Is it better to have a fluent motion on serve

[nextbigbigthing1]

Is it better to have a fluid motion when serving,
i tend to bring it up to my knees then lift the racquet facing sky to right side of shoulder. this restricts power as my racquet need to be behind right shoulder etc. i tried it last night and you get more power from a fluid motion that ends with racquet behind your right shoudler.
A fluid motion gets this position but its hard to change too tips.
And tips on second serve motion aswell,.
Tips?
thanks.

 

[zapvor]

you mean fluid?

 

[LeeD]

If you can watch vids of Pro players serving, you can get an idea of the variety of styles that work in serving, and try to adopt some version of a few player's styles. You can go on U tube to get some also.

 

[FedExpress 333]

Most of the time, yes.

 

[Swissv2]

As the Bryan Brothers recommended for the serve: slow setup + toss, then acceleration through the shot - with little to no breaks in the motion.

Though I wouldn't know how to "express my service motion easily and articulately" (the definition of fluent), I would say it's more of a fluid motion .

 

[dominikk1985]

roddicks motion isn't really fluid and he has done OK.

but generally I would say a slow and fluid loading pattern is better for most players because it makes timing easier (higher accuracy). but if you can time a "jerky" motion like roddick that is fine too.

It's all about timing. you need to have finished the load and be ready to fire before the ball has reached the striking point.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Is it better to have a fluid motion when serving,
i tend to bring it up to my knees then lift the racquet facing sky to right side of shoulder. this restricts power as my racquet need to be behind right shoulder etc. i tried it last night and you get more power from a fluid motion that ends with racquet behind your right shoudler.
A fluid motion gets this position but its hard to change too tips.
And tips on second serve motion aswell,.
Tips?
thanks.

A service motion is like throwing a ball. You throw the racquet into the tennis ball. IMO, it's best to start slowly and gradually accelerate to contact.

 

[Logan71]

I grew up on watching Mcenroe in his prime and Edberg,or Stich.It's similar to a well executed dance move.
Aiming for a smoothness of weight transfer through the preperation and toss,getting yourself ready for the whip up with the racket into contact.

Ivanisevic for me just had the least complicated looking serve.Just no effort wasted in that motion.When he was mentally present he made winning service games look stupidly easy.
He had a very flamboyant rock back into his back foot but the rest was complete simplicity.

 

[Bartelby]

I think the Fed service motion is extremely simple and effective.

 

[tennis_balla]

My serve is fluent in 6 different languages....

 

[Bartelby]

Now, now, that's an underhand serve.

My serve is fluent in 6 different languages....

 

[Bartelby]

Its actually not wrong to use fluent:


flu·ent   [floo-uhnt] Show IPA
adjective
1.
spoken or written with ease: fluent French.
2.
able to speak or write smoothly, easily, or readily: a fluent speaker; fluent in six languages.
3.
easy; graceful: fluent motion; fluent curves.
4.
flowing, as a stream.
5.
capable of flowing; fluid, as liquids or gases.

 

[jht32]

Its actually not wrong to use fluent:


flu·ent   [floo-uhnt] Show IPA
adjective
1.
spoken or written with ease: fluent French.
2.
able to speak or write smoothly, easily, or readily: a fluent speaker; fluent in six languages.
3.
easy; graceful: fluent motion; fluent curves.
4.
flowing, as a stream.
5.
capable of flowing; fluid, as liquids or gases.

Yep. And

fluid   
adjective
2. pertaining to a substance that easily changes its shape; capable of flowing.
3. consisting of or pertaining to fluids.
4. changing readily; shifting; not fixed, stable, or rigid: fluid movements.
5. convertible into cash: fluid assets.

So it it better to have a fluent motion or a fluid movement when serving?

 

[TennisCJC]

I think you DO want a fluent/fluid motion at least reasonably smooth. Fed/Sampras = very smooth and continuous. Roddick/Monfils = not so smooth, quick, abbreviated.

I think the big question you want to decide is are you a full motion server like Fed/Sampras or a short motion server like Nadal/Roddick/Monfils. Either is fine and both are "relatively" smooth without major kinks but Fed/Sampras have longer, slower start-up while the other have a very short arm motion - they basically don't go down too far with the arms during setup and rather go straight up together in an abbreviated setup. Either is fine and use the one you have the best results with.

Next decision is are you a platform or pivot server. Platform is like Fed/Sampras with feet kept shoulder width apart until you explode up into contact. Pivot is like Simon and Roddick that pull the back foot up close to the front foot during the setup. Again, it is personal preference.

I am platform/full motion because I have been playing a long time and that's the way most of us were taught decades ago.

In my opinion platform/short motion may be the easiest to learn as it has the least amount of moving parts to get you in the trophy position.

 

[thug the bunny]

a fluid motion that ends with racquet behind your right shoudler

Fluid or fluent is one thing, but this is in the realm of contortionist!