Informal Stroke Speed Survey of US Tennis - Spring 2008 Update

In my on-going survey of stroke speeds in US tennis, I have some more interesting data from the world of college tennis. In early April, I measured the serve speeds from the singles matches contested between the CU and Texas women. So without further ado, here are the numbers:

CU Buffs

Player Position	Average 1st Serve	Average 2nd Serve
#1	71.1	57.8
#2	66.4	59.0
#3	75.0	56.7
#4	80.5	71.7
#5	78.1	70.0
#6	67.3	58.5

Texas Longhorns

Player Position	Average 1st Serve	Average 2nd Serve
#1	77.8	63.0
#2	76.1	65.0
#3	85.0	77.8
#4	77.9	61.6
#5	85.6	56.6
#6	68.5	56.0

To sum up the info in the two tables above:

The average 1^st serve (12 players) was 76.3 MPH.

The average 2^nd serve was 61.6 MPH.

The fastest serve (in play) was 97 MPH.

The slowest serve (in play) was 50 MPH.

The average fastest serve (in play) for the 12 players was 86.1 MPH.

The average slowest serve (in play) was 57.1 MPH.

What do these numbers mean?

Well, the differences in serve speed between the pro and collegiate women are pretty similar to those I found between male collegiate players and their ATP counterparts… (see my earlier post titled: Memo to American College and Junior Players: Find another 30 MPH ASAP!

I then analyzed the serve statistics from players who competed in the 2007 US Open Women’s Round of 16 to the Finals and found the following:

The average 1^st serve (12 players) was 97.6 MPH (vs 76.3 MPH for the collegians).

The average 2^nd serve was 81.1 MPH (vs. 61.6 MPH)

The fastest serve was 124 MPH (vs. 97 MPH).

The slowest serve was 67 MPH (vs. 50 MPH).

The average fastest 1^st serve was 110.8 MPH (vs.86.1 MPH).

The average slowest 2^nd serve was 71.5 MPH (vs. 57.1 MPH).

The difference between the serve speed performance between the pro and college level for the women is at least 15 to 30 MPH – which is indeed a staggering difference!

It appears that the performance level of the women’s collegiate game is diverging from the pro game – in the wrong direction – just as I’ve observed on the men’s side.

And the record bears this out… Can anyone name who’s the last female player from the collegiate world to crack the WTA Singles Top 50 or 80 in recent memory?

Currently, there are only 2 players with any collegiate tennis experience in the WTA Top 100 Singles: Jill Craybas (WTA #66; Florida,1996) and Lilia Osterloh (WTA #94; Stanford, 1997). And, there are only 3 players in the Top 150 with any collegiate tennis experience… the 3^rd player being Laura Granville (WTA #136; Stanford, 2001).

Having seen these 3 players compete in person at some point in the last 7 to 8 years, I can tell you that their serve speed profiles resemble the WTA profile more closely than they do the collegiate profile.

So, in the end, the difference in achievement (i.e. being a successful collegian versus being a successful tour pro) still boils down to the ability to perform to a given standard…

You see, in US tennis, that “standard” has been your win and loss record as you’ve come up through the competitive ranks. There is little attention paid to the objective performance standards that you need to achieve to be competitive with your (elite) peers. And, as we slowly “fill in” those real, measurable standards (as we’re trying to do here), we will improve our chances of achieving the (competitive) goals we really want. At least you’ll know exactly what you’re aiming for!

TTFN!

TennisSpeed visits Europe - Part 2 (El juego de pies)

A couple of news items to kick off this post:

• The Tennis SpeedChain V2 goes on sale at our website (www.tennisspeed.com) later this week. The original Tennis SpeedChain has been transformed into a complete tennis training system that you can use to develop both optimal stroke techniques and increased racket speed. For those of you hearing this bit of news for the first time, I summarized the incredible new features of V2 in my last post which you can check out by clicking here.

• Congratulations to the University of Tennessee Volunteers Men’s Tennis Team for their outstanding performance this season—including a win (4-3) over the defending NCAA team champions, the 3^rd-ranked University of Georgia Bulldogs to close out their regular season! The Vols (who joined the “SpeedChain family” in January) have established themselves as one of the Top 5 or 6 teams in NCAA Division 1 (for the first time in about 5 years), and will be a force to be reckoned with come NCAA tournament time.

• As this is the time of the year where the college teams close out their seasons with their respective conference championships, and with the NCAA tournament looming, I wanted to give a shout out to all of the teams who were part of the SpeedChain family this season:

University of Tennessee-Knoxville Men’s Tennis (SEC)

University of Tennessee-Knoxville Women’s Tennis (SEC)

Boise State University Men’s Tennis (WAC)

University of Colorado Women’s Tennis (Big 12)

Syracuse University Women’s Tennis (Big East)

UCLA Men’s Tennis (Pacific 10)

University of California-Riverside Women’s Tennis (Big West)

Now, on to the subject of this post where I’ll present some closing thoughts about my European visit in early March…

I wanted to discuss two particular observations from my visit to Spain and Switzerland that have really caused me to shift my perspective about tennis training and coaching.

The first of these observations has to do with the fundamental difference in the training philosophy/approach taken by Jofre Porta and his team at Global Tennis. The best way for me to describe it is to use Jofre’s description of what tennis is really about: tennis is best described as “el juego de pies” or, “a game of the feet”.

The bottom line in tennis is simply this, if you cannot move – using your feet – into the correct, optimal position to strike the ball, playing tennis at a high level is simply impossible. It won’t matter how technically sound your stroking movement is if your feet cannot bring you to a solid position to strike the shot. Your hands, arms and torso cannot compensate for your movement weaknesses… Period.

If your ability to move on the court is somehow compromised by injury, a bad attitude, laziness, or whatever, your whole game is well, compromised at best. And if you need to perform at a very high level to be competitive you should take a careful, objective look at what’s happening below your waist. If you are having performance issues, the quickest way to improve is to work on your court movement skills. Before you even think of tinkering with stroke techniques, work on improving your movement because poor movement is almost always the root cause of poor performance.

During my 6-day stay at Global Tennis, I noticed how much attention was paid by the coaches to the movement and positioning of the players during training. I would say that the vast majority of the corrections given by the coaches to the players during training sessions pertained to moving correctly into the proper striking position for each and every shot (i.e. moving to a position behind the line of the incoming shot as rapidly as possible then forming the hitting stance). I could probably count on my hands the number of corrections pertaining to the stroking movement (the movements above the waist, that is) over the course of the 4 to 6 hours of daily on-court training that goes on there.

Does that mean that the Global Team doesn’t care about those movements that happen “above the waist”? Absolutely not! They definitely pay attention to what the other half of the body is doing, and they understand – rightly – that the main cause of any serious errors or flaws in the whole, integrated stroking movement (that involves the integration of both lower and upper body movements) are caused – triggered – by movement flaws and issues. The upper body “reacts” to the action of the lower body, and therefore if the lower body action is flawed, by definition, the upper body action is similarly flawed.

In other words, the Global team correctly understands that the optimal movement is the true foundation of playing high-level tennis. It also became very clear why Moya and Nadal emerged as Grand Slam champions having been trained in this approach, apparently from the very start of their life in tennis.

This philosophy described by “el juego de pies” used at Global is in stark contrast to what I saw in various training facilities in Switzerland (including training sessions involving federation-sponsored players in their National training center in Biel), and what I have seen here in the US.

The contrast between the Global approach and everything else I’ve seen so far everywhere is that where Global focuses on movement first, everyone else is clearly focuses first on what’s happening above the waist with the stroking movement of the hands, arms and upper body, and then they pay attention the player’s movement “skills” second. It’s as if they believe that they can make up for their poor positioning using their “superb stroke technique”.

Many simply fail to realize or understand that again, it’s just not possible to have “superb stroke technique” without “superb movement”!

This primary focus on what’s happening “above the waist” is tantamount to placing the “cart” before the “proverbial horse”. It bears repeating this message again and again: if you don’t or can’t move into the optimal striking position for each shot, by definition, you can’t make an “optimal strike”. You can’t produce your “best shot” if you can’t move to the “best striking position” for that specific shot.

Am I beginning to sound repetitive?

OK, one last time then...

When your movement goes awry – for any reason – this means that, by definition, your game goes awry as well.

Want to get your game back on track? Immediately focus on moving correctly, and everything else (i.e. power, control, etc.) tends to fall back into place automatically.

The second observation I wanted to mention was the stark difference in the general reaction and attitude of the people I met in both Spain and Switzerland toward the whole SpeedChain training concept and product(s).

You see, here in the US, I would say that 90% of the time, the tennis community here from players and coaches to parents and trainers, responds with great skepticism and sometimes outright hostility toward the very concept of the SpeedChain. When I reflect back on these experiences, it occurs to me that one common denominator shared by these SpeedChain “detractors” is the fact that they simply do not believe or understand that US tennis players – especially at the high-performance level – effectively have a stroke speed “deficiency”. And this “racket speed deficiency” may be a key factor in explaining why there are so few American players who have been able to compete successfully at pro level.

The bottom line is, the Americans have told us that “no (speed) problem even exists”, so there’s no need for anything like the SpeedChain. In contrast, the Spanish (at least among those Spanish coaches and trainers I met at Global in March) and the Swiss coaches and trainers I met reacted like this: “You guys solved that problem? Let me see the SpeedChain! Show me how this works!”

It was quite a refreshing change to talk to people who were largely open-minded and receptive to the very idea of the SpeedChain, to say the least. So, it makes me think that maybe we need to seriously consider setting up shop somewhere across the Atlantic… For once, the Europeans will take the innovation lead (at least when it comes to speed training), and it’s the Americans who will follow.

One thing’s for sure, I’m going to look very seriously at which German and Spanish classes at the local JC will fit into my busy schedule!

TTFN!

The Power Revolution in Tennis - Part 1

As I promised at the end of the “Radar Guns 101” post, I’m going to start getting into some of the “$64,000 questions” that come to mind when we hear the term “tennis speed”…

And, from my own observations of the American tennis scene over the past 2, rather, 15 years, the vast majority of these “key” questions regarding speed in tennis focus mainly on the question of how to produce high-speed strokes.

Of course, what seems to escape the notice of the vast majority of players, parents and coaches in the American tennis scene—even at the high-performance level—is the fact that high-speed strokes alone without high-speed court movement leads to limited success at the pro level.

When a player possesses both racket speed and foot speed, then the only real limit to a player’s success is whether or not they are willing to behave in a professional manner as possible. (Yes, if you’re wondering, I consider the attribute commonly known as “mental toughness” as being fundamental and integral to behaving as a true “professional”, whatever your actual profession may be).

So, without further ado, let’s open our discussion of him about the “power revolution” in tennis from a technical perspective…

If you ask me what the single greatest technical misconception that keeps American tennis behind the rest of the elite tennis world today, it’s our fundamental misconception about the proper use of topspin in today’s modern power tennis.

Essentially, the prevailing concept of “topspin” in US tennis still conjures memories of the slow, moonballing topspin of pro tennis that prevailed during the Tennis Boom of the mid-1970s, especially in the minds of today’s top American college and junior coaches. Of course, the game, as always, evolves as the years pass, and the looping, heavy topspin of the Borg era transformed itself into the heavy, penetrating topspin drives first mastered by former ATP #1, Ivan Lendl, and taken to its current pinnacle by current ATP #1, Roger Federer.

Somehow, the prevailing wisdom in American tennis today when it comes to topspin is that playing topspin needs to be minimized in the development of a high-performance player over the course of a player’s career, to be replaced by a faster, flatter and more aggressive stroking and tactical style—the so-called “Big Strike” or “First Strike” gamestyle that’s embraced by most top American pro, college and junior coaches.

The vast majority of American coaches—with their unshakable association of topspin with the slow, looping, moonballer topspin of the 70s—truly believe that while heavy topspin groundstrokes may be acceptable for the 12-and-under competitive player, it has no place in the repertoire of their vision of today’s high-performance player, male or especially, female.

In essence, if you were to ask an American coach what the purpose of topspin is, they will typically answer this way:

“The purpose of topspin is to slow the ball down to help players keep the ball in play.”

And that, folks, is the American bottom line when it comes to understanding the role of topspin in tennis:

“Topspin” = “Slowing the ball down”

With this equation in the mind of our coaches, it is not surprising that their students end up thinking that topspin has no place in the modern game. Kids aren’t dumb, if that is the message that’s being sent by their coaches (and reinforced by their parents), that’s how they're going to play.

Put yourself in the player's shoes... Why would anyone in a sport that’s trying to maximize speed want to learn a skill that’s understood by the “experts” as a means of “slowing” the ball down, not speeding it up?

No wonder a heavy topspin game that’s understood by the top pro coaches to be “standard operating procedure” (SOP) for pro success today, is such a hard idea to swallow in American tennis.

When you misunderstand a fundamental concept and then build entire philosophies (technical, tactical, developmental, etc.) based on a wholly flawed idea, well, it is no surprise that we aren’t very successful at developing viable pro tennis prospects.

If you’re into metaphors…

Because our coaches have a fundamentally flawed view of the role of topspin in the shaping the performance capability of today’s players, what ends up happening when we send our American college and junior prospects into battle at the pro level is the same as if...

An army would send soldiers to battle armed only with clubs and rocks when they know that their enemy has remote-controlled machine guns, missiles and bombs. You know what the outcome is going to be… The outcome is a given.

So, you might be wondering what the correct understanding of the role of topspin is for today’s competitive player? What do the other successful tennis nations of the world understand (i.e. Spain, France, Argentina, etc.) that we don’t’?

This is the “equation” that the successful tennis coaches and nations have in their mind:

“Topspin” = “Control”

In fact, taking the equation to the next logical level, those who want to maximize their ability to succeed in pro tennis have this equation in mind:

“Maximize Topspin” = “Maximize Control” (at high racket/ball speeds)

And for those of you (probably American by birth or tennis upbringing) who still don’t understand this tennis axiom, this is what you need to understand…

The only practical way to play high-speed shots (i.e. groundstrokes that travel over 90 MPH in flight) that land inside the lines with maximum consistency is to apply a ton of topspin to force the ball down toward the court faster. Without sufficient topspin to force the ball down to the court sooner (such that it falls inside the lines), increasing the ball speed alone causes the ball to fly further and most likely beyond the lines and out of play.

For all practical intents and purposes (because the ITF has no plans of changing the dimensions of the tennis court anytime soon, if ever), the only possible way to increase ball speed while maintaining (maximum) control over the ball flight is to maximize the amount of topspin to force that ball down to the court inside those lines.

Is the fog of false American game knowledge beginning to lift about now?

So, let's review...

Q: Want to generate more ball speed without sacrificing control?

A: Learn how to MAXIMIZE TOPSPIN PRODUCTION when swinging at high racket speeds.

Given this truth about topspin, do you now understand the fundamental reason why the Top 2 tennis players—as well every current Top 10 player—on Planet Earth have their games built upon a foundation of heavy topspin groundstrokes?

If you have a problem with this concept, you need to accept the fact that you won’t be able to consistently control your high-speed shots and you won’t put very many balls into play, inside the lines of the court. Competitive tennis success is still fundamentally rooted in consistency (of proper execution), so if you choose to play in a manner where—by definition—you will have trouble keeping the ball inside the lines in the court, your days as a tennis player, much less a competitive player will be short-lived.

Do you dream about a future in professional tennis? Then you need to have the correct understanding about topspin, or else your dream will forever remain just a dream.

So how do you maximize topspin on your groundstrokes?

We’ll start discussing those details in my next post…

Maybe it might be the basis of a new tennis future for some of you out there…

And, wouldn’t that be a great way to ring in 2008!

TTFN and Happy New Year!

P.S. If you’re interested in the “how to transition to pro tennis from college tennis” primer from Todd Martin mentioned in my last post, please email me (speedmaster [at] tennisspeed [dot] com) and I’ll send you a copy of my summary of his featured clinic at the 2007 ITA College Coaches Convention.

Finally, given the ever-growing number of so-called “tennis prodigies” that have emerged courtesy of YouTube (and some overly-ambitious parents), let me say that I’m as curious as the next coach and I already have a pretty good idea about the future prospects of each of those prodigies (see next month’s issue of US Tennis Magazine for a rundown on them) based solely on the concepts I’ve discussed in this post.

Can you guess who among those YouTube prodigies I think has a real shot at a pro future? I’ll reveal my predictions in a future post…

2007 ITA Convention Impressions

A couple of weeks ago, I had the privilege of making a presentation about what we’ve being doing with the SpeedChain to about 100 college tennis coaches at their annual convention (“2007 ITA Coaches Convention”) in Naples, Florida (12/14 to 12/17/07).

First, I want to thank all of the coaches who attended the presentation, and I hope that we were able to provide them with some new and useful information regarding how to increase the overall performance level of their players.

Second, I want to express how grateful I am to the person who has been the greatest supporter of the SpeedChain and TennisSpeed, and who is a true legend among modern American tennis coaches, the one and only Greg “The General” Patton (former USTA National Coach, Collegiate Tennis Hall of Fame member and currently Head Men’s Tennis Coach at Boise State University). Our presentation would not have ever happened if not for all of Greg’s help in getting TennisSpeed get off of the ground.

Third, I want to say thank you for all the support given to TennisSpeed over the past two seasons by our 4 collegiate early adopters of the SpeedChain:

Boise State Men’s Tennis (Head Coach Greg Patton)

UCLA Men’s Tennis (Head Coach Billy Martin)

Colorado Women’s Tennis (Head Coach Nicole Kenneally)

Syracuse Women’s Tennis (Head Coach Luke Jensen)

Overall, I thought that the presentation at the convention went quite well (I am thankful that I have had some experience speaking in public in front of larger audiences—that turned out to be one upside of my whole academic science experience), and the I think our message was well-received by the coaches who attended. And, we also received a wide range of very interesting and challenging questions from the coaches regarding the SpeedChain training concept, and our findings from our various pro, collegiate and junior early adopters.

From the TennisSpeed side, what was especially interesting was that we learned who among today’s college coaches are the great “seekers” of advanced (coaching) knowledge and who want to learn the most cutting-edge ideas and methods to help their players find their highest level. Not surprisingly, most of these coaches lead programs that have been very consistently successful season after season.

Alongside our presentation, there were also a number of other interesting talks and on-court clinics given by various experts in the American tennis community at the Convention, including one by celebrated American coach Nick Bolletieri, but the one presentation that stood out in my mind was the featured on-court clinic led by former Top-5 player, Todd Martin on Saturday afternoon (December 15th).

“Coach” Martin’s clinic was essentially a one-hour primer on how to be successful in singles at the pro level. The ideas that Martin presented were indeed fascinating and enlightening, and for many coaches there, counter-intuitive. When you compare Martin’s “4 skills” to the kinds of tactical ideas that are commonplace in today’s collegiate and junior game in the US, the way to be a successful tour pro is almost 180 degrees opposite from the prevailing “Big Strike/First Strike” philosophy so widely held in American tennis at the high-performance level.

Martin’s clinic was titled “Taking it to the next level: 4 skills necessary to transition from college to pro tennis.” Effectively, Martin summarized the four core tactical adjustments (taught to him by former top-10 player, Jose Higueras) he had to make in order to improve his chances to succeed on the tour after two years as an All-American at Northwestern University.

I created a written summary of the ideas that Martin presented over the course of his scheduled hour and you can email me at speedmaster [at] tennisspeed [dot] com if you’re interested in getting a copy (it’s a PDF file, FYI).

Oh, I thought I would close out this post by mentioning this recent development for us here at TennisSpeed…

TennisSpeed has been invited to give a technical presentation about our work with the SpeedChain to the newly-formed Tennis Education Group (TEG) based in Spain (yes, that Spain with the 12 pros ranked in the ATP Top 100) sometime in February 2008.

What’s really exciting about this opportunity is that many of the top federation coaches in Spain are already involved in this new venture (spearheaded by Jofre Porta (who coached Carlos Moya to ATP #1) and Pedro Zierof (one of the top physical trainers in Spanish tennis)), and TennisSpeed is honored to have the opportunity to speak alongside these luminaries of Spanish tennis.

Until next time, TTFN!

Informal stroke speed survey of US tennis-Postscript

After the last post where I reported stroke speed measurements for high school varsity tennis players, I received a comment from a reader who raised some interesting questions that I felt would make the basis of an interesting post and becoming a starting point to share some other interesting stroke speed-serve speed, specifically-“phenomena” with you.

The two main questions raised in this reader’s comment were as follows:

Q1: You mentioned the wide range of skills among the high school players you measured. In a future post would you be willing to break out your data to show the difference in ball speeds between the couple best players and the run of the mill HS player?

A: The average fastest serve for three 5A State singles (#1 to #3) champions was 104.7 MPH.

The average first serve (all serves combined) was 94.5 MPH.

The average second serve was 73.9 MPH.

The serve speeds of these State high school singles champions are comparable to the speeds demonstrated by the typical Nationally-ranked 18-and-under junior boy (see the post titled “Memo to American college and junior players: Find another 30 MPH ASAP!) whose average first serve was 91 MPH and average second serve was 71 MPH.

Q2: Also, how much variance is there in the Division I ball speed data? Having measured, using a RADAR gun and video analysis, the serve speeds of several Division I male players (from one team), I'm surprised that the average first serve speed you found for Division I players is just 90 mph. My measurements found first serves to be on average more than 10 mph higher than that. My measurements were in practice, though, and not in competition so that might explain much of the difference. For instance, the players were simply hitting hard first serves, not mixing up the speed and spin as they do in matches.

A: The way I measure serve speeds, I record the speeds of individual serves and note what type of serve (flat, slice, topspin, or kick) was struck. So, when I report the average serve speed for either first or second serve, the speeds of all serve types are lumped together in that figure. So, on first serves, the faster flat serve speeds are averaged together with the slower slice and topspin serve speeds.

To address the comment, if we consider the average fastest serve speed for 1^st serve for the D1 players I’ve measured, that average fastest 1^st serve speed is comparable to the serve speed measurements made by the comment author (which I am now pretty sure that he measured the average fastest 1^st serve speed) :

102.4 MPH (speed range was 81 to 120 MPH, mine) versus 100 MPH (his)

What’s also interesting to mention here is the trend I’ve noticed in the speed differential between the different serve types, i.e. flat versus slice and flat versus topspin/kick serves.

What’s interesting is that the speed differential between the different types of serves is relatively consistent even between the vastly different competitive levels from ATP pros down to 3.5 to 4.0 high school varsity players.

What I mean by this is:

The speed differential between a flat and slice serve is between 15 and 20 MPH at every playing level from the top ATP pros down through the NTRP 3.5 to 4.0 crowd.

For example, Andy Roddick’s flat serve averages typically averages around 135 to 140 MPH whereas his slice serve typically registers between 117 to 12 MPH. The typical NTRP 4.0 hits his fastest flat serve around 85 MPH, and his slice serve averages around 65 to 70 MPH.

The speed differential between a flat and topspin serve is typically 20 to 25 MPH for all playing levels I’ve measured so far.

FYI, if you are wondering what the difference between a topspin serve and a kick serve is, the easiest way is to distinguish them is to observe the direction the ball moves after the bounce.

A topspin serve bounces straight ahead or slightly toward the middle of the court relative to the original flight path of the serve, whereas a kick serve bounces toward the side fence (for right-handed servers, the bounce is toward the right side fence and for lefties, it’s toward the left side fence).

The speed differential between a flat and kick serve is typically between 25 to 30 MPH for all playing levels I’ve measured so far.

Why are kick serves slower than topspin serves? The answer is because of the slight difference in the arm swing path between the two serves—the additional sidespin applied to the kick serve by moving the toss further overhead decreases the forward momentum of the arm swing slightly resulting in a slightly lower overall racket speed (and therefore, (s)lower ball speed).

So, based on this consistent speed differential between the four main types of serves, I can essentially predict what the serve speed “profile” of a player is based on a single serve speed measurement. For example, if a player hits a kick serve at 75 MPH, the fastest flat serve they can hit will be in the range of 100 to 105 MPH. And if a player can hit a flat serve at 105 MPH, their slice serve will range from 85 to 90 MPH.

Are there exceptions to this “rule” of serve speed differential?

Of course there are… And the exceptions are of course, those players who can hit the absolute fastest serves (into the service boxes, of course)… i.e. the Andy Roddicks and Ivo Karlovics of the world, that is…

Roddick, for example, in the match he played today in the Masters Cup against Davydenko, routinely hit his flat first serve around 230 KPH or 143 MPH and his kick second serve around 160 KPH or 99 MPH….

This makes for a speed differential of 44 MPH!

But, I think you’ll agree, that in terms of on-court effectiveness, that 44 MPH difference doesn’t really have the same impact on Andy as it would for many lower-level competitive players whose maximum first serve speed is maybe, on a really good day, around 90 MPH. These are the same players who, after missing the box with their “90 MPH bombs”, then follow up with a massive 46 to 51 MPH topspin, “get it into the box” sitter that “quacks” as it flies over the net, to avoid the dreaded double-fault!

So, to close out this post, here's a memo to those of you who are standing, lifelong members of “Club 46”:

1) In order to hit an effective spin (second) serve, you need to generate the same amount of racket speed as you would on your flat serve to create both the necessary spin (for control) and ball speed (so your serve doesn’t quack and get smacked into all corners of the court by the returner).

2) If you want to hit a relatively effective topspin or kick serve, you need to be able to hit your topspin/kick serve around 70 to 75 MPH (air speed) to generate enough height and speed after the bounce to prevent most players from smacking your serve to all parts of the court without conscience.

3) Of course, if you can’t hit your flat first serve around 100 MPH, there’s basically no way (given the laws of physics governing the universe we inhabit) you can generate enough racket speed to hit a 70 to 75 MPH topspin/kick serve. So, if that’s your situation, may I suggest you start training with the SpeedChain to help you develop that extra 20 to 30 MPH you need to reach “Club 100”?

TTFN!

Informal stroke speed survey of US tennis-continued

Recently, I had the opportunity to continue my survey of serve and groundstroke speed in US tennis by measuring the stroke speeds of high school varsity (“HS”) players that participated in a regional qualification tournament for my home state’s 5A Division (overall) State Championships.

To give you a bit of background on the players involved, there were players from 10 different high schools trying to qualify for the State 5A Boys’ Tennis Championships in 7 divisions: Singles #1 to #3 and Doubles #1 to #4. So there was a wide range of players from a variety of competitive backgrounds from those players who only compete for their high school team during the high school season to a sectional Top 20-ranked player.

If I was to describe the approximate playing levels of the 30 players whose speeds I measured, I would estimate that the majority of players would probably be rated somewhere between NTRP 3.7 (by this I mean between NTRP 3.5 and 4.0) all the way to about NTRP 5.0.

Anyway, let’s get down to the nitty-gritty…

The average 1^st serve speed of these HS players was 68.9 MPH.

The average 2^nd serve speed was 60.8 MPH.

The average forehand speed (during neutral rallies) was 46.1 MPH.

The average forehand speed (during neutral rallies) was 46.9 MPH.

Now, let’s put these speeds into some context…

NCAA Division 1 vs. HS Tennis

1^st serve: 90.5 MPH (NCAA) vs. 68.9 MPH (HS)

2^nd serve: 78.5 MPH (NCAA) vs. 60.8 MPH (HS)

Forehand: 78.5 MPH (NCAA) vs. 46.1 MPH (HS)

Backhand: 73.9 MPH (NCAA) vs. 46.9 MPH (HS)

By now, I’m pretty sure that shouldn’t be surprising to you that direct measurements of stroke speed confirm the perception that there should be a pretty big difference in the stroke speeds between college and high school tennis players.

Effectively there is, on average:

• A 20 MPH speed gap between the first and second serves of the typical male collegiate and the better high school varsity player.
• A nearly 30 MPH speed gap between the groundstrokes of the typical male collegiate player and the better high school varsity player.
  
• A 40 to 50 MPH speed gap* between the first and second serves of the top tour pros and the better high school varsity player.

*see my earlier post titled "Memo to American college and junior tennis players: Find another 30 MPH ASAP!" for serve speed data from the top ATP pros.

What I find more than ironic in these measurements is the fact that there are some, perhaps many players, parents and coaches in the US who think that there are more than enough high school varsity tennis players to populate the rosters of collegiate varsity tennis programs and so there is no need to offer collegiate playing opportunities and scholarships to international (read “foreign”) tennis players.

While it’s true that from the perspective of sheer numbers, there are more than enough high school varsity players for college tennis coaches to choose from. From the perspective of tennis ability, the reality is that there are only around 200 to 300 total, legitimate male or female college tennis prospects that emerge from either the US junior and high school tennis ranks each calendar year.

What’s the take-home lesson then? The “better” high school varsity tennis player has no realistic chance of playing for a truly competitive collegiate tennis program, and currently the true route to the collegiate level continues to run through (National) junior tennis and not high school tennis.

For those of you who are familiar with the current competitive tennis pathways here in the US, what I’ve written about in this post is hardly news to you. But for others who aren’t so familiar about how to advance themselves within the American competitive scene, you need to realize that high school varsity tennis competition is really a side or back door to collegiate tennis at best.

The proverbial “front door” to the higher levels of tennis here definitely runs through USTA tournament competition where the goal is to qualify for the National Junior or ITF Championship events held nationwide throughout the calendar year.

And maybe next time I attend a high school varsity tennis match or tournament, I think I will strongly consider measuring the groundstroke speeds of the players using a calendar instead of a radar gun… ;)

TTFN!

Is it possible to have too much racket speed? (Of course not!)

Sorry about the rather long "pause" between posts...


I've been quite busy with the business of TennisSpeed including getting two more NCAA teams started with SpeedChain training (Colorado Women's Tennis (Big 12) and Syracuse Women's Tennis (Big East)) and attending a number of tennis events, including a charity event, one state high school tennis championship tournament and several instructional clinics. And somewhere mixed in all that, I also spent 10 days tuning up the game of one of my touring pro clients.


Anyway, the past two weeks have been especially interesting and I thought I would share some of the things I’ve learned about the state of American tennis from the viewpoint of a wide cross-section of American tennis community.

In particular, I want to bring to light the viewpoint expressed by the typical American tennis parent. Because based on a number of conversations I have had with junior tennis parents over the last 18 months, there are a lot of parents out there who believe that their children have more than ample racket speed to succeed in competitive tennis.

If you’ve been following this blog for a while, you would understand that this common perception is patently false based on the various stroke speed surveys I’ve done at collegiate dual matches and dozens of professional, junior and high school tennis matches (I was able to obtain stroke speed measurements from high school varsity tennis players at a recent Boys’ State Tennis Championships, and I will report those speed measurements in a future post) over the last 18 months.

So, here’s a conversation I had with a parent of a female tournament player (12 years old) whom she claimed was ranked among the Top 3 players in her home section.

Our conversation went something like this:

Parent: “Oh, my daughter has more than enough racket speed. Racket speed is not her problem whatsoever. Actually, I think that she has too much racket speed and it’s not helping her game.”

Me: (addressing the player) “So, what is your first serve speed? (Head shaking and shrugged shoulders from player)

Parent: “Her coach says that she has plenty of racket speed.”

Me: “That’s interesting, you don’t even know what her stroke speeds really are, but you and her coach are sure about her having plenty of racket speed… By the way, did you know that both Venus and Serena could serve over 100 MPH at the age of 12? When Venus played her first pro match at 14, she was serving over 115 MPH.”

(addressing player) “Do you serve over 100 MPH right now?” (Head shaking from player)

Parent: “Well, actually she’s injured right now, so maybe she’s not capable of swinging that fast…”

OK, let me add some context to this conversation…

This particular conversation occurred in front of an information booth for TennisSpeed and all of our speed training products, including the Tennis SpeedChain, at a recent, local charity event. It may well have been that the purpose of this parent was to say something to avoid the possibility of hearing my “SpeedChain pitch” as she read through the information at our booth.

However, based on this parent’s unwavering tone and choice of words, I concluded that she really believes that her daughter has more than sufficient racket speed, and won’t need to improve her racket speed now or in the future.

In fact, that her child swings her racket so fast that her incredible racket speed actually hinders her tennis progress because she understands that high racket speeds (“hitting hard”) compromise her daughter’s ability to control the ball.

And this was not the first time I have heard a tennis parent firmly and decisively assert that their child has terrific, if not incredible racket speed, and that racket speed will never become a factor that will limit their ability to succeed in tennis.

I didn't know that smoking c---k had reached epidemic proportions among junior tennis parents these days.

This point is worth mentioning over and over until the majority of conversations I have with junior tennis parents come to focus on this question:

“How can I help my son/daughter maximize their racket speed?”

As competitive tennis today has evolved into a “true sport” where speed is the single most important physical attribute required to perform at the highest possible levels, the concept of having “too much speed”, whether it be foot speed or racket speed, is simply unthinkable.

Imagine a baseball player complaining about having too much bat speed (fearing that they would hit the baseball “too far”) or throwing speed (throwing too hard where opposing hitters can't hit their pitches). Oh, the horrors of too much speed!

How about a football quarterback complaining about having too much arm speed that he throws the ball “too far that his receivers can’t catch up to his passes”, or a running back or receiver that outruns the defense “too often”? (OK, non-football fans, what happens in those situations is that most football coaches will go out and find receivers who run fast enough to catch the “too strong-armed” quarterback’s passes and find ways for his “too fast” running backs and receivers to touch the ball as much as possible during games…)

As you can see, this concept of “too much speed” in other sports sounds patently absurd, so why does this idea persist in competitive tennis?

Here are a few observations of mine over the years that might explain why this perception of racket speed being a “luxury” or a ”hinderance to development” continues to perpetuate itself in US Tennis:

1. Parents/Teaching Pros/Coaches typically only understand how to teach the sport using bygone classic tennis principles where racket speed couldn’t be readily generated (rackets too small and heavy) nor adequately controlled (not enough topspin production).

2. The last time most coaches/parents played/watched pro tennis LIVE AND IN PERSON was back in the 1980s or 1990s when the game was measurably slower.

3. Most players/coaches/parents have no idea what their (student’s/children’s) stroke speeds really are and seem to have no interest nor motivation to find out. The typical excuse for not knowing their stroke speeds comes out sounding like “who has a radar gun lying around anyway?”

4. Most players/coaches/parents don’t know what the “speed profile” of the top pros really are. They may know their serve speeds, but what about the speeds they achieve on their other strokes like their forehands and backhands? Every coach/parent knows goal-setting is critical for competitive success, but when you don’t know exactly what the goal is… How successful can you expect to be?

5. Tennis on TV does not accurately depict the actual ball speeds, nor variation in ball speeds and spin, and can’t be used to familiarize and educate players/coaches/parents on the physical realities of today’s pro game.

6. Coaches/Parents “indoctrinate” players based solely on their perceptions and understanding of (classic) tennis that based mainly on anecdotal information, out-dated, false or outright misinformation. The typical teaching pro's understanding of tennis in US is based on the near-complete ignorance of facts and reliance on perception rather than detailed analysis.

How should we then begin to educate these speed-challenged members of the tennis community so they can understand the reality that maximizing racket speed is essential and necessary to succeeding in competitive tennis today?

Let’s begin by repeating these basic facts about racket speed in modern tennis:

1. Players must maximize racket speed and spin production to be successful in modern competitive tennis at the pro level.

2. High spin rates are the basis of maximizing stroke control and consistency at high racket speeds.

Having “too much” racket speed or foot speed in tennis is, quite frankly, as ludicrous a concept as “having too much money”. For all practical intents and purposes, having too much foot speed and racket speed is the condition that we should be striving to achieve, not avoid.

Junior tennis parents (and coaches), it’s time to get informed about the impact of speed on your child’s tennis. At least be willing and interested in taking the first step of actually measuring their stroke and foot speed(s). All you need to do this is to get your hands on a stopwatch and a radar gun.

By doing this, you will all know how fast you really are and how much you will need to improve if you want to perform at a level that’s truly comparable to today’s top professionals.

TTFN!

Memo to American College and Junior Players: Find another 30 MPH ASAP!

Several posts ago, I summarized the serve speeds I measured for male and female National junior competitors at the Easter Bowl Championships in Palm Springs in April. I was able to measure serve speeds from players in every age group represented at that event, except for the players in the 18-and-under Boys event, so I have been looking for an opportunity to gather some serve speed numbers from that age division.

Recently, a National Open Junior event was held in Denver for the Boys 18s division, and I used that opportunity to measure the serve speeds (first and second) of the participants there. The tournament field was reasonably strong for a National Open event as the Top 8 seeds in the tournament were all ranked inside the Top 120 nationally, and the Top 5 seeds were ranked inside the Top 60 nationally. There were players ranked as high as #11 in the National 18s and players ranked in the 1500s as well. So there was a wide range of competitive, 18-and-under American junior players represented in this event.

I measured the serve speeds of 34 of the 64 participants during live matchplay, and the results I found were interesting to say the least.

The fastest first serve was 118 MPH, and the fastest second serve was 94 MPH (both by the same player).

The slowest first serve was 63 MPH and the slowest second serve was 60 MPH.

The average first serve speed of the 34 players surveyed was 91 MPH.

The average second serve speed of the 34 players surveyed was 71 MPH.

30% of the total number of first serves measured (200+) exceeded 100 MPH.

70% of the players hit a first serve over 100 MPH.

15% of the players hit a first serve over 110 MPH.

33% of the players hit a second serve over 80 MPH.

What to make of these speed measurements?

The “good news” is… If I were to compare these to the serve speeds I measured at this National Open tournament to those I have measured at the NCAA Division 1 level, these serve speeds of the 34 juniors are directly comparable in terms of both average first and second serve speed. Even the fastest and slowest serves are very similar, if not identical those of D1 players. And, it isn’t too surprising that these junior players share the same serve speed characteristics as the D1 players, as the vast majority of players who are Top 6 or Top 8 in D1 men’s tennis programs are recruited from the players who have high national singles rankings and typically participate in high-level USTA National Junior tournaments such as this National Open.

The "bad news" is… If you compare the serve speeds of these typical US college and junior players to those at the ATP level, the difference is stunning. The typical US college or junior player serves, on average, around 30 MPH SLOWER than a successful ATP player.

For a quick and dirty comparison to the ATP pros, I compiled the serve stats for 16 of the 32 players who made it to the 3^rd round of the Men’s Singles at Wimbledon (upper half of the draw including Federer, Roddick and Gasquet). This is what I found:

The average first serve speed of these 16 male pros was 119 MPH (compared to 91 MPH for our sample of nationally-ranked under 18 boys).

The average second serve speed of these 16 male pros was 99 MPH (compared to 71 MPH for our sample of nationally-ranked under 18 boys).

On average, the ATP men serve around 30 MPH faster, on average for both first and second serves, than the typical American male high-performance (college or nationally-ranked junior) player.

30 MPH!! On average!! Which means that the difference in serve speed could be as much as 40 MPH faster in some cases.

Given this astonishing difference in serve speed capability between the established ATP players and the typical American college or junior player, is it truly realistic for the great majority of young competitive tennis players here in the US to be competitive at the pro level when they are giving away at least 30 MPH on serves alone? Are their pro dreams even reachable?

At the very least, what can they do about closing the speed gap?

If you ask the tennis coaching and conditioning establishment (USTA, USPTA, PTR, etc.) here in the US how to increase your serve speed, they’ll tell you that you have only two alternatives: 1) improve your technique and/or 2) lift weights, pull rubber bands, and throw medicine balls to increase your strength. Well, the former alternative (changing technique) simply takes too long, and the overwhelming evidence from the sports science realm is that the latter (conventional, strength-focused conditioning exercises) simply doesn’t increase your racket, therefore, serve speed.

What now?

If you’ve been reading this blog with any regularity, you already know what the solution to the “I want/need more serve speed problem" is: train with the Tennis SpeedChain.

TTFN!

Introduction to Conditioning Today's High Performance Tennis Player

After my discussion of Tennismetrics 101, I think that this is a good time to begin a discussion of my current thoughts about the fundamental principles of conditioning the modern, high performance tennis player.

Let’s start by considering what physical skills need to be emphasized to help today’s tennis athletes perform their best.

First, players need to demonstrate the ability to run hundreds of short sprints with an explosive “first step” toward each of their opponent’s returns as well as an explosive “first step” to recover court position after each of their own.

Second, players need to have high levels of speed(-specific) endurance because they may need to move explosively for the two or three hours required to complete a competitive singles match.

Third, they need to demonstrate the ability to move explosively in all directions: forward, backwards, sideways, and upward to respond to the types of shots that are encountered in tennis.

Fourth, players need to demonstrate considerable arm/shoulder/upper body power and endurance to consistently generate high racket speeds over a period of several hours.

And fifth, tennis players do not have to develop large amounts of muscle mass associated with protecting athletes who compete in sports that involve physical contact—impact, if you like—with their opponents.

I am specifically mentioning the fact that tennis isn’t a contact sport because it provides me with an easy transition to the heart of this discussion... Which is to raise your awareness of the fundamental inferiority of the methods used to condition the majority of high performance tennis players here in the US.

This fundamental inferiority in tennis conditioning know-how is most plainly apparent in collegiate tennis where one of two typical scenarios occur:

a) There is a football-focused conditioning coach who tries to adapt conditioning ideas and methods developed specifically for football to tennis, OR

b) If the tennis team has no access to the department conditioning specialist, the tennis coaching staff themselves will employ their anecdotal, and outdated understanding of conditioning methods for tennis that is typically based on the conditioning drills and exercises they did themselves as active players “back in the day”.

So, the typical collegiate tennis player is either trained in the image of a football player who happens to hold a tennis racket while chasing tennis balls or is trained using archaic and largely ineffective exercises that have become irrelevant to the current demands of today’s tennis.

How could this situation be remedied in the short term?

First of all, I would recommend to the vast majority of collegiate conditioning coaches that they should acknowledge that football-specific conditioning methods have only a very general application to tennis players, and football methods fail to completely address the most important performance requirements of tennis.

Second, they need to understand that tennis is a unique composite sport that requires the development and training of diverse athletic skills and attributes, well beyond that of any single sport. By definition, they need to look beyond football and begin examining conditioning methods and philosophies from sports that require similar, if not identical physical attributes as tennis.

For example…

1) To develop the ability to perform short sprints over extended periods, I would look closely at conditioning methods from:

Basketball, Soccer, Rugby, and Aussie Rules Football

2) To develop the ability to move explosively in all directions, I would look closely at conditioning methods from:

Basketball, Soccer, Badminton, and Squash

3) To develop the overhand and sidearm throwing power and endurance required for serves and groundstrokes, I would look closely at conditioning methods from:

Baseball pitching, Football passing, Javelin, Handball, and Volleyball spiking & jump serving

Bottom line is, the majority of conditioning programs for tennis at the collegiate level today are designed and implemented by football conditioning specialists and does not adequately prepare players for the actual demands of today’s high performance tennis.

All of the conditioning programs I’ve designed and implemented for my own players only scarcely resembles what college tennis players are currently doing. The programs I’ve designed for my own players address the specific demands of today's high performance tennis and generally follow the guidelines below:

a. We do extensive assessments of relevant, individual athletic attributes to determine individual strengths and weaknesses that impact tennis performance.

b. We educate players about the performance standards they need to meet or exceed to perform at an elite (“world class”) level in tennis.

c. We fully customize all training activities to address the specific needs of individual players.

d. We periodize all training activities according to individual player performance goals.

e. We focus primarily on variations on interval training for general endurance training and development.

f. We perform specific drills and exercises to increase first-step explosiveness.

g. We perform strength training that addresses stabilization, deceleration and muscle endurance.

h. We perform speedchain training (using the Tennis SpeedChain and the Torsoburner) to increase racket speed, explosiveness of the core muscles and lateral movement
acceleration.

What I’ve described here is a very basic framework that I use to evaluate, design and implement an appropriate conditioning program for individual players. The initial evaluation of fundamental athletic attributes (#1 above) itself takes 2 to 3 full days alone. The results of those evaluations are then integrated with the information I obtain through extensive conversations with the player about their goals, injury history, etc. to develop the initial program.

Developing an effective conditioning program for high performance tennis players is a very time-consuming, involved process, so don’t be fooled by coaches and trainers who claim that they can just hand you a rote program to follow without doing the legwork to determine what’s really necessary for you to maximize your physical performance on court. If your conditioning program is not customized to your specific needs, you will end up wasting valuable time doing things that aren't going to help you improve your ability to perform.

Conditioning today’s tennis athletes given the demands of the current—and future—high performance game is inherently complex, and it’s not surprising that there are only maybe a handful of players, coaches and fitness trainers in the US who truly understand the true physical basis of high performance tennis.

And until the majority of so-called conditioning coaches improve their understanding of how to properly train today’s players to meet or exceed the actual demands of the sport today, the vast majority of high performance tennis players won’t be fully prepared to confront the challenges that await them on the tennis court.

TTFN!