Bolletieri convinced a few WTA players in the late 90's to adopt a very similar motion, IIRC.
I suspect it is more a matter of coaching bias than any special characteristic Roddick, Monfils, et al possess. I shared that bias for many years: my understanding of serve development priorities was such that Roddick's motion appeared to me to introduce unnecessary tension in the upper arm and shoulder. It also has what classical serve coaching would call a major hitch. I changed my mind after reading a really insightful analysis of Roddick's serve, after seeing what a colleague (who was trained the same way I was) had done with his academy juniors' (especially the girls') serves, and finally after doing it with my own serve and seeing improvement even in an old dog.
It now seems to me that the prep movements that Roddick and others eliminate add nothing to the acceleration phase, and if that's so, it makes the hitch irrelevant. I suspect too that the simplification of the overall motion speeds overall learning by freeing students to focus on higher piorities (aligning hand acceleration with body extension, etc).
We may be in the middle of a transition in how serves are commonly taught, similar to the one in the 80's with groundstrokes.
![[d]ragon](/data/avatars/m/26/26312.jpg?1574364787){kind=avatar}
