johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
Still arguing... Geez
We (plus the videos) are saying the same thing, the question is, though: does this elbow flexion add speed to the serve or not? B/c it seems that it does more that just a continous down swing....The wording of your post #140 appears to be advocating both wrist snap and elbow snap. I would say that this is a reasonable interpretation of what you posted.
I had previously seen 2 of the 4 videos in the post that you linked. I don’t believe that any of the 4 videos are advocating a wrist snap. One of the videos does mention “snapping the racket” thru contact & post-contact. But I do not believe he ever characterizes this as a snapping of the wrist.
I had been teaching the post-contact elbow flexion shown for many years — long before seeing any of those videos. But never referred to them as an elbow snap. Note that Jeff Salzenstein implemented this elbow action as the “dirty diaper” position— but did not refer to it as a snap.
I would have less objection to referencing an “elbow snap” than the cringy “wrist snap” instruction. But I prefer to label it as merely an elbow flexion (or a post-contact bending of the elbow).
But note that this elbow flexion is not absolutely necessary. Many high-level servers, like Pete Sampras, incorporated this elbow flexion. Other, very effective, elite servers, like Roger Federer, did not.
While I did teach this elbow flexion on the follow-thru, I did not force students to adopt it if they had a problem implementing it. To my mind, the post-contact elbow flexion is a means to decrease the stress & motion to the shoulder and the wrist without slowing down RHS until later in the follow-thru.
Also playing daily practically, how about you?Still arguing... Geez
I don't argue for the sake of arguing. I don't get emotional and personal on a forum. If a discussion is no longer productive, I'm out. My tennis is going well.Also playing daily practically, how about you?
You believe ppl here are arguing just for the sake of arguing? Appeared to me to be the case earlier in the thread but think we got past that for the most part.I don't argue for the sake of arguing. I don't get emotional and personal on a forum. If a discussion is no longer productive, I'm out. My tennis is going well.
I don’t believe that the elbow flexion is, in itself, adding to RHS or ball speed. The ball is already off the strings when the elbow flexion is executed. Max RHS occurs immediately prior to contact. At contact, the speed of the RH is automatically decreased by the impact. At contact, as the ball leaves the strings, max ball speed is achieved.We (plus the videos) are saying the same thing, the question is, though: does this elbow flexion add speed to the serve or not? B/c it seems that it does more that just a continous down swing....
I presume you got the wrong impression that I agreed with you or accepted your points. Well, I didn't. I only accepted not to continue this discussion. Hitting down on the ball means hitting the ball so it goes down into the box. Let's not be ridiculous. What else could it have been? Hitting up on the ball towards the moon so it somehow comes down? I just suggested people should be more aware of this while they're hitting their serves. Don't make it sound like I'm asking them to do something to ruin their lives. Anyone can try it, test it, like it or say it's bs. That's about it.Seems some old myths have resurfaced. Can’t let those go unchecked. It is perfectly fine for coaches & players to utilize some fallacies they may or may not know to be untrue to achieve a desired result. However, these myths / fallacies should not be presented as new truths for other players.
The focus on “stopping” everything but the racquet head may be helpful exercise, but only for those who tend to deliver the impact with whole-arm windmill-style swing (even when starting in proper trophy pose). Not to anyone.@Dragy and especially @10sbeast888 as well:
Did you watch the videos? Basically he is keeping the buttcap more or less in the same place....
Myself, I think of it as throwing the racquet at the ball(and I do it for FHs a lot).
I've tried one serve one hour ago and it felt great (will try more tomorrow probably).
I presume you got the wrong impression that I agreed with you or accepted your points. Well, I didn't. I only accepted not to continue this discussion. Hitting down on the ball means hitting the ball so it goes down into the box. Let's not be ridiculous. What else could it have been? Hitting up on the ball towards the moon so it somehow comes down? I just suggested people should be more aware of this while they're hitting their serves. Don't make it sound like I'm asking them to do something to ruin their lives. Anyone can try it, test it, like it or say it's bs. That's about it.
Of course. Not when you grow up though!What is for sure from the above is if you are a young junior than you will need to hit up on the serve since assuming playing on a standard size tennis court. As the serve will be struck closer to ground level due to shorter height of the junior and time for ball to get to the service box will increase due to lower service speeds and so more time for gravity to act down on the ball.
My comment was certainly not directed towards you... I've got used to mixed bag of information on here. Anyone serious about learning here just have to learn to sieve.You believe ppl here are arguing just for the sake of arguing? Appeared to me to be the case earlier in the thread but think we got past that for the most part.
Healthy exchange of ideas / beliefs?
Seems some old myths have resurfaced. Can’t let those go unchecked. It is perfectly fine for coaches & players to utilize some fallacies they may or may not know to be untrue to achieve a desired result. However, these myths / fallacies should not be presented as new truths for other players.
I have no idea what you are referring to, in this case.I don't argue for the sake of arguing. I don't get emotional and personal on a forum. If a discussion is no longer productive, I'm out. My tennis is going well.
which dude? There's a lot of dudes that's responding back and forth and it can be construed as arguing, including the dude that says he doesn't argue.This dude will argue anything, no matter how stupid the concept is.
Any onewhich dude?
Dudes love to argue.Any one
hehe, i was avoiding this threaded because the title immediately did not compute with my mental model......
@nyta2 posted about it here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/golfer’s-elbow.778869/post-18508692
i wonder if it's an illusion... ie. if i let my elbow drop just after contact, it appears that the racquet+hand+elbow+arm are travelling at the same speed...
I had been teaching the post-contact elbow flexion shown for many years — long before seeing any of those videos. But never referred to them as an elbow snap. Note that Jeff Salzenstein implemented this elbow action as the “dirty diaper” position— but did not refer to it as a snap.
I would have less objection to referencing an “elbow snap” than the cringy “wrist snap” instruction. But I prefer to label it as merely an elbow flexion (or a post-contact bending of the elbow).
But note that this elbow flexion is not absolutely necessary. Many high-level servers, like Pete Sampras, incorporated this elbow flexion. Other, very effective, elite servers, like Roger Federer, did not.
i'm a fan of the dirty diaper finish, but the difference between that and the "elbow snap", is the timing of when i'm letting the racquet accelerate past my hand... in the dirty diaper finish, i can siwng the racquet at the same speed that my arm is rotating and still let the elbow flex "late" in the serve motionWhile I did teach this elbow flexion on the follow-thru, I did not force students to adopt it if they had a problem implementing it.
agreed, it is to me a way to dissipate the energy, but for me is also an indicator that i am letting the racquet accel past my hand at/through contact...To my mind, the post-contact elbow flexion is a means to decrease the stress & motion to the shoulder and the wrist without slowing down RHS until later in the follow-thru.
agreed, i don't think it is either... ot me it just indicates i'm letting the racquet whip past my hand...I don’t believe that the elbow flexion is, in itself, adding to RHS or ball speed.
not that it matters to the actual learnign of the serve, but imo i think if were not to hit a ball (elim the physics of decel due to collision), i think i would achieve max rhs a few inches after my typical contact point... my $.02 - zero evidence - just a feeling, and my current mental modelThe ball is already off the strings when the elbow flexion is executed. Max RHS occurs immediately prior to contact. At contact, the speed of the RH is automatically decreased by the impact. At contact, as the ball leaves the strings, max ball speed is achieved.
agredAs I indicated previously, I believe that the elbow flexion might be employed to reduced stress shoulder & wrist on the follow-thru without decelerating the racket head too early.
In one sense, perhaps it does permit some players to achieve a greater RHS into contact. These players might consciously or unconsciously limit pre-contact RHS in order to minimize stress to the arm (particularly the shoulder & elbow). If that is the case for these players then perhaps the post-contact elbow flexion allows them to achieve a greater RHS/ ball speed at contact.
i didn't read through the entire thread, but my mental model is definitely to hit up on every serve, and let the face of the racquet dictate the directionI presume you got the wrong impression that I agreed with you or accepted your points. Well, I didn't. I only accepted not to continue this discussion. Hitting down on the ball means hitting the ball so it goes down into the box. Let's not be ridiculous. What else could it have been? Hitting up on the ball towards the moon so it somehow comes down? I just suggested people should be more aware of this while they're hitting their serves. Don't make it sound like I'm asking them to do something to ruin their lives. Anyone can try it, test it, like it or say it's bs. That's about it.
like this... even on "flat" serve i'm hitting up.. and i swear some of my "flat" serve look like it's diving into the court as if it had a tiny bit of top (but not exaggerated like my loopier topspin or kick serve, and definitely not as much clearance)the racket head is traveling upwards, hence you get topspin. the angle is slightly closed, i.e. -2 degrees say, so the ball goes downward.
i think the same thing too... "throw the racquet at the ball"... but one other thing i've realized is that folks tend to "throw" differently when attached to a racquet and/or don't know how to throw... i also add in "...throw and try to make the a racquat spin as much as possible"... many folks find it hard to have this chaotic throwing motion AND hit a ball AND get it to land in the box, while they are "throwing the racquet" tomahawk style...Myself, I think of it as throwing the racquet at the ball(and I do it for FHs a lot).
this is what i realized i used to do alot, especially on flat & slice... led to tennis elbow too.The focus on “stopping” everything but the racquet head may be helpful exercise, but only for those who tend to deliver the impact with whole-arm windmill-style swing (even when starting in proper trophy pose). Not to anyone.
Meanwhile, it seems to me that said windmill style swing is actually linked to trying to hit the back of the ball, or hit down into the box, as their intention/feel.
Those who developed proper upward swing and rely on ISR and racquet pivot on top of the motion to deliver impact usually have this slow-down naturally. Even more — they sometimes need to consciously avoid that “stopping”.
So what I mean — need to see your motion/issues to suggest suitable corrective technique.
um... applies to short players like me too! (5'4")... my son is a "junior" but he's 5'10"!What is for sure from the above is if you are a young junior than you will need to hit up on the serve since assuming playing on a standard size tennis court. As the serve will be struck closer to ground level due to shorter height of the junior and time for ball to get to the service box will increase due to lower service speeds and so more time for gravity to act down on the ball.
i find that most of the intermediates and lower are trying to "hit down into the box"...
What caused you TE: "deliver the impact with whole-arm windmill-style swing (even when starting in proper trophy pose)" or stopping the elbow?hehe, i was avoiding this threaded because the title immediately did not compute with my mental model...
i wonder if it's an illusion... ie. if i let my elbow drop just after contact, it appears that the racquet+hand+elbow+arm are travelling at the same speed
anywho, it really helped me feel the difference of "letting the racquet accel past my hand" if i focused on "keeping the elbow up after contact" (which was hard/impossible for me to do if i was "reaching as high as i could to make contact")
i'm a fan of the dirty diaper finish, but the difference between that and the "elbow snap", is the timing of when i'm letting the racquet accelerate past my hand... in the dirty diaper finish, i can siwng the racquet at the same speed that my arm is rotating and still let the elbow flex "late" in the serve motion
agreed, it is to me a way to dissipate the energy, but for me is also an indicator that i am letting the racquet accel past my hand at/through contact...
agreed, i don't think it is either... ot me it just indicates i'm letting the racquet whip past my hand...
not that it matters to the actual learnign of the serve, but imo i think if were not to hit a ball (elim the physics of decel due to collision), i think i would achieve max rhs a few inches after my typical contact point... my $.02 - zero evidence - just a feeling, and my current mental model
agred
i didn't read through the entire thread, but my mental model is definitely to hit up on every serve, and let the face of the racquet dictate the direction
ironically i'v had a coach (utr14 130mph+ serve) actually go through one progression where he asked me to serve "up" and hit where the indoor wall met the roof... (coupled with a few "elbow snap drill")
now it's my goto progression once someone has their basic motion ironed out...
in working with students i find that most of the intermediates and lower are trying to "hit down into the box"...
like this... even on "flat" serve i'm hitting up.. and i swear some of my "flat" serve look like it's diving into the court as if it had a tiny bit of top (but not exaggerated like my loopier topspin or kick serve, and definitely not as much clearance)
this is my current mental model anyway.
i think the same thing too... "throw the racquet at the ball"... but one other thing i've realized is that folks tend to "throw" differently when attached to a racquet and/or don't know how to throw... i also add in "...throw and try to make the a racquat spin as much as possible"... many folks find it hard to have this chaotic throwing motion AND hit a ball AND get it to land in the box, while they are "throwing the racquet" tomahawk style...
so you end up with folks "throwing" but controlling the face at contact, kinda like doing a "no rotation" knife throw (if anyone here has every tried to do that... or in the axe throwing booth that seems to be popular...)
this is what i realized i used to do alot, especially on flat & slice... led to tennis elbow too.
um... applies to short players like me too! (5'4")... my son is a "junior" but he's 5'10"!
my $.02
happy new year, all!
This is not proof that Jordan is actually swinging down on the ball. While your “flat” serve appears to have improved, your video might appear to show that that ball path is downward coming off the strings but it does not offer proof that you are actually swinging down into the ball.
Jordan is not. Nick is.This is not proof that Jordan is actually swinging down on the ball. While your “flat” serve appears to have improved, your video might appear to show that that ball path is downward coming off the strings but it does not offer proof that you are actually swinging down into the ball.
That mostly means that you’ve been doing some odd thing before, and now by overcompensating you got much closer to optimum. It’s good, whatever works. In best case scenario you ingrain what works and forget how you got there, unnecessary thoughts.Jordan is not. Nick is.
I really don't care who says what about this. I started hitting down into the court and my serve turned into something else. That's proof for me.
The windmill-style (reach as high as I can) caused my TE.What caused you TE: "deliver the impact with whole-arm windmill-style swing (even when starting in proper trophy pose)" or stopping the elbow?
From google AI…
You do you, and don’t let any of us scrubs to tell you otherwise!Jordan is not. Nick is.
I really don't care who says what about this. I started hitting down into the court and my serve turned into something else. That's proof for me.
Slowmo side-view of Nick's serve does not show him swinging down on the serve. He swings upward from his drop to contact. Near contact, his racket path has started to level off -- but his racket does not move downward until after he's contacted the ballFrom google AI…
“Nick Kyrgios' arm span is reportedly around 71 inches (180 cm), which is considered significantly long for his height of 6'6" (198 cm) and contributes to his powerful serve in tennis.”
If you are similarly built, then ignore anything this (me) 5’4” hack has to say about how I serve….
I forget the actual height, but if you have a contact at/over 8’ you probably can hit down.
Just post this in every one of your threads and move on.I really don't care who says what about this.
I agree.Slowmo side-view of Nick's serve does not show him swinging down on the serve. He swings upward from his drop to contact. Near contact, his racket path has started to level off -- but his racket does not move downward until after he's contracted the ball
It is conceivable that the giants, like John Isner (6’10”), who are close to 205 cm or taller, MIGHT be able to swing down on the ball — IF they jump high enuff to make contact.I agree.
I have in my head that the actual height to be able to hit hit down is like 9ft+…
But if whatever OP is describing works for him, who am I to argue. It’s not like I’m the tennis police… I just know it doesn’t work for me… thus why I avoided this thread in the first place![]()
Bingo!guys it's circular. what goes up must come down.
Which stroke seems so basic to you?of a basic stroke?
4. Fh, bf, serve, volley. Staples of tennisWhich stroke seems so basic to you?
Why is it gone the next day?this is how the brain works - one day you have everything down, the next day everything is gone.
it's better to keep a log. or you can write down everything here, just to be humbled by your own naivety later..
Why is it gone the next day?
So, even after 10 yrs it's not become permanent? Not enough time/reps?just the way the brain works... certain swing thots are temporary, until enough reps to make them into permanent muscle memories.
in this example C aint making that big of a change on the serve.So, even after 10 yrs it's not become permanent? Not enough time/reps?
What do you think about GOAT Novak Djokovic rebuilding his serve being 24 y.o. top player, and further developing it during next decade to actually become The GOAT?4. Fh, bf, serve, volley. Staples of tennis
If you're keen on using @Curious for example, where would you rate him as a player in 100 people? 50th is smack dab in middle/ average, 100th is the excellent learner/player.
Pros rebuilding, learning anything to improve their game is far FAR from basic, doesn't touch this conversation by 10 miles at all.What do you think about GOAT Novak Djokovic rebuilding his serve being 24 y.o. top player, and further developing it during next decade to actually become The GOAT?
Tennis is a game where you learn and learn and learn. And everyone has to figure out for himself every shot - and that "how" may be different for every single one.
So no, I see no issues. The basic stroke is there. Put me against a lower level player, and I win 1 and 2 hitting every shot confidently. Put @Curious against a lower level player, and he dominates that poor guy with serves and FH winners and net play, while his BHs work good to set up further attacks. We've seen such videos.
Basic is just not enough to move forward. Fundamentals have depth and levels of proficiency. Details and nuances are important and highly individual.
Now can we get lost in minutae or turn for dead ends? Absolutely! Not stopping us from hitting the road, though.
Happy New Year!![]()
That means what Curious is doing is correct, heading in the right direction then, given 10+ years of this put him in top 5% player. That's not bad!top 5% learner; considering the diligence levels in both theoretical pursuit and work ethic.
the serves are very solid; seemed to figure that out by himself, mostly with hard work;
the bh took years; unlucky didn't have good info for a while; now is good with the right fix, and a local guy to work with;
fh seems solid;
volleys will need fix - typical home-built volleys, but won't take much to fix;
anticipation, smoothness of play, these things require high level competition/practice partners, seemingly lacking at the moment.
all things considered guy is playing tremendous tennis at this age.
Look, you think based on what? I see my own progress as well as some other people around. I'm 100% focused on having very utility approach to technique and advice I share. I don't claim I'm brilliantly efficient instructing, or always right, but what you may see as "like you guys doing..." - for my case, personally, is very composed and definitely not sand castles. Trying to help, or sharing what helped me, with very exact and real picture of result.Pros rebuilding, learning anything to improve their game is far FAR from basic, doesn't touch this conversation by 10 miles at all.
Basic means basic.
It allows you to hit the ball with sufficient control (stroke-wise) to compete up to 4.5 which already puts you over top 5% (per 10s assessment) and Curious isn't even a 4.5, I think. That means "basic" here is already too good.
So, I'm not even talking about "basic" as being beginning.
I think at this point (the practical rec levels) focusing on the "minutiae" like you guys are doing is just like...building sand castles. It's fun but completely useless.
Happy New Year 2025!
I'm not sure what we're even talking about here.Look, you think based on what? I see my own progress as well as some other people around. I'm 100% focused on having very utility approach to technique and advice I share. I don't claim I'm brilliantly efficient instructing, or always right, but what you may see as "like you guys doing..." - for my case, personally, is very composed and definitely not sand castles. Trying to help, or sharing what helped me, with very exact and real picture of result.
I'm pretty sure some other people on here with enough proof of success, sharing. Reader's only job is seeing and understanding.
Our friend @Curious is already quite good player, and improved a lot during his years on here. Is he in his own way all this time? Likely, by having quite twisted mindset, or maybe twisting mindset: one day he's on track practicing hard and properly, with coach, and competing with right focus... next day he's discovering and arguing and doing things to his game to prove the point. If only he just did the "getting better part", didn't find so much pain in bad days, accepted his rate of improvement and didn't get disappointed by himself ... and did all the arguing and proving stuff somewhere out of his tennis, I don't know, in medical debates with his colleagues ...
So while I don't accept the "you guys" unification as explaind above, I'll stand for @Curious any day, because he's passionate for improvement and puts a lot into tennis and the community.
Or you want here vocal only coaches aka "couldn't achieve anything in tennis despite no childhood" looking down at all the adult learners, and their yes-people and fanboys?![]()
Fundamentals have depth and levels of proficiency. Details and nuances are important and highly individual.
That means what Curious is doing is correct, heading in the right direction then, given 10+ years of this put him in top 5% player. That's not bad!