Well, at least that's the expectation. Most of the top male players in recent times have been 183cm to 190cm, with players taller than that excused for not getting to the top because they can't be expected to have good movement or be athletic because of their height. Usain Bolt is 195cm and he seems to move ok. The prototype for the top tennis player should be someone extremely tall who can hammer down the serve, but has the athleticism that's common in tall basketballers. It's time to stop "excusing" tall tennis players for being unathletic and concede that height is not a detractors from athleticism in tennis or just about any other sport.
Tall Players Have Poor Movement
- Thread starter reaper
- Start date
Usain bolt runs fast. Movement in tennis side to side totally different thing.
It's not identical, but what about it makes it something that a tall person supposedly can't do?
I agree with that. The strange thing about it is that people in the normal height range of tennis tend to be good athletes. The moment they're abnormally tall they're hopeless athletes who can only exist on the circuit courtesy of the advantage (serving) that their height gives them. Just seems odd to me that there's never been a super athlete who's 6 foot 10 who decided they love tennis and went pro.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
The super tall guys who are very athletic usually go in another direction I would say... (basketball for instance)
Dope Reign
Banned
Del Potro moves pretty well for a big guy.
Murray is an excellent mover at 191. I find it hard to believe his movement would drop off a cliff if he had 3 more inches.
I wonder what difference it makes if you were always really tall, versus if you were somewhat tall and have a spurt growth in your late teens.
Murray is an excellent mover at 191. I find it hard to believe his movement would drop off a cliff if he had 3 more inches.
I wonder what difference it makes if you were always really tall, versus if you were somewhat tall and have a spurt growth in your late teens.
Boom-Boom
Legend
You're right...
...I think what OP is saying is that we yet have to see in tennis a Michael Jordan type player, like someone at 198 who moves extremely well
Pahansuopa
Rookie
I would say fine motoric skills related to tennis are harder to maintain than in many other sports. It is hard to develop fluid, economic strokes and at the same time build muscel mass. Of course there are cases like Verdasco and Murray who went to see Gil Reyes and gained 20 pounds in short period. I would still say that they both have flaws in their techniques, maybe not because of higher mass, but still Murray has akward forehand and bad second serve. Verdascos shots are hard to maintain and he often loses touch and control in many of them. Does many double faults sometimes etc... It is harder to change direction if you are taller, that is a basic fact from physics. In tennis movement is basically ability to change direction and ability to maintain balance during rapid movement and hitting. That is of course harder and harder as you get taller. Many times people also don't apprecciate how fast and well taller players move. They seem even slower than they are because they don't take as many steps. You don't have smaller person moving in same side of the net trying to catch you to compare the movement.
SinjinCooper
Hall of Fame
Tall players appear to move "poorly" for the same reason Usain Bolt always seems to "start slow," and then run past everyone at 50m.
All athletic movement is predicated upon the activation of kinetic chains. And the longer (taller) the links in that chain are, the longer they take to activate.
This is a benefit in, say, a service motion. Because there are no pressing restrictions on the time a player can use to begin and unwind the movement, all the free power that comes from the longer chain is theirs to enjoy and employ. It's also a benefit in a forehand you can get to easily, because longer levers allow for a brutalizing of the ball that shorter ones simply can't, all else being equal.
Likewise, the 100m dash has proven to be just long enough that the additional horsepower gained through the long strides has enough time to overcome the quicker starts of the shorter racers.
In tennis? Not so. With the sidelines only 27 feet apart, the faster integration of the kinetic chain shorter players can harness (what we typically call "quickness"), gives the vertically challenged a massive advantage in movement. Remember that even for the world's fastest man, it routinely takes him 50m to overcome the quickness of his rivals. They simply get their chains started and in motion a lot faster. And that's six times as far as you ever need to go on a tennis court. And tennis forces you to do that a dozen or more times a point, regularly. Taller athletes just physically can't do that at the speeds shorter guys can. The biomechanics are absolute.
Getting guys tall but "more athletic" can minimize the advantage somewhat, but never eradicate it. The best you can hope for is more powerful acceleration of the muscles from a tall, athletic player, versus a shorter, less athletic one. But a well-trained shorter guy will always, always, always have the advantage in acceleration. Taller players look quicker on NBA courts in part because they're more athletic, but in larger part because there's such an advantage to size in the NBA that the average player is about 6'7". Even the lanky look more athletic when being guarded by the lanky. Ask Michael Jordan how easy it was to stay in front of Allen Iverson, however.
Just about every sporting position that mandates frequent changes of direction, but doesn't directly reward height, is dominated by shorter athletes. NFL running backs and cover men, futbol/soccer players worldwide, etc.
In waiting on guys to show up with Delpo's height and Michael Chang's quickness, you're waiting on a unicorn.
HipRotation
Hall of Fame
I'd say players like del Potro and Cilic move very well
Flash O'Groove
Hall of Fame
But what would be the advantage for a taller player to be more muscular? The bigger power in his stroke would be marginal because the problem is not to hit the ball with a power, it's to hit and let it stay in the court. When a tall player is in a position to unleash his forehand, he has already enough mechanical strength to do it, even with a Karlovic build.
Then muscles are heavy, and in a sport with so many stop and go, heavy isn't so good. It produce injuries and don't give so much reward. Basketball players needs to be heavy because it's a contact sport.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
There's a difference between agility in a small space and raw speed on a track moving straight foward. Murray is no more than 6 2 btw. He said himself he was 187.5 cm on twitter. 6 foot to 6 foot 2 is clearly the best range for modern tennis and it is a factor I'd consider when looking at up and coming talent....ex. Coric
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
I don't think we can call Coric the most promising of his generation based on his height though. Skills are still more important and he looks to be a lot less skilled than the likes of Kyrgios or Zverev. I actually have no real confidence in Coric becoming a future top player.. as in top player. I have every confidence that Zverev is going to be there or thereabouts based on his skill set. There are plenty of young rising talents that are Coric's height, so what will set him apart from those other talents? Style of play? Style isn't enough as it must be backed up with the appropriate requisite skills.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Skills are more important overall of course. I wouldn't bank on any of them becoming all timers. I think it is unlikely a guy under 6 feet tall or over 6 2 will become an all time great any time soon though
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Updated my post a bit.
Yeah, I find it unlikely that Zverev is the next Djokovic, Nadal or Federer, though I am predicting he will win multiple Slams (and I still think Kyrgios will win multiple Slams, which is a prediction that looks more flaky by the second). I do think Zverev could be in the league of the likes of Edberg, Wilander, Murray.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
I like Corics playstyle for the modern game, i can see he isnt overly dynamic though.
SinjinCooper
Hall of Fame
Taller players absolutely must win with power, if they're going to win at the highest levels. When everyone who takes the court is trained up to maximize their physical gifts, you have to rely on physics. All the mental strength, willpower, and desire in the world can't overcome physics.
Around 6'0" has proven to be the maximum height with which you can still change directions and accelerate enough to get to pretty much everything gettable in tennis. And the maximum height with which you can do that also gives you the most power potential of everyone who is getting to everything. That's why that height has dominated the sport for aeons.
More than a couple inches above that, you don't get to everything. More than a couple below, and you can't do as much with it when you get there.
The only way that's changing is if the courts speed up again, and start rewarding power disproportionately. Till then, it doesn't mean taller guys can't win. But it does mean they have to accept that they're going to have to hit their opponents off the court in order to do it, and primarily so on the serve.
Around 6'0" has proven to be the maximum height with which you can still change directions and accelerate enough to get to pretty much everything gettable in tennis. And the maximum height with which you can do that also gives you the most power potential of everyone who is getting to everything. That's why that height has dominated the sport for aeons.
More than a couple inches above that, you don't get to everything. More than a couple below, and you can't do as much with it when you get there.
The only way that's changing is if the courts speed up again, and start rewarding power disproportionately. Till then, it doesn't mean taller guys can't win. But it does mean they have to accept that they're going to have to hit their opponents off the court in order to do it, and primarily so on the serve.
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Although loosely speaking there seems to have been a slow upward progression for the average height of dominant groups of players for a long time now.
haqq777
Legend
Well said. Slight caveat though. Until Mo Green was active (at least as far back as I can remember), the underlying consensus was that tall height is a detriment to sprinting (think Ben Johnson & Ato Boldon etc). All that 'stride length times stride rate' rhetoric became awash once Bolt hit the scene. There was a Journal of Sports Science & Medicine study I read which found something along the lines of how world champion sprinters can only be between 5'9 and 6'3. Will try to find the link for it. I am not sure we will find an exception like Bolt in tennis though.
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Laver and Rosewall just looked like short tall(er) people, whereas Nishikori just looks short and small even though he's taller than those guys. Maybe it will become more commonplace to have tall players who don't look tall, but look filled out and perfectly proportioned and built like Djokovic or Federer. Wasn't Borg about the same height as Nishikori? Maybe he was a smidge taller, but when comparing their physiques one looks short and small and a bit awkward and the other looks like an athletic God of tennis, perfectly built for any trials the sport could throw at him.
Imagine a 14 foot tall Bjorn Borg. He'd dominate life.
Long story short: tall or short players tend to have atypical physiological profiles (though typical for their height). The ideal height and the physiological advantages it brings might not remain static.
Imagine a 14 foot tall Bjorn Borg. He'd dominate life.
Long story short: tall or short players tend to have atypical physiological profiles (though typical for their height). The ideal height and the physiological advantages it brings might not remain static.
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Wasn't Pancho 6'4"? I could be way off, there. Like, by an inch.
Gazelle
G.O.A.T.
Raonic has understood this very well, and adopted his game accordingly. A few years ago he tried to rally too much. Maybe he deserves a bit more credit.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Lendl is comparable to Djokovic in height and build. The prototype has always been there.
It's the exceptions both ways that are receding from prominence. I think the more athletic nature of the sport and slower surfaces makes the height range less forgiving. The super tall guys cant move well enough...the shorter guys can't hit thru the surfaces and counterpunch well
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, the conditions will also change the range. However, from Rosewall-Laver-Pancho to Connors-Borg-McEnroe to Lendl-Wilander-Becker-Edberg (so I'm using the big legends here) there seems to have been a trend. I recall seeing statistics though that show that the average height of the field has remained quite similar since the 1990s. Obviously, going on, the tandem of Agassi-Sampras upsets the trend a bit, and then we had Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray, where not a single one of the dominant players is below 6 foot (which ties into your idea that the recent tour conditions has made the height range less forgiving). So it seems to have settled since the '80s, with Agassi being an anomaly due to his ridiculous talent.
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
Sprint: Move your body as fast as you can in ONE direction.
Tennis: Move your body as fast as you can in ALL directions, continously changing.
The comparison with Bolt is completely invalid here(statistics actually show that Milos Raonic, a TTW celebirty for being slower than a turtle, sprints faster than Andy Murray). Tall people(especially long-legged people) naturally have a higher center of gravity, which makes fast changes of direction a lot more demanding than for shorter people with considerably lower center of gravity.
Tennis: Move your body as fast as you can in ALL directions, continously changing.
The comparison with Bolt is completely invalid here(statistics actually show that Milos Raonic, a TTW celebirty for being slower than a turtle, sprints faster than Andy Murray). Tall people(especially long-legged people) naturally have a higher center of gravity, which makes fast changes of direction a lot more demanding than for shorter people with considerably lower center of gravity.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
I believe a similar thing has happened with age. Of course the average age has gone up and part of that might be due to lack of competition (weak era) from the young guns. However, I think the athletic nature of the sport makes the age range less forgiving and will do so in the future... I believe 2015 was ND's highest level, particularly the 2nd half of the year when he was 28 and whatever months old. Tennis is so athletic now that it takes time to build up fitness, endurance etc. so we may see the peak age in other sports being mimiced by tennis (late 20s)
Ironically, I think this also makes it less likely that a very old player can win slams or have great runs as well (think Connors etc) because it is so athletic focused and grinding. There is a narrow range of ages when men are at their peak physically and tennis is starting to mimic that. I give Roger incredible credit here that he is still so competitive at his age as I think it is harder than ever with the conditions on tour for BOTH younger and older players to compete. I don't deny that chance (the quality of the younger players being not that good) doesn't play a role, but I think we will see this trend continue into the future as long as conditions remain the same.
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
I think the trend of some players priming later will continue, but at some point over the next few years the average age of players making it into the latter stages of draws is going to plummet as a natural consequence of one generation just becoming too old and the next couple of generations not being especially strong in the first place, making it easier for the next few younger ones to mix it up with them or even displace them. Generally, I don't think it will preclude the special talents from still hitting prime and winning big by the age of 20-22, but the spread of ages will be wide for at least a while, which is very interesting actually.
Not one of the current crop of very tall players are athletic like Michael Jordan or even close so they're not being "excused". They are unathletic compared to the best of every generation, fact.
haqq777
Legend
Morales's personal best was 10.28 (in 1987) when sprinters around him were running sub 10s left and right. Ben Johnson, Carl Lewis (5'10 and 6'2 respectively) ran sub 10s at World Championships in Italy. In fact, the guy who came in 5th at the World Championships ran a 10.25 - that's faster than Morales's personal best.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Do you think Jordan looked like a standout athlete when he was on the baseball field? He might not look that athletic if he was running side to side or bending down to make volleys or making the movements that tennis players need to make.
Similar threads
