Difference between 90 mph and 120+ mph serve?

[EikelBeiter]

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.

Sure he was poaching and moving well, we played a short match. He probably didn't play his best of course, since he's on a different level.

He did hit a few forehands or backhands full out, which was scary He hits it so cleanly, when he was younger he used to train for an hour, and if he made an easy mistake he continued the session until he was satisfied with a long streak without any errors.

His racket was something special as well. 360 grams or something, nothing special, but his balance was on 29 or 29.5 cm, which is wicked HL.

He is a very nice down to earth guy as well. Too bad he couldnt serve like the other pro's, who knows how good he could have been.

 

[J011yroger]

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.

You keep saying this, but it is not true. Ballspeed is approx 1.5X racquethead speed depending on the weight of the racquet. So a 150+mph serve is about the only time the racquethead is travelling over 100mph.

J

 

[catfish2424]

If you go to lifetime fitness you will be a beast mabye the 120 mph serve go to lifetime every day like chris MCCarthy

 

[drakulie]

You keep saying this, but it is not true. Ballspeed is approx 1.5X racquethead speed depending on the weight of the racquet. So a 150+mph serve is about the only time the racquethead is travelling over 100mph.

J

jo11yroger, not sure where you are getting your numbers, but what I am saying is true, and **ACCURATE**. When you corrected me in the other thread, you were right, "I did have it backwards" (innocent mistake), but the racquet is still traveling at a high speed when when making contact with the ball, and well over 100 mph.

Here you go: (note the velocity of the racquet tip from start to contact, all the way thru to the followthru)

http://www.tennisserver.com/set/set_03_11.html

Now look at the velocities of this sample of Sampras' flat and slice serves -- very consistent. It's just amazing to me how similar the velocities are at each phase of a particular type of serve.

Velocity Of Sampras Flat Serve



Velocity Of Sampras Flat Serve
Velocity Of Sampras Slice Serve
Velocity Of Sampras Slice Serve​

 

[drakulie]

^^^just to add>>> Sampras never served 150 mph. He served in the low 120 range.

 

[BullDogTennis]

30mph.....

+1
10 char

 

[Tennis Dunce]

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.

Drakulie is right...at least in the matter that swing speed is a very pertinent link in the chain. as to how fast (100mph) it travels to attain such a fast serve...ya got me.

EDIT: Although Jolly's calculation seems to make at least a little bit of sense.

 

[J011yroger]

jo11yroger, not sure where you are getting your numbers,

I am recalling from "Technical Tennis".

It is possible that I am wrong in what I remember, or was confusing groundstroke speed, and serve speed, but I will double check tomorrow.

At the least it will be interesting to compare what the two sources have to say.

If I am wrong, well. . . It certainly wont be the first time.

J

 

[gzhpcu]

Stanley Plagenhoef studied the effect of the striking mass of the racket on the speed of the ball.

He found:

• Racket head velocity before impact is slightly higher than resulting ball velocity
  
• Light-headed rackets give a higher racket head speed, but not a faster ball velocity (striking mass is lower)
  
• Biggest variable is firmness of the grip, bigger impact than the type of racket selected

A vigorous body motion, in attempting to reach high racket speeds, may well result in less hand control, which will result in loss of ball speed and accuracy. The striking mass varies with the firmness of the grip and can be less than the racket weight during poor contact, or greater than racket and hand weight during solid contact.


Interesting also is the analysis of photos of pictures of ball impact of serve taken at 4000 frames per second:

• the ball flattens out against the strings
• strings are pushed out the back side, the ball is hit higher than the center of the racket, but the greatest depression is at the center of the racket, thus creating an elongated flattening
• at the point of greatest ball flattening, it is practically totally hidden by the frame when seen from the side

 

[Midlife crisis]

I am recalling from "Technical Tennis".

It is possible that I am wrong in what I remember, or was confusing groundstroke speed, and serve speed, but I will double check tomorrow.

At the least it will be interesting to compare what the two sources have to say.

If I am wrong, well. . . It certainly wont be the first time.

J

As shown here:

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi?racquetA=K61T90|90|Wilson|KSix-One:Tour:90|RCWILSON|x&racquetB=none&racquetC=none&racquetD=none

and as you read in Technical Tennis, the COR is in the 40-45% range for most higher level racquets. To this, you add the incoming racquet speed, so serve speed is between 1.4 and 1.45 of the stringbed speed at the contact point, towards the lower end on higher speed serves when energetic losses are greater due to more ball deformation.

The problem results from determination of what the "racquet speed" is. If it's measured from the tip, that's not so useful because that's not the part that hits the ball, but there is a solid surface there to reflect radar and most radar units will pick the fastest clear signal and report on that.

It's not clear from Drakulie's diagrams if there is any component of velocity that is tangential to the direction the ball travels, but obviously on Pete's serve, he had a rather large tangential component to generate the serve ball rotation rates he did. The greater the tangential velocity, the lower the forward velocity and so the corresponding ball speed will be lower.

 

[J011yroger]

^^^^ So what you are saing is that I am not losing it?



J

 

[origmarm]

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

Wow I'm amazed that's 108. If you have asked me to guess from the video I would have said 80-85.

I really need to get myself gunned again to get some perspective.

I tend to agree with you about headspeed though, it's a combination of that an energy release throughout that stroke that let you break the barrier. Whenever I watch someone who serves at that level on court that's what always strikes me.

Unfortunately I am still planted firmly on the wrong side of that barrier. I appear to be growing roots also.

 

[WV_tennis22]

Wow I'm amazed that's 108. If you have asked me to guess from the video I would have said 80-85.

I really need to get myself gunned again to get some perspective.

LOLOLOL I said the same thing to myself (no offense)

 

[nalbyvsfed]

if my calculations are correct, 30MPH+

 

[drakulie]

Wow I'm amazed that's 108. If you have asked me to guess from the video I would have said 80-85.

Actually, it is more like 113. :shock: Remember, the radar doesn't capture the serve speed as it leaves the racquet (like in the pros), rather when it approaches the radar. Goes to show how much video does not truly capture what is happening. Everything is slowed down, one does not see the spin, etc. Video just doesn't really translate well what is really happening.

I really need to get myself gunned again to get some perspective.

I tend to agree with you about headspeed though, it's a combination of that an energy release throughout that stroke that let you break the barrier. Whenever I watch someone who serves at that level on court that's what always strikes me.

Unfortunately I am still planted firmly on the wrong side of that barrier. I appear to be growing roots also.

LOL. Keep working at it. We are just hacks anyways.

 

[ZPTennis]

Actually, it is more like 113. :shock: Remember, the radar doesn't capture the serve speed as it leaves the racquet (like in the pros), rather when it approaches the radar. Goes to show how much video does not truly capture what is happening. Everything is slowed down, one does not see the spin, etc. Video just doesn't really translate well what is really happening.

LOL. Keep working at it. We are just hacks anyways.

Their radar is just better isn't it? I sat right behind Djokovic in person
and saw him hit 129. I thought it looked more like 115. I was expecting
the pros serves to look bigger in person when I was at the US Open but
it was just the opposite. Makes a big difference I think looking behind
instead of the side. Side always looks faster for some reason.

Drakulie I move to Virginia at the end of the year. If you ever head
over to Naples, we gotta hit!

 

[sureshs]

Wow I'm amazed that's 108. If you have asked me to guess from the video I would have said 80-85.

Use the rule of thumb that if a serve hit the fence in one bounce without almost dying before it, on a standard club court dimensions, not a pro court, it is 100 mph.

 

[bpp]

Use the rule of thumb that if a serve hit the fence in one bounce without almost dying before it, on a standard club court dimensions, not a pro court, it is 100 mph.

I dont know if thats a good reference. I can reach the back fence on one bounce with an 85 MPH flat serve. I think I will hit on one bounce even with an 80 MPH.

 

[sureshs]

I dont know if thats a good reference. I can reach the back fence on one bounce with an 85 MPH flat serve. I think I will hit on one bounce even with an 80 MPH.

Let us say it is a rule of thumb for anything 80 or more

 

[matkimi]

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.

actully i saw of a site
that a 130mph serve has a swingspeed of 180
or something like that

 

[drakulie]

^^^^^do you still have the link???? :shock:

 

[sureshs]

actully i saw of a site
that a 130mph serve has a swingspeed of 180
or something like that

Very interesting - someone had suggested the opposite. The issue is that only the difference in momentum before and after impact is transferred to the ball by the frame, so it is not clear that the heavier object must have the lesser velocity.

 

[sureshs]

Very interesting - someone had suggested the opposite. The issue is that only the difference in momentum before and after impact is transferred to the ball by the frame, so it is not clear that the heavier object must have the lesser velocity.

Though it appears correct for golf (swing speed of driver less than speed of ball)
http://www.instantgolflesson.com/2008/03/23/golf-ball-speed/

Golf Driver Swing Speed (mph) Golf Ball Speed (mph)
80 110

90 130

105 155

 

[Midlife crisis]

^^^^ So what you are saing is that I am not losing it?



J

I think you have it totally under control!

 

[Midlife crisis]

actully i saw of a site
that a 130mph serve has a swingspeed of 180
or something like that

Not possible. If that were the case, the ball would hit the strings and get stuck there, pressed against the strings because the racquet is trying to move 50 MPH faster than the ball is bouncing off the strings.

Look at the Tennis Warehouse university link I posted above, and at the other articles there. Much of this information is a summary of the information found in the Technical Tennis book at Jolly first mentioned. It's a good read.

 

[sureshs]

Not possible. If that were the case, the ball would hit the strings and get stuck there, pressed against the strings because the racquet is trying to move 50 MPH faster than the ball is bouncing off the strings.

Look at the Tennis Warehouse university link I posted above, and at the other articles there. Much of this information is a summary of the information found in the Technical Tennis book at Jolly first mentioned. It's a good read.

Not necessarily, because the racquet will slow down after impact. But your conclusion is correct I think.

 

[CoachingMastery]

Most people can generate enough speed to hit around 90 mph. (Men and yes, women too.)

However, they will max out there if their technique is flawed, as others have said.

The legs are a very small percentage: I serve at 105mph on my knees with no leg thrust. My top speed is around 124mph so the legs in my case provide about 15% at best...and most of this is not from leg drive but from the leverage of height.

A short person will obviously have a lower trajectory than a tall person but the height should have little to do with serve speed potential. I have a girl who is now 18 but at 14 she could serve 112mph...and she was only 5'4".

The grip is usually the culprit among those capable of serving at 100+ mph. Those who use an eastern forehand will tend to pull the elbow down while facing the net and actually generate their fastest swing speed down about their knees because this is the point that the racquet release occurs. (Which is why those who use an EF grip tend to hit themselves in the shins when they try to swing too hard!)

Most people can indeed serve over 90 mph if they developed the proper swing mechanics, (using the form and using the right timing in utilizing the kinetic chain), it is not a fluke that players can do this.

It is sort of like typing...if you only hunt and peck with two index fingers, you won't ever be able to type at 60 wpm...learning the right technique with the proper practice will usually result in most people being able to type around this speed.

 

[stormholloway]

A 5'4" 14-year-old girl serving 112mph? Video please.

 

[CoachingMastery]

A 5'4" 14-year-old girl serving 112mph? Video please.

We never video taped her at 14. I can see about showing you her serve now at 18 (which she now serves about 118...if you trust the typical radar gun!).

However, if you have either of my books, you will see the girl as the model form for the two-handed forehand when she was 12.

You will have to take my word for her abilities at 14!

 

[raiden031]

I don't know if anyone else said this, but I think that a tall person would have an advantage in serve speed because of the extra long arms so they can generate more racquet head speed. If you swing a stick, the longer it is, the faster the end of it will swing, because its swing path will actually cover a longer distance than the shorter stick.

 

[Blade0324]

Some have talked about legs not being that important in generating a hard serve and that is only partly true. Yes the upper body, shoulder, timing, free flowing swing etc. are important but it is all part of a kinetic chain and that chain starts with the legs. If you don't use your legs correctly the rest of the motion falls apart. There have been studies done on top players serves and the ones that hit the hardest all generate higher levels of force on the ground when serving. Normal players generate about 1.3 times their weight in force on the ground where top pro's with big serves generate about 2.5-3 times their weight on the ground. This all comes from a complete kinetic motion that starts with the legs and goes up from there.

 

[stormholloway]

I think legs are very important in tennis altogether, and while the upper body might be more directly responsible for making the serve happen, without a strong base the balance and stability just aren't there.

 

[origmarm]

Actually, it is more like 113. :shock: Remember, the radar doesn't capture the serve speed as it leaves the racquet (like in the pros), rather when it approaches the radar. Goes to show how much video does not truly capture what is happening. Everything is slowed down, one does not see the spin, etc. Video just doesn't really translate well what is really happening.

In which case it's even more surprising than I thought. I do feel that video often fails to capture a lot of things and it surprises me. It never ceases to amaze me how a player can look a level lower on video than they really are. You definitely lose the spin but I think the perspective also gets skewed a lot, you lose a frame of reference.

I would definitely be very interested to see how I come out on a gun nowadays.

Use the rule of thumb that if a serve hit the fence in one bounce without almost dying before it, on a standard club court dimensions, not a pro court, it is 100 mph.

That's interesting. Does it depend on the type of serve? I would say that I do this fairly often but I don't think I'm over that barrier. At a guess I would say around 90 but it's no more than a guess. As an approximation it's a good rule of thumb if it works.

I'm really curious now as to the results. It's a pity my club doesn't have one of these guns.

For me the difference between a 90 and a 120 is simply that a 90 is probably 75% returnable given reasonable placement. A 120 probably more like 40%. From my perspective. I reckon for the pros add 20% to each of those figures.

 

[tennisdad65]

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

still going through page 2 of this thread , and this article caught my eye..
notice that all his components add up to 140%

Movement Percent of Racket Speed
Leg Drive & Trunk Rotation 10%
Upper Arm Movement 50%
Forearm Extension & Pronation None
Upper Arm Inward Rotation 50%
Hand Flexion 30%

 

[CoachingMastery]

still going through page 2 of this thread , and this article caught my eye..
notice that all his components add up to 140%

Movement Percent of Racket Speed
Leg Drive & Trunk Rotation 10%
Upper Arm Movement 50%
Forearm Extension & Pronation None
Upper Arm Inward Rotation 50%
Hand Flexion 30%

I question this report (the USTA article) on two counts: A) yes, how can "approximate" values add up to more than 100% of a given movement? and B) that the value for forearm extension and pronation be "None"?

A reasonably good server can hold their arm fully extended and serve by ONLY using pronation and get approximately 30 to 40 mph on a serve.

Also, his point of "inward rotation" IS pronation! So, why would one line say none and the other line include this action of the forearm?

Also, there is little hand flexion on high level serves as has been shown in hundreds of high-speed video clips (that show no measurable hand/wrist flextion within the entire contact phase of the serve).

I would not give the article much credence on true understanding of both the values and the understanding of the mechanics and/or verbiage of language used to descibe these movements.

 

[drakulie]

Stanley Plagenhoef studied the effect of the striking mass of the racket on the speed of the ball.

He found:

• Racket head velocity before impact is slightly higher than resulting ball velocity
• Light-headed rackets give a higher racket head speed, but not a faster ball velocity (striking mass is lower)
• Biggest variable is firmness of the grip, bigger impact than the type of racket selected

A vigorous body motion, in attempting to reach high racket speeds, may well result in less hand control, which will result in loss of ball speed and accuracy. The striking mass varies with the firmness of the grip and can be less than the racket weight during poor contact, or greater than racket and hand weight during solid contact.


Interesting also is the analysis of photos of pictures of ball impact of serve taken at 4000 frames per second:

• the ball flattens out against the strings
• strings are pushed out the back side, the ball is hit higher than the center of the racket, but the greatest depression is at the center of the racket, thus creating an elongated flattening
• at the point of greatest ball flattening, it is practically totally hidden by the frame when seen from the side

As shown here:

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi?racquetA=K61T90|90|Wilson|KSix-One:Tour:90|RCWILSON|x&racquetB=none&racquetC=none&racquetD=none

and as you read in Technical Tennis, the COR is in the 40-45% range for most higher level racquets. To this, you add the incoming racquet speed, so serve speed is between 1.4 and 1.45 of the stringbed speed at the contact point, towards the lower end on higher speed serves when energetic losses are greater due to more ball deformation.

The problem results from determination of what the "racquet speed" is. If it's measured from the tip, that's not so useful because that's not the part that hits the ball, but there is a solid surface there to reflect radar and most radar units will pick the fastest clear signal and report on that.

It's not clear from Drakulie's diagrams if there is any component of velocity that is tangential to the direction the ball travels, but obviously on Pete's serve, he had a rather large tangential component to generate the serve ball rotation rates he did. The greater the tangential velocity, the lower the forward velocity and so the corresponding ball speed will be lower.

^^These posts contradict one another. Which one is correct???

I question this report (the USTA article) on two counts: A) yes, how can "approximate" values add up to more than 100% of a given movement? and B) that the value for forearm extension and pronation be "None"?

A reasonably good server can hold their arm fully extended and serve by ONLY using pronation and get approximately 30 to 40 mph on a serve.

Also, his point of "inward rotation" IS pronation! So, why would one line say none and the other line include this action of the forearm?

Also, there is little hand flexion on high level serves as has been shown in hundreds of high-speed video clips (that show no measurable hand/wrist flextion within the entire contact phase of the serve).

I would not give the article much credence on true understanding of both the values and the understanding of the mechanics and/or verbiage of language used to descibe these movements.

^^This is one of the reasons I am so critical of the USTA, and was critical of them earlier in this thread.

 

[Midlife crisis]

^^These posts contradict one another. Which one is correct???

What do you think is contradictory? This isn't a smart-a** response, I just don't see anything in one that rules out something in the other.

 

[drakulie]

^^^^^Midlife, in the first post by gzhpcu, it states the following: "Racket head velocity before impact is slightly higher than resulting ball velocity" .

In your post it states the ball velocity is 1.4 to 1.5 X's the speed of the string bed speed, which means the racquet head speed is lower than that of the resutling ball speed.

To add, In the post I provided where the Sampras serve is discussed, it shows a racquet head speed of well over 100 mph.

I also understand your post points out that the tip of the racquet vs the string bed will not be the same. However, it doesn't provide how much difference in speed there is between the tip of the frame and string bed. I can't imagine it being that much different, although it would be very interesting to see the difference.

 

[Slicendicer]

If you want to test "how much legs and hips contribute to the serve", do this:

sit on your behind perpendicular to the net at the baseline and try a few serves.

I used to play up/down tennis and knew a few guys who could serve pretty fast for being wheelchair bound. The shoulder, arm and wrist are probably combined 45% of serve strength.

 

[Slicendicer]

Hey Dave... no human being can hit 30-40 MPH serve using entirely wrist pronation... it is impossible. For one, to completely isolate the wrist and hit the tennis ball, you would have to hit it from a stationary position. Try throwing a tennis ball with only your wrist... hold your elbow in and secure your fore arm with your non-dominant hand. If you can throw the ball 15 MPH, you are a super human.

 

[CoachingMastery]

Hey Dave... no human being can hit 30-40 MPH serve using entirely wrist pronation... it is impossible. For one, to completely isolate the wrist and hit the tennis ball, you would have to hit it from a stationary position. Try throwing a tennis ball with only your wrist... hold your elbow in and secure your fore arm with your non-dominant hand. If you can throw the ball 15 MPH, you are a super human.

The leverage of the length of the racquet increases the potential speed of the end of that lever, (the racquet) far more than simply using the hand as the throwing component. (This is one of the reasons that serving, while similar to the throwing motion, is not exactly the same as throwing a ball out of the hand.)

You are absolutely correct that a person can't throw a ball from their hand using pronation alone and get more than 15 mph. Add a 27 inch stick from the hand, toss a ball to the end of that stick, and the speed of the end of that stick, (racquet) increases proportionately to the speed of the hand. (Just as the outer horse on a merry-go-round travels faster than the inner horse because the outer horse travels a far greater distance than the inner horse in the same period of time.)

While complete isolation is nearly impossible, I've demonstrated this serve at 30 - 40 mph in clinics and workshops with a radar gun, using only the pronation of the forearm and little to no forward movement of the arm, nor any extension of the elbow or use of the body, to demonstrate the importance of pronation in generating speed of a serve.

So, yes, you are correct about throwing a ball, the concept of using a racquet changes the leverage available and speed of the hit ball drastically compared to throwing an object from the hand.

 

[Slicendicer]

The leverage of the length of the racquet increases the potential speed of the end of that lever, (the racquet) far more than simply using the hand as the throwing component. (This is one of the reasons that serving, while similar to the throwing motion, is not exactly the same as throwing a ball out of the hand.)

You are absolutely correct that a person can't throw a ball from their hand using pronation alone and get more than 15 mph. Add a 27 inch stick from the hand, toss a ball to the end of that stick, and the speed of the end of that stick, (racquet) increases proportionately to the speed of the hand. (Just as the outer horse on a merry-go-round travels faster than the inner horse because the outer horse travels a far greater distance than the inner horse in the same period of time.)

While complete isolation is nearly impossible, I've demonstrated this serve at 30 - 40 mph in clinics and workshops with a radar gun, using only the pronation of the forearm and little to no forward movement of the arm, nor any extension of the elbow or use of the body, to demonstrate the importance of pronation in generating speed of a serve.

So, yes, you are correct about throwing a ball, the concept of using a racquet changes the leverage available and speed of the hit ball drastically compared to throwing an object from the hand.

Dave... hold your elbow in, hold your forearm with your non-dominant hand, have someone toss a ball, with a tennis racquet hit the ball 30 MPH... forget "serving"... you can not hit the ball close to 30 MPH with only the wrist(and a tennis racket).

If you have "demonstrated" this serve... you are a super human. Incomplete isolation... ok... try tucking your elbow and forearm to your side and hit the ball with only your wrist... you can not generate enough pace to hit the ball to the net in the air.

 

[CoachingMastery]

Dave... hold your elbow in, hold your forearm with your non-dominant hand, have someone toss a ball, with a tennis racquet hit the ball 30 MPH... forget "serving"... you can not hit the ball close to 30 MPH with only the wrist(and a tennis racket).

If you have "demonstrated" this serve... you are a super human. Incomplete isolation... ok... try tucking your elbow and forearm to your side and hit the ball with only your wrist... you can not generate enough pace to hit the ball to the net in the air.

I'm not using any wrist...If you isolate the arm so that you don't have any internal rotation of the forearm, (pronation), then yes, you can't generate much speed at all.

Believe me, I'm no superhuman. (Wish I was!)...and, as I said, I know I don't probably have 100% isolation of the arm's movement in these demonstrations...but, believe me, it is minimal. My arm is fully extended before and after contact and I'm not using any legs or body motion. (I've done this drill on my knees as well.) I don't have any problem getting the ball over the net and in with the slow 30 to 40 mph speeds we are talking about.

But, all arguments aside, this is still only a percentage of the swing speed we are talking about for the full service motion. The problem I see is where players swing only WITH the arm, usually pulling the elbow down ahead of the racquet as if swinging an ax down on a piece of wood on the ground. They obviously won't incorporate pronation at the right time, nor will they create the optimal swing path for various spins and full racquet head speed.

 

[Djokovicfan4life]

Hey Dave... no human being can hit 30-40 MPH serve using entirely wrist pronation... it is impossible. For one, to completely isolate the wrist and hit the tennis ball, you would have to hit it from a stationary position. Try throwing a tennis ball with only your wrist... hold your elbow in and secure your fore arm with your non-dominant hand. If you can throw the ball 15 MPH, you are a super human.

Well, as you know, I'm no expert, but don't the weakest of tap serves clock in at about 30-40 MPH? We're not really talking blistering speeds here.

 

[Slicendicer]

Well, as you know, I'm no expert, but don't the weakest of tap serves clock in at about 30-40 MPH? We're not really talking blistering speeds here.

Hold your elbow and pronate your wrist... now try with a racket. Do you think you can hit a 30-40 MPH serve... you can not. This is a fact, it's not really open for debate. The point is, the legs and hips are provide the larger amount of "power" while serving... I estimate 55% legs, hips/core 45% shoulder, arm, wrist.

 

[stormholloway]

It's all about centripetal force. The legs force the racquet to drop which sends energy into the mass of the racquet, then it's up to your upper body to utilize this energy properly.

 

[mucat]

Hold your elbow and pronate your wrist... now try with a racket. Do you think you can hit a 30-40 MPH serve... you can not. This is a fact, it's not really open for debate. The point is, the legs and hips are provide the larger amount of "power" while serving... I estimate 55% legs, hips/core 45% shoulder, arm, wrist.

I might have misunderstand your point. But if you only hit the ball with NO upper body or arm movement, just leg drive, the ball might not pass the other side of the court also.

I think the Pros has strong shoulder and core strength plus their long floppy arms.

 

[Slicendicer]

I might have misunderstand your point. But if you only hit the ball with NO upper body or arm movement, just leg drive, the ball might not pass the other side of the court also.
I think the Pros has strong shoulder and core strength plus their long floppy arms.

Are you serious, eh? Sometimes I wonder why I even try...

 

[CoachingMastery]

Hold your elbow and pronate your wrist... now try with a racket. Do you think you can hit a 30-40 MPH serve... you can not. This is a fact, it's not really open for debate. The point is, the legs and hips are provide the larger amount of "power" while serving... I estimate 55% legs, hips/core 45% shoulder, arm, wrist.

Well, you can say it isn't open to debate, but I've done it...and so have many other pros who speak at USPTA conventions. Don't know if you are a teaching pro with any experience, but you seem to be sure of something that has been shown many times in demonstration to be opposite of your contention.

Your information is incorrect regarding the legs too. If the legs are 55% as you "estimate" then I should be able to serve well over 200 mph, according to you. This is because I can serve over 100 mph on my knees, (another example that has been demonstrated by me and hundreds of other teaching pros). If I serve over 100 mph without legs, and if the legs are "55%" of the power, then I should be able to serve well over 200 mph if I use my legs. (I can't.)

This is a common misconception. I won't argue with you since you seem to be so very sure of yourself in all areas. However, if you are ever speaking at a tennis conference, please let me know so I can learn more.

 

[Slicendicer]

Well, you can say it isn't open to debate, but I've done it...and so have many other pros who speak at USPTA conventions. Don't know if you are a teaching pro with any experience, but you seem to be sure of something that has been shown many times in demonstration to be opposite of your contention.

Your information is incorrect regarding the legs too. If the legs are 55% as you "estimate" then I should be able to serve well over 200 mph, according to you. This is because I can serve over 100 mph on my knees, (another example that has been demonstrated by me and hundreds of other teaching pros). If I serve over 100 mph without legs, and if the legs are "55%" of the power, then I should be able to serve well over 200 mph if I use my legs. (I can't.)

This is a common misconception. I won't argue with you since you seem to be so very sure of yourself in all areas. However, if you are ever speaking at a tennis conference, please let me know so I can learn more.

If you are saying you can sit on your behind and serve the ball + 100 MPH, you are simply lying. If you are on your knees, you are using your legs and hips.... so it doesn't really pertain to any previous statements.

The wrist pronation alone CAN NOT generate enough racket head speed at contact to hit the ball 40 MPH... I know this for a fact.

I don't think I'll be attending any tennis conferences... I'll leave that to the guys who wear the Gilligan hats and anklet socks. Peace.