USTA National Juniors - Boys Serving

[NLBwell]

I watched some of the Boys 18s at the national juniors tournament here in Colorado the beginning of July (Most of the kids from the middle of the country, some from CA, not many if any from the sourtheast or Fla. I was surprised at how weak most of the boys 18s serves were. I only saw a few of players, but assuming this is a represntative sample, there are not many that use big serves as a weapon. The number 1 seed did, serving and volleying a lot, and another kid had a big serve, but not a developed game on the rest of his shots.
Basically, junior tennis is about grinding baseline rallys (which it has always been), but it seems to me that there used to be a lot more kids with serves as weapons. When I was in high school and college all the top players had big serves as weapons and a lot of us lower players did too.
#1, #3 (me), and even #9 on my high school team could serve big (radared near 120mph - modern radar would read higher) and the top juniors at my club (pretty much all of whom became #1 D1 players over the years) could all pound the serve that big or bigger. As you can see, it didn't take that skilled a player to have a big serve. There were a lot of them about.
Is it because kids aren't taught to serve big anymore? Do they not practice hundreds of serves a day? Maybe American kids don't throw balls growing up the way they used to with video games, etc. This was often given as the reason that American players always had much bigger serves than other players. It used to be that if an American player was a top pro, the first assumption was that he had a big or at least extremely effective serve - though that certainly wasn't always true (ie. Connors).
Without a big serve as a weapon in the juniors, I don't see American tennis developing a new generation of top players. There used to be a bunch of John Isner-type Americans in the pros. Are there none coming up anymore? I don't think Americans growing up on hard courts will ever develop as better grinders than the Europeans.

 

[tennisnoob3]

sometimes, placement and topspin is much more effective and reliable at the junior level. i've noticed this as well when watching some videos of top junior matches at orange bowl, etc.

 

[willshot]

I think partially because most of the training in juniors nowdays emphasize on groundstrokes rather than serves and netplay. Almost every kid can hit big from the baseline but not all can serve big. Since their game is to defend from the baseline and not attack they don't need huge serves to win. Some kids are the opposite, having big serves but weak groundies. But again, most work on their baseline strokes the most.

 

[chalkflewup]

I think partially because most of the training in juniors nowdays emphasize on groundstrokes rather than serves and netplay. Almost every kid can hit big from the baseline but not all can serve big. Since their game is to defend from the baseline and not attack they don't need huge serves to win. Some kids are the opposite, having big serves but weak groundies. But again, most work on their baseline strokes the most.

I agree that most junior's only work on their serve the last 10 min of a lesson and it shows. The men's game is all about Big Serve-Big Forehand. And a kid that can hold serve AND play doubles well is a college coach's dream.

 

[arunstennis]

yeah some of the very best high school players in my state don't have monster serves either, but what they do have are ridiculous baseline games

 

[chalkflewup]

yeah some of the very best high school players in my state don't have monster serves either, but what they do have are ridiculous baseline games

Sick baseliners are like great 3 point shooters - they come a dime dozen. And for some kids, that's the style that chose them. Kids with athletic ability must develop an all court game and add in weapons that will separate them from the pack. Kids that can learn to serve big, make a forehand disappear, and return well, will beat the baseliners. Sure it takes longer to build that game, but that's the modern game...big boy tennis.

 

[cmb]

^^^The funny thing is that I have noticed when I play matches against some kids who are supposed to be good juniors...they have a grinding style of play, thats fine, but they still dont do anything with the ball..They sit it up in the middle of the court and try to play defense. They see Nadal and other spanish guys on TV and try to imitate that, but they dont relize how much they are doing with the ball as far as angles and combinations.

Also, the coaches seem to be coaching this skill-less style of play, and obsessed with grinding their opponents down. And lets be honest, college coaches love the skill-less number 8 guy who works his tail off in practice but cant ever win a match in the lineup

 

[arunstennis]

Sick baseliners are like great 3 point shooters - they come a dime dozen. And for some kids, that's the style that chose them. Kids with athletic ability must develop an all court game and add in weapons that will separate them from the pack. Kids that can learn to serve big, make a forehand disappear, and return well, will beat the baseliners. Sure it takes longer to build that game, but that's the modern game...big boy tennis.

yeah i agree, i rarely see these kids go to net to finish balls, its all about getting a short ball and ripping it for them.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

Great thread, man this is a pet peeve of mind. The serve and return of serve are after thoughts with so many parents, kids, and coaches.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

Sick baseliners are like great 3 point shooters - they come a dime dozen. And for some kids, that's the style that chose them. Kids with athletic ability must develop an all court game and add in weapons that will separate them from the pack. Kids that can learn to serve big, make a forehand disappear, and return well, will beat the baseliners. Sure it takes longer to build that game, but that's the modern game...big boy tennis.

Agree 100%. My kid's practices are so different from all the other kids at the tennis center its comical.

 

[ClarkC]

Agree 100%. My kid's practices are so different from all the other kids at the tennis center its comical.

We need lots of players whose practices are different from the norm. We discussed the odds of making it as a pro on several threads. Picture the odds of having the same practices and same style of play as everyone else, but somehow being significantly better than everyone else in your age group at that style of play. Sounds pretty tough to me. I think your odds go up just by doing things differently.

 

[droliver]

Just like on the ATP tour, I suspect some of that has to do with offering up fewer 2nd serves. At the pro level many players sacrifice MPH for % as it's often the higher percentage play

 

[NLBwell]

Just like on the ATP tour, I suspect some of that has to do with offering up fewer 2nd serves. At the pro level many players sacrifice MPH for % as it's often the higher percentage play

Of course they do that, but no, that's not what I'm talking about. It was clear that most of the kids don't have good enough form, or enough explosiveness to have a really good serve. The couple that were big severs had high first serve percentages.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

Of course they do that, but no, that's not what I'm talking about. It was clear that most of the kids don't have good enough form, or enough explosiveness to have a really good serve. The couple that were big severs had high first serve percentages.

It starts very young. The easiest way to hit the ball hard for kids is to almost hit it off to the side just above their shoulder level, usually without a conti grip. By the time you start fixing it into a real serve its a battle.

Again if they are allowed to win some tournies using that method it is hard to totally break the habits.

 

[Number1Coach]

Just like on the ATP tour, I suspect some of that has to do with offering up fewer 2nd serves. At the pro level many players sacrifice MPH for % as it's often the higher percentage play

Thats using your brain. I like that thought I will look into it as a way of teaching a junior I know sounds logical.

 

[SStrikerR]

In high school tennis I've noticed the same thing. Most players just try to get their serve in, and you usually don't face real "weapons". The players that do, however, have good serves, almost always have more complete games and are capable of winning in a number of ways. Just earlier this year I was beating someone during baseline rallies, and he changed his strategy to serve and volley. He gave me tough serves to return, and put things away with ease. Most people I play would never change their strategy, and they're the ones that lose easily.

 

[drgchen]

I'm surprised this comment is from a national level 18 USTA event. I see weak and inconsistent serving locally for high school level USTA players. Some of the old school teaching pros that I used to play emphasized serve and return of serve as well as holding your serve. So much of serving is technique, and you don't get that by serving 20 or so times at the end of a weekly private lesson. I routinely do the ball hopper serve a few hundred a week myself, and as a short guy I can serve 100-120 without having the height, leverage, or build.

 

[CANTGETENOUGHTENNIS!]

at my clinics i have noticed that the top ranked section player have a decent serve but nothing in the 100s range. im one of the only ones that has a serve 110 plus and actually use as a weapon rather than it just being something to start the point.
Interesting, havent ever really thought about this before.

 

[ga tennis]

there will be plenty of big serves at the zoo

 

[slice bh compliment]

......Maybe American kids don't throw balls growing up the way they used to with video games, etc.....

I don't doubt your point about video games, I just see a TON of kids playing soccer, basketball, baseball and football. Your point probably rings true in that a lot more kids are specializing in tennis earlier these days, so there's less time for a tennis kid to develop the throwing skills from football or baseball.

...But again, most work on their baseline strokes the most.

Yes. As mentioned in a few other posts, the serve, for some of the early tennis specialists, has become an afterthought because of how trivial it is to success in 10s and 12s. So yet another baseline grinder is born.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, baseline grinding is not a bad thing -- the character and physicality required for baseline grinding is tremendous for success in all parts of life. But being risk-averse and playing a boring, ugly game is the side-effect. Oh, and less long-term success. I realize not everyone can be a versatile, attacking player, based on body-type and even brain-type. I just want to always present 'the beautiful game' to my children, rather than just grinding. And a big serve is a nice way to start that. Not to get off topic, but good touch around the net is another.

... they dont relize how much they are doing with the ball as far as angles and combinations....

From what I've seen, many coaches see it but don't really preach the subtleties of playing angles and combinations because it could interfere with a kid's short term development. I think this whole short-term/early-success way of thinking is hurting US tennis in 16s, 18s and up.

 

[InspectorRacquet]

The reason I see for the emergence of the grinding baseliner is to combat the opponent's serve. Even though the player with the biggest serve can win a few points from aces and unreturnable serves, the best baseliner would return most of the serves and grind out the rest of the rally.

There's rarely a combination of the two in the junior world because a better baseliner will nearly always return the biggest server, keeping in mind that working on the serve more means that the junior has a less developed baseline game.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

The reason I see for the emergence of the grinding baseliner is to combat the opponent's serve. Even though the player with the biggest serve can win a few points from aces and unreturnable serves, the best baseliner would return most of the serves and grind out the rest of the rally.

There's rarely a combination of the two in the junior world because a better baseliner will nearly always return the biggest server, keeping in mind that working on the serve more means that the junior has a less developed baseline game.

I could not disagree more on every point. The reason for weak serves and stronger baseline games is easy....its hard for coaches and kids to tough out the hard work needed to have a strong serve. A strong serve does not have to be an ace to put the server in an advantage position for the rally. It can set up a winner a few shots later. Even a junior can use the serve to set up his next shot and dictate the point.

Working a few extra hours a week on the serve would not take away from the baseline game. Most juniors waste 50% of practice time with inefficient drills anyway. There is plenty of time to develop both.

 

[InspectorRacquet]

I could not disagree more on every point. The reason for weak serves and stronger baseline games is easy....its hard for coaches and kids to tough out the hard work needed to have a strong serve. A strong serve does not have to be an ace to put the server in an advantage position for the rally. It can set up a winner a few shots later. Even a junior can use the serve to set up his next shot and dictate the point.

Working a few extra hours a week on the serve would not take away from the baseline game. Most juniors waste 50% of practice time with inefficient drills anyway. There is plenty of time to develop both.

I understand your viewpoint completely. I can see how the serve can set up the point, giving the server the complete advantage. I guess I was thinking that a strong baseline game meant strong and well-placed serve returns, but that's not always the case as I thought (I thought it was just a natural progression).

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

I understand your viewpoint completely. I can see how the serve can set up the point, giving the server the complete advantage. I guess I was thinking that a strong baseline game meant strong and well-placed serve returns, but that's not always the case as I thought (I thought it was just a natural progression).

I agree about the returns. I think the junior game has several ignored facets, the serve to set up the next shot and the return of serve tio try and do the same thing.

You are correct in that in juniors the returners have the advantage. But I think it is because the serves are not used appropriately.

So its a chicken or the egg thing.