Abstract Discussion: SERVING TO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS: SET-UP, TOSS, AND RACKET KINEMATICS OF THE PROFESSIONAL TENNIS SERVE

Submitted by Michael Griesser, MD

Sports Biomech. 2011 Nov;10(4):407-14.

SERVING TO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS: SET-UP, TOSS, AND RACKET KINEMATICS OF THE PROFESSIONAL TENNIS SERVE

Reid M, Whiteside D,Elliott B.

SOURCE

Sport Science Unit, Tennis Australia, Melbourne, Australia.

ABSTRACT

The serve, as the most important stroke in tennis, has attracted considerable biomechanical interest. Of its component parts, the swing has received disproportionate research attention and consequently, little is known

regarding toss kinematics. Indeed, the age-old question of whether players serve to different parts of the court from the same toss remains unanswered. Six right-handed professionally ranked players hit first serves (FSs) and second serves (SSs) to three 2 x 1 m target areas reflecting the landing locations of T, body and wide serves, respectively, on the deuce court. A 22 camera, 250 Hz VICON MX motion analysis system captured racket, ball, foot, and h and kinematics. Repeated measures ANOVAs assessed within-player differences in foot, racket, and ball kinematics within the FS and SS as a function of landing location. The positions of the front foot, ball zenith, and ball impact were significantly different in the FS, while kinematics across all SS were consistent. Front foot position was closer to the centre mark in the T FS and players impacted the ball further left in the wide

FS compared to the T FS. This study discusses the findings in the context of the development of the serve as well as potential implications for the return.

REVIEW

This study revealed differences in foot position, ball zenith, and ball impact across first serves to different portions of the court, but very little difference in the same elements across second serves. The implications would be that these elements may be a “give-away” on where a player will direct his/her first serve and could be used for investigation by the returner to improve serve return. Further, the natural assumption that would follow is that a player who could keep those elements the most similar across first serves would have an advantage against the serve returner. These insights could help development of a server’s success as well as development of a returner’s success depending on the way in which the information is employed.