn't allow him to make the proper upper body movements required for a good serve.

But what he lost with his serve he made up with hitting the ball clean and hardly making any errors.

On a side note, when our tennis club existed for 75 years, a few years ago, they paid Sjeng Schalken to give some clinic to the kids. He also played a demonstration doubles match together with the club champion, which happened to be me that year I've had worse double partners in my life, I can tell you that

Ha, good story. So he wasn't poaching, moving??? That's a funny story. Good stuff.

And yes, I recognize this guy as a being an extremely clean ball striker.