The Underhand Serve

[Steady Eddy]

While I was once looking this up, I read about a college match where a female player had an injured shoulder, so she got permission to serve underhand for the match. Despite this disadvantage she won anyway.

This brings up some questions. One, is why did she feel she needed permission to serve underhand? It's rare but I've seen touring pros serve underhand. Some people think it's a sleazy move, but if you do it every time, especially due to an injury, no one should have a problem with that.

The other question is, despite being a college match, and presumably the players have some level of skill, she was able to win anyway. For many players, especially recreational players, the serve simply starts a point. Aces and service winners are rare.

This makes me wonder if many recreational players should just serve underhand, get the points started, and forget about acquiring a serve that makes them dominate points. When you serve underhand you don't have to worry about the sun getting in your eyes, or the wind blowing around your toss. Since double-faults would be practically non-existent, you might well hold serve often, as your opponent would have the burden of getting their serve return in play, (no second chance for a missed serve return!)

If your overhand serve is no weapon, and you double-fault frequently, maybe you're better of just serving underhand and getting the point started?

 

[Deleted member 733170]

While I was once looking this up, I read about a college match where a female player had an injured shoulder, so she got permission to serve underhand for the match. Despite this disadvantage she won anyway.

This brings up some questions. One, is why did she feel she needed permission to serve underhand? It's rare but I've seen touring pros serve underhand. Some people think it's a sleazy move, but if you do it every time, especially due to an injury, no one should have a problem with that.

The other question is, despite being a college match, and presumably the players have some level of skill, she was able to win anyway. For many players, especially recreational players, the serve simply starts a point. Aces and service winners are rare.

This makes me wonder if many recreational players should just serve underhand, get the points started, and forget about acquiring a serve that makes them dominate points. When you serve underhand you don't have to worry about the sun getting in your eyes, or the wind blowing around your toss. Since double-faults would be practically non-existent, you might well hold serve often, as your opponent would have the burden of getting their serve return in play, (no second chance for a missed serve return!)

If your overhand serve is no weapon, and you double-fault frequently, maybe you're better of just serving underhand and getting the point started?

I guess what you suggest makes perfect sense for 3.0's and below.

 

[jaggy]

Over the years I have seen several college women's players, some ranked as high as top 50, serve underhand. Usually with success. I have no idea if they asked for permission though.

 

[robbo1970]

Yeah, I didn't think you needed permission.

I think with lower level rec players, there is mileage in the use of an underarm serve. It would cut down on double faults and at least get the ball in play. Arguably more effective than a looping, slow dolly serve that just tee's up your opponent to hit a winner.

 

[newpball]

She got permission?

You don't need permission to server underhand.
It was probably some clueless official who told her his own made up rules.

 

[heninfan99]

I was watching a pretty good player in the park about three weeks ago. All his second serves were underhanded. Seemed pretty effective.

This makes me wonder if many recreational players should just serve underhand, get the points started, and forget about acquiring a serve that makes them dominate points. When you serve underhand you don't have to worry about the sun getting in your eyes, or the wind blowing around your toss. Since double-faults would be practically non-existent, you might well hold serve often, as your opponent would have the burden of getting their serve return in play, (no second chance for a missed serve return!)

If your overhand serve is no weapon, and you double-fault frequently, maybe you're better of just serving underhand and getting the point started?

 

[movdqa]

There was a match between Chang and Lendl where Chang used underhand serves for a while. Chang won the match.

I don't think that I would have wanted to be around Lendl afterwards.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I guess what you suggest makes perfect sense for 3.0's and below.

Yes. Nothing wrong with being a 3.0. If you're having fun and a good sport, that's great. When I walk my dog, I go by our HOA courts, and on weekdays I see housewives, (I suspect that because they have freetime on a weekday), playing doubles. They play enough tennis to have purchased tennis outfits, but they probably don't practice, they just play. For example they're not going to take a hopper full of balls and practice serving.

As a result, they gain no advantage by having the serve hit from a higher point. They hit up on the serve and allow gravity to pull it down.

There's nothing wrong with playing this way. I can tell they enjoy it. But if that's your level, there's no point in the overhand serve. In the early days of the sport, even some champions served that way! I think that they don't even know it's an option. An instructor might ask, "How much time do you want to devote to this sport?" If the answer is "Once or twice a month, during the summer.", maybe they shouldn't pursue that overhand serve?

 

[Steady Eddy]

Seems to me an apt analogy is to compare it to 'flip turns' in swimming. I was on a swim team and learned to do them. So when I swim for a workout I use them instead of grabbing the wall. Most swimmers in the pool grab the wall. They don't feel bad about it. They know the Olympic swimmers don't do it that way.

Same thing should be in tennis. If you're just hacking around, just start the point in a way similar to your forehand, not an overhead (another shot that's very erratic on the lower levels). The tennis serve is very difficult to master, how many players can serve like Serena? If all you can do is forehands, just start the point with another forehand.

 

[Stupendous1HBH]

At the 3.0 level, a 2nd serve underhand could be very effective. Esp if you practice it a lot and can generate a fair amount of side spin on the shot. Really eff with the returner's footwork and contact point.

 

[Steady Eddy]

At the 3.0 level, a 2nd serve underhand could be very effective. Esp if you practice it a lot and can generate a fair amount of side spin on the shot. Really eff with the returner's footwork and contact point.

I knew a teaching pro who could do an underhand serve with a ton of sidespin. You could get used to it, but most people butchered the return the first time they saw it.

I'm thinking of a serve for a beginning to early intermediate player. One that is hit firmly, clears the net by a foot, and lands deep in the service court. This kind of serve would put them at neither an advantage or disadvantage. What beginners need is practice, and no one gets that if everyone is mostly picking up balls from faults or double faults.

Beginners. Get the serve in play. If you want to learn to hit aces, go practice by yourself. Don't keep 3 other people waiting while you smack balls into the net.

 

[LeeD]

I once saw Art Larsen hit a side arm serve that went probably around 30 feet in the air, land at very short service box, and bounce back at ME, his partner.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I once saw Art Larsen hit a side arm serve that went probably around 30 feet in the air, land at very short service box, and bounce back at ME, his partner.

You were his partner? What was he like?

Did he win the point with his sidearm serve?

 

[Shaolin]

''Permission'' to hit an underhand serve. lol

Whats next, permission to hit drop shots, volleys?

 

[LeeD]

In '76, I started going to Golden Gate Park. Brought 2 Stan Smiths in a Wilson racket bag I bought from moma Louie.
Art was the first person to ask if I wanted to play, him on Court 8 with John Murio and George Pontacoff (I found out later). Then needed a rummy 4th, and I was elected.
John had won a SF City Open about 30 year's previous, and George won it in the mid 50's, about the time Art played Wimbledon.
I first partnered with Art, because I was a 2nd year tennis player, and Art was the Alpha dog. John was already 68 then, or nearly 70, I don't know, but was really old and couldn't run at all. George was a drunk, beer in one hand, cigarette in the other, alternating when needed, and sleeping at the park.
Needless to say, neither could get to Art's drop shots, or my first flat serves.
I played with that group for almost 3 months, me getting George as partner, then John as they found out that rummy that I was, I was making good progress and was the only one who could return all of Art's tricky serves. Final few sets we played, I always got stuck with John, who really could not run or move more than 4' from his ready position by then. He totally stopped playing tennis when I migrated away from that group, knowing his future wasn't bright on the tennis courts if he couldn't move. He just stayed at his bar in the Haight.
What was Art like? He seemed a jokester, all talk like the brother's in the hood. But, he could hit all the serves, and several trick shots that'd fool anyone the first time, but wasn't so special after seeing it 3 times. He needed to win, but tried to use the least effort and the worse possible shot, like drop shotting me, or rallying with John or George, who could hit 10+ shots easily away from any netman. I suspect at 55, his ego was just as strong as when he was in his 30's.
Seemed to me, George turned out to be the most real, and I counted him as a personal friend for a couple year's later even, but he was headed downhill by '77.

 

[Nostradamus]

While I was once looking this up, I read about a college match where a female player had an injured shoulder, so she got permission to serve underhand for the match. Despite this disadvantage she won anyway.

This brings up some questions. One, is why did she feel she needed permission to serve underhand? It's rare but I've seen touring pros serve underhand. Some people think it's a sleazy move, but if you do it every time, especially due to an injury, no one should have a problem with that.

The other question is, despite being a college match, and presumably the players have some level of skill, she was able to win anyway. For many players, especially recreational players, the serve simply starts a point. Aces and service winners are rare.

This makes me wonder if many recreational players should just serve underhand, get the points started, and forget about acquiring a serve that makes them dominate points. When you serve underhand you don't have to worry about the sun getting in your eyes, or the wind blowing around your toss. Since double-faults would be practically non-existent, you might well hold serve often, as your opponent would have the burden of getting their serve return in play, (no second chance for a missed serve return!)

If your overhand serve is no weapon, and you double-fault frequently, maybe you're better of just serving underhand and getting the point started?

NO laughing matter. It works and Works great even in very top of the sport like D1 tennis and Challenger pro level. Cal bear woman served entire doubles match Underhanded while her partner served normal. That one girl had injury but They reached the Semi finals of NCAA doubles tournament in Athens, Georgia this year......Take that.............

and Mackie Macdonald of UCLA served the entire set and a half underhanded due to injury in a Challenger event against Tanys Sangren,,,,and actually won a set..............

 

[LeeD]

While post 16 is reality that has happenned in real life, I'd not recommend any decent tennis player, 4.0 and up, to serve underhand and expect good results from it in match play.

 

[Nostradamus]

While post 16 is reality that has happenned in real life, I'd not recommend any decent tennis player, 4.0 and up, to serve underhand and expect good results from it in match play.

Agree, but if you can master the Shot by practicing it,,,,it can be very very useful. You use it in unexpected situations like break point or Game point and expect to win the point. In these situations with Poly strings in your racket,,, I can literally bend the ball at 90 degree angle after it bounces. This will make your opponent flat out miss the return or even if he gets it back somehow, it will be weak reply and you can pound the next shot........ and as surprise ,,, you can even serve and volley off this serve.....

 

[LeeD]

True dat, and if you use a sidearm or under serve enough, you will find your partner list diminishing rather quickly, until you have no partner's to hit with.

 

[Steady Eddy]

In '76, I started going to Golden Gate Park. Brought 2 Stan Smiths in a Wilson racket bag I bought from moma Louie.
Art was the first person to ask if I wanted to play, him on Court 8 with John Murio and George Pontacoff (I found out later). Then needed a rummy 4th, and I was elected.
John had won a SF City Open about 30 year's previous, and George won it in the mid 50's, about the time Art played Wimbledon.
I first partnered with Art, because I was a 2nd year tennis player, and Art was the Alpha dog. John was already 68 then, or nearly 70, I don't know, but was really old and couldn't run at all. George was a drunk, beer in one hand, cigarette in the other, alternating when needed, and sleeping at the park.
Needless to say, neither could get to Art's drop shots, or my first flat serves.
I played with that group for almost 3 months, me getting George as partner, then John as they found out that rummy that I was, I was making good progress and was the only one who could return all of Art's tricky serves. Final few sets we played, I always got stuck with John, who really could not run or move more than 4' from his ready position by then. He totally stopped playing tennis when I migrated away from that group, knowing his future wasn't bright on the tennis courts if he couldn't move. He just stayed at his bar in the Haight.
What was Art like? He seemed a jokester, all talk like the brother's in the hood. But, he could hit all the serves, and several trick shots that'd fool anyone the first time, but wasn't so special after seeing it 3 times. He needed to win, but tried to use the least effort and the worse possible shot, like drop shotting me, or rallying with John or George, who could hit 10+ shots easily away from any netman. I suspect at 55, his ego was just as strong as when he was in his 30's.
Seemed to me, George turned out to be the most real, and I counted him as a personal friend for a couple year's later even, but he was headed downhill by '77.

Thanks. Since you're out in the bay area, and know the old days, did you ever meet Whitney Reed? I can't find any video of him playing on youtube. I got a book about him, but that's mostly about his seductions and not his on court exploits. Allen Fox described playing him in NCAA competition in 1963 and falling victim to his drop shots and lobs. He just fascinates me.

 

[Deleted member 23235]