Do you consider serving a tennis talent? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Do you consider serving a tennis talent?

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-02-2007, 09:23 PM
I don't consider serving a tennis talent at all. I mean it is a talent in its own right....but come on.....I just don't see it as a talent on a tennis court. I mean say a guy like Ivo Karlovic can beat Lleyton Hewitt, I mean is this a joke. The guy is an embarassment to tennis. Throw a ball up in the air and see how hard you can hit it, hardly a talent is it :lol:

I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

Peoples
02-02-2007, 09:35 PM
Another joke thread :haha:

Jlee
02-02-2007, 09:39 PM
Do you consider serving a tennis talent?

Um, yes.



:cuckoo:

JustJames
02-02-2007, 09:49 PM
I don't consider serving a tennis talent at all. I mean it is a talent in its own right....but come on.....I just don't see it as a talent on a tennis court. I mean say a guy like Ivo Karlovic can beat Lleyton Hewitt, I mean is this a joke. The guy is an embarassment to tennis. Throw a ball up in the air and see how hard you can hit it, hardly a talent is it :lol:

I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

Well if thats the case then much of tennis isnt a skill..if hitting a ball as hard as you can is all that is involved.
You have obviously conveniently forgotten to mention the impecable timing, practise and motion that goes into a great serve.

Karlovic may not be hugely talented with regards to an all round game but his serving ability is outstanding. Try telling him that all those 1000's of hours haven't resulted in a skill based action.

Burrow
02-02-2007, 09:49 PM
of course i do....what a dumb thread.

Apemant
02-02-2007, 09:55 PM
I don't consider serving a tennis talent at all. I mean it is a talent in its own right....but come on.....I just don't see it as a talent on a tennis court. I mean say a guy like Ivo Karlovic can beat Lleyton Hewitt, I mean is this a joke. The guy is an embarassment to tennis. Throw a ball up in the air and see how hard you can hit it, hardly a talent is it :lol:

I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

You don't have a point.

First, if serving was easy, then everyone would have great serves (given enough height). Second, being tall helps you serve better, but also hinders your movement and reactions. If they reduced serves to just 1, then shorter players would actually have an upper hand. I think it's best as it is right now; a constant and unclear battle between serving and returning.

BTW, Olie the David owns Karlo the Goliath. :devil: That doesn't help your argument, right?

scoobs
02-02-2007, 09:58 PM
Of course it's a talent. It's a skill that nurtured from a base of natural ability and physical attributes.

It can be an irritating one at times but what's that got to do with it?

Snowwy
02-02-2007, 10:09 PM
Well since serving isnt a talent I geuss the forehand can be said to not be a taleent because I mean all you do is hit it in as hard as you can

Actually why stop with the forehand..the backhand the overhead, I guess none of them are talents.

Too bad that I cant make the ATP, it seems like all these guys are talentless.

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 10:16 PM
:silly:




That smiley is coming in incredibly useful these days.

deliveryman
02-02-2007, 10:18 PM
And you've officially been added to my "Retard List"

Thanks for coming out :)

R.Federer
02-02-2007, 10:21 PM
I can't be sure you're serious (are you?).

If you arent, Thank GOD!

If you are being serious: doesn't everyone want the free points? If it's such a meaningles, talentless thing to do, why isn't everyone disgusing their toss, hitting the ball extremely fast and hard, and serving with incredible precision so that they get those free points and win love games?? I am confused :confused:

scoobs
02-02-2007, 10:28 PM
People find big serving annoying because it can be used to very easily get players out of the trouble they get into because of the weaker parts of their game.

But then that's what all players aspire to do - get easy points using their strengths and protect their weaknesses. The only difference is that the big server, in control of the start of the point, can do it just a bit more easily.

Doesn't seem to matter in the end, though, most huge servers with a weak return game don't seem to really do as well as you'd think because in tennis you still have to break to win - it's too chancey expecting to be able to win matches exclusively on tiebreaks - and at 3 slams you can't anyway.

RickDaStick
02-02-2007, 10:30 PM
Only a Rafatard would make such a stupid thread.

partygirl
02-02-2007, 10:38 PM
It is how the game begins, therefore it seems stupid to discount it, really.:rolleyes:
Everyone has to have a serve, don't hate the ones that do it well...
it's just as much a part of "real tennis" whatever the hell that is.:)

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-02-2007, 11:07 PM
Yes I'm totally serious. I mean do you guys not listen to other people's points of view.

Serving is not a talent, its a ridiculous thing that harms tennis and the sooner they take it away the better. In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:12 PM
Yes I'm totally serious. I mean do you guys not listen to other people's points of view.

Serving is not a talent, its a ridiculous thing that harms tennis and the sooner they take it away the better. In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.

Some points of view are so stupid they're not even worth consideration. Still, I'm in a generous mood. Of all the crackpot suggestions people have made to improve tennis, and there have been many of them, eliminating the second serve is just about the worst. It's funny that the people who propose it always do so because they say tennis is too one-dimensional with these big servers around, failing to realise that no second serve would produce baseline rally after baseline rally and turn matches into a prolonged, tortuous affair where holding serve is a complete lottery. The nearest example I can think of is a lot of WTA matches, though by no means all of them, some women players can actually do something decent with their first serve. Do we want the men's game to resemble the worst WTA break-fest? Hell no.

I suppose you're right, it will make things more equal, ie equally bad for everyone from the tallest ace machine to the shortest puffball server who can still get cheap points now and then when they really make an effort on their first serve (and some of those on the vertically challenged side such as Rochus will be losing an awful lot of points through "single faults" into the net if they only have one serve).

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:17 PM
:lol:
When we all thought Just Cause was the worst thing for a good while... :rolleyes:

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:18 PM
Didn't you hear J'Torian, anyone who's 6'10" can serve like Karlovic, it's not as though you need talent to do that! Why I'm the same height as both Sampras and Federer, I could beat their best holding streaks at Wimbledon if someone paid my fee for main draw entry!

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:18 PM
Sure, tossing a ball up in the air and hitting it over a net into the confines of a smallish box with both power and placement isn't a talent. And being able to vary the serve and disguise the toss? Psssh, anyone can do that!

You forgot to say that it's so easy it's the first thing you learn to do well when learning how to play... :rolleyes:

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:19 PM
:lol:
When we all thought Just Cause was the worst thing for a good while... :rolleyes:

I actually wonder whether this thread is a troll, because the argument is that nonsensical.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:19 PM
Didn't you hear J'Torian, anyone who's 6'10" can serve like Karlovic, it's not as though you need talent to do that!


So if height is the only thing that matters, does it mean Sharapova serves better than Grosjean? :D :p

scarecrows
02-02-2007, 11:21 PM
:silly:




That smiley is coming in incredibly useful these days.

true dat

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:23 PM
So if height is the only thing that matters, does it mean Sharapova serves better than Grosjean? :D :p

Well actually, relative to their respective tours, yes.... :p

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-02-2007, 11:23 PM
I actually wonder whether this thread is a troll, because the argument is that nonsensical.
Ok listen. I do consider serving to be a talent, but I feel that it shouldn't be part of tennis. Its just too much of an easy way too play tennis, and so often unskilled players win matches. Its something I've always felt.

Take for example Coria, he is way more talented with a tennis racket than Roddick, but he's not gonna get anywhere partly cos he's a small guy, and small guys don't serve big. Is that really fair, I don't think so.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:24 PM
Well actually, relative to their respective tours, yes.... :p

Don't use "respective" in such a thread like this. It's too much.

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:28 PM
Ok listen. I do consider serving to be a talent, but I feel that it shouldn't be part of tennis. Its just too much of an easy way too play tennis, and so often unskilled players win matches. Its something I've always felt.

Take for example Coria, he is way more talented with a tennis racket than Roddick, but he's not gonna get anywhere partly cos he's a small guy, and small guys don't serve big. Is that really fair, I don't think so.

Rubbish. Was he "not getting anywhere" when he had the RG title on his racquet three years ago, when he had a very solid and consistent serve that didn't produce bombs but was still very hard to attack? Believe it or not, Coria had one of the most reliable serves of all the top players back then and won a very healthy percentage of points behind both first and second serve. To use your two players as an example, there's no doubt that fast surfaces have helped big bad Andy beat up on poor little Guille, but was it his lack of serve that let Coria down when he had a 3-1 lead in the final set against Roddick at the 2003 TMC and then proceeded to blow five games in a row with bizarre unforced errors? Nope.

*edit - rereading it, I suppose you could say that had Coria been blessed with a bigger serve he would have been able to ride out a break lead in the final set more easily. But up to that stage, I remember he was winning a higher percentage of first serve points than Roddick was, so his serve was not exactly hindering him.*

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:30 PM
If that logic held true, then Hanescu would serve better than Safin.

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:35 PM
I'm going to sound like a broken record here I know, but the way people always complain about unfair serving advantages, it's as though Karlovic had Federer's record over the last few years. By and large players are ranked deservingly according to their talent, with some notable exceptions, and a big server without enough all-round ability will always be found out by a more complete player. OK, so you know you're going to be needing tiebreaks against Karlovic, but the best players still win them against him with regularity, which is why for such a great server he has no better than a 50-50 record in breakers.

Hugh Jaas
02-02-2007, 11:35 PM
Serving as a players only weapon IS a complete farce.

players like Ivo Karlovic make watching tennis games unbearable.
Any Untalented player who is 538547825735 feet tall can whack the ball down into the court and guess what they are suddenly top 100 material because they make journeymen dirtballers get frustrated and choke after the 30th ace has rocketed past them.

Pathetic.

I karlovic didn't have his serve he would not make the ATP ranking list.

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-02-2007, 11:38 PM
Rubbish. Was he "not getting anywhere" when he had the RG title on his racquet three years ago, when he had a very solid and consistent serve that didn't produce bombs but was still very hard to attack? Believe it or not, Coria had one of the most reliable serves of all the top players back then and won a very healthy percentage of points behind both first and second serve. To use your two players as an example, there's no doubt that fast surfaces have helped big bad Andy beat up on poor little Guille, but was it his lack of serve that let Coria down when he had a 3-1 lead in the final set against Roddick at the 2003 TMC and then proceeded to blow five games in a row with bizarre unforced errors? Nope.
Coria may have had a decent % on his serve or whatever, but that was more to do with his amazing court coverage and variation in shots. It had very little to do with his serving, and he was never an ace hitter, even at the best of times.

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:41 PM
Coria may have had a decent % on his serve or whatever, but that was more to do with his amazing court coverage and variation in shots. It had very little to do with his serving, and he was never an ace hitter, even at the best of times.

He served a tremendously high percentage of first serves, around 80 and sometimes close to 90%, and varied the pace of his serve well, sometimes throwing in very fast serves that would catch opponents by surprise when they were expecting something routine. The bottom line is, he played the cards that he had been dealt with his limited physical stature, and the talent in the rest of his game was usually enough to surmount the gap in service power between him and other players. I can't remember many instances of him being served off the court by someone without much ground game of their own, Roddick wouldn't have an unbeaten record against him if he didn't know how to construct points from the baseline himself.

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-02-2007, 11:42 PM
Not to bring Henin into this even though I do so love to mention her :o, but if she can be #1 with her height and her serve - which isn't even that great of a serve - there's no need to "equalize" the game for smaller players. In fact, wasn't there a thread recently where someone suggested that tennis needed "weight classes"? :silly:
I've never thought of that, but actually its a pretty good idea. Happens in boxing, when someone is too heavy, and therefore has more power. I mean look at Serena Williams and Martina Hingis - Hingis has more talent, but because players like Serena are so physical Hingis struggles.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2007, 11:46 PM
That's the last drop. Someone defending weight classes in tennis. I'm outta here. :cuckoo:

Sjengster
02-02-2007, 11:55 PM
Coria's losses since, ooh, the start of 2003 on fast surfaces:

Agassi (AO, USO, IW x2), Hewitt (IW), Costa (Miami), Rochus (Wimbledon, Miami), Mirnyi (Cincinnati), Schuettler (TMC), Roddick (TMC x 2, Miami by retirement, Wimbledon), Saulnier (AO), Mayer (Wimbledon), Safin + Henman (TMC), Nalbandian (AO, TMC), Dent (Miami), Ferrero (Montreal), Horna (Cincinnati), Ginepri (US Open), Gonzalez (Madrid), Berdych (Paris), Ljubicic + Federer (TMC), Grosjean (AO).....

OK, some big servers in there, but only Mirnyi and Dent could really be classed as players without much groundstroke ability, and that's probably a little unfair on both of them. It's actually quite obvious that Agassi was the biggest thorn in Coria's side on fast surfaces, and that was entirely down to his unfair advantage in "real tennis", to use your phrase, not any serving advantage.

A-ha! I missed out a perfect example which illustrates my point wonderfully: Coria lost to Lopez in the first round of Montreal 2003 through retirement. And that is the only time that Lopez, he of a great serve and average groundstrokes, has ever beaten Coria, including some matches indoors as well as on clay. When Coria won Basel in 2003, his only title on a fast court, he beat Lopez in around 50 minutes in the quarters and Ljubicic in the semis (Ljubicic had beaten Federer earlier on in the tournament).

Horatio Caine
02-02-2007, 11:57 PM
What would someone be without a serve? :p

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 12:01 AM
Coria's losses since, ooh, the start of 2003 on fast surfaces:

OK, some big servers in there, but only Mirnyi and Dent could really be classed as players without much groundstroke ability, and that's probably a little unfair on both of them. It's actually quite obvious that Agassi was the biggest thorn in Coria's side on fast surfaces, and that was entirely down to his unfair advantage in "real tennis", to use your phrase, not any serving advantage.
Well Agassi had a power advantage, but thats a whole other story.....what about verkerk :lol: what has happened to him btw?

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 12:03 AM
Verkerk had a power advantage from the baseline as well as in the service box, and outplayed Coria in the rallies that day - a fact that some people still have a hard time accepting, as though beating Schuettler and Moya in the previous two rounds (and indeed Horna after he had taken out Federer in the first round) wasn't evidence enough of his groundstroke ability. It would hardly be surprising, the man grew up on clay for heaven's sakes.

Injury, that's what. A similar story with Coria, which shows that players both above and below average height are susceptible to injury.

sondraj06
02-03-2007, 12:12 AM
It wasn't until I started playing tennis, that I realized how freaking hard it is. I use to be that person who would watch it on t.v and think this is not as hard as these players make it seem. I didn't understand what was so difficult about it. But now I know, Serving is hard as hell. and to get the serve in that box is not easy:fiery:. But to say the least I get it now. And You can't win a match with serving alone, it will get you some where until you have to return and win points off that too.

Merton
02-03-2007, 12:22 AM
Sjengster has said everything here, just adding that getting rid of the 2nd serve would also implicitly penalize gifted returners relatively to less gifted ones. Good servers that are ranked high also possess other skills, and it is easier to see that looking at the 90's when fast surfaces played faster than they do today.

Matchu
02-03-2007, 12:33 AM
I don't consider serving a tennis talent at all. I mean it is a talent in its own right....but come on.....I just don't see it as a talent on a tennis court. I mean say a guy like Ivo Karlovic can beat Lleyton Hewitt, I mean is this a joke. The guy is an embarassment to tennis. Throw a ball up in the air and see how hard you can hit it, hardly a talent is it :lol:

I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

Obviously you do not understand tennis the way professionals do, serving is the most important part of the game. It's more than just "throw the ball up and hit it as hard as you can" it's about timing, ball toss, movement, leg drive, TECHNIQUE etc. and many of variations of the serve like the kick serve or slice. Every serve is not a flat serve as you imply in this post.

Ok listen. I do consider serving to be a talent, but I feel that it shouldn't be part of tennis. Its just too much of an easy way too play tennis, and so often unskilled players win matches. Its something I've always felt.

Take for example Coria, he is way more talented with a tennis racket than Roddick, but he's not gonna get anywhere partly cos he's a small guy, and small guys don't serve big. Is that really fair, I don't think so.

Look if your going to abuse the system that everyone uses around the world and have for over 100's of years then you shouldn't be watching tennis. The first and second serve have been a part of tennis from the very beginning. The height and power of a player equals out to another's skill and speed. Lleyton Hewitt is a perfect example of why a serve is such an important part of the game, and why you don't need the best serve to make it to the top. Lleyton Hewitt reached the world number 1 ranking spot in 2001 and had one of the worst serves on the tour as far as cheap points go, Hewitt had to work for every point he played. Once Hewitt lost the number 1 spot he begun to really work on his SERVE and physique in the 2004 off season. His work paid off and he made the Australian Open final. Since that work on his serve Hewitt's aces are a lot more in the norm and has a reliable second serve. Now if that's not proof of what your asking I don't know what is.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 12:43 AM
I always thought Hewitt had quite a decent serve actually, I remember he had about 16 aces in 3 sets in the Wimbledon final against Nalbandian, who's no mean returner. Now one of the most awkward-looking service motions, I won't argue the toss on that.

El Legenda
02-03-2007, 12:50 AM
hitting a ball 135-140mph it a litte corner is not a skill, i do it every morning before i go to school. so easy.

ezekiel
02-03-2007, 12:50 AM
Sure it's a talent but it's a soft and underrated talent the same way as shooting 3's in basketball it can be undercut by good defense

nkhera1
02-03-2007, 01:55 AM
I'm guessing the creator of this thread has never tried serving.

Deboogle!.
02-03-2007, 02:09 AM
In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.For it's one! one! one strike you're out...

oh wait. :scratch:

One ball's a walk...

oh wait.

don't get 10 yards on the first down, you have to give the ball away...

oh wait.

sondraj06
02-03-2007, 02:17 AM
hitting a ball 135-140mph it a litte corner is not a skill, i do it every morning before i go to school. so easy.

well maybe you are just naturally skilled. I know it's not so easy for me.

soonha
02-03-2007, 02:34 AM
Yes I'm totally serious. I mean do you guys not listen to other people's points of view.

Serving is not a talent, its a ridiculous thing that harms tennis and the sooner they take it away the better. In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.

:retard: Oh, sure. Sampras was not so talented that he won 14 Slams and beat Agassi most of times they met. Roger doesn't have the biggest serve in the tour but wins over 95% of his matches. Time to move on for you.

Apemant
02-03-2007, 07:55 AM
For it's one! one! one strike you're out...

oh wait. :scratch:

One ball's a walk...

oh wait.

don't get 10 yards on the first down, you have to give the ball away...

oh wait.

Touche :worship:

:devil:

Burrow
02-03-2007, 11:24 AM
Yes I'm totally serious. I mean do you guys not listen to other people's points of view.

Serving is not a talent, its a ridiculous thing that harms tennis and the sooner they take it away the better. In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.

just cause nadal cant serve for toffee and that he has edited his service action in order that it looks more like federers.:D

Burrow
02-03-2007, 11:27 AM
That's the last drop. Someone defending weight classes in tennis. I'm outta here. :cuckoo:

damn right

dorkino
02-03-2007, 12:18 PM
Well, To give it in a simple answer: yes i consider it a tennis talent. Not everyone is capable of doing it , some are naturally having this talent ,yet all need to develop it and for this they need both physical and mental skills.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned on this thread, as unfortunately i haven't read all posts here, but although it may apparently seems like it's mostly about physical power , i guess it's not always about that.:angel:

I 've heard for example that some players say Fed's serve is not always that big.But it gains strength from its placement/slice. And one of the guy's points of strength is that he approximately serve different kinds of serves without showing lots of differences in the way he moves his hands or so, which makes it very much unpredictable where he's going to place it the next time. Lots of other examples are found too on both men and women courts.

What may bother me and certainly others is that some players depend only on their serve especially if it's just big / fast without showing other skills /mind at playing tennis to win matches . I'll act polite enough not to say examples :p but i am not a fan of these players and i can say winning depending only on one's serve is a good chapter in the book called "winning ugly"

So it's one important tennis talent that has to be taken care of ...but not on the account of other talents.:o

Rogiman
02-03-2007, 01:50 PM
Look if your going to abuse the system that everyone uses around the world and have for over 100's of years then you shouldn't be watching tennis.Spot on.
Andre's #1 little whinny bitch is not a tennis fan, he only complains about how the game is played and the players that excell, he actually would like it to become football.

I guess he can't cope with the fact that players like Crouch have advantage in the box due to their height either.

*Ljubica*
02-03-2007, 01:54 PM
Spot on.
Andre's #1 little whinny bitch is not a tennis fan, he only complains about how the game is played and the players that excell, he actually would like it to become football.

I guess he can't cope with the fact that players like Crouch have advantage in the box due to their height either.

And yet he/she still sends me Bad Reps saying I have no "credibiity" here :rolleyes: - though whether that is as a person or in my tennis knowledge, I don't know, and I care even less! The "Ignore" function was desgined for such people! :p

silverarrows
02-03-2007, 01:56 PM
It's definitely a talent but it's not everything. ;)

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 02:32 PM
For it's one! one! one strike you're out...

oh wait. :scratch:

One ball's a walk...

oh wait.

don't get 10 yards on the first down, you have to give the ball away...

oh wait.
Oh American sports. Well I don't watch those. In fact there is probably a reason why these sports are only played in America.

federerfan7465
02-03-2007, 02:58 PM
I don't consider serving a tennis talent at all. I mean it is a talent in its own right....but come on.....I just don't see it as a talent on a tennis court. I mean say a guy like Ivo Karlovic can beat Lleyton Hewitt, I mean is this a joke. The guy is an embarassment to tennis. Throw a ball up in the air and see how hard you can hit it, hardly a talent is it :lol:

I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

I disagree with you completely.

Serving is the most important shot in the game. It takes talent. It takes skill and practice. Its way more than throw it up and seeing how hard you can hit.

The way you present your arguement, I highly doubt you actually play tennis.

Deboogle!.
02-03-2007, 02:59 PM
Oh American sports. Well I don't watch those. In fact there is probably a reason why these sports are only played in America.Baseball is only played in America? Check your facts, please.

And of course, you haven't answered the most fundamental and basic question. If serving isn't a talent, why isn't everyone equally as good at it? If it's not a talent, then anyone should be able to practice enough to all be perfect at it. So please, explain this to us.

DrJules
02-03-2007, 03:33 PM
Yes it is a talent.

However, I do not believe professional players should have 2 attempts. You do not have 2 attempts at any other shot.

GlennMirnyi
02-03-2007, 03:37 PM
just cause nadal cant serve for toffee and that he has edited his service action in order that it looks more like federers.:D

:lol:

Spot on.
Andre's #1 little whinny bitch is not a tennis fan, he only complains about how the game is played and the players that excell, he actually would like it to become football.

I guess he can't cope with the fact that players like Crouch have advantage in the box due to their height either.

Jealousy sucks.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 03:49 PM
Oh American sports. Well I don't watch those. In fact there is probably a reason why these sports are only played in America.

With watertight arguments such as these it's truly astounding that your suggestion doesn't seem to have caught on. :confused:

Apemant
02-03-2007, 04:54 PM
Yes it is a talent.

However, I do not believe professional players should have 2 attempts. You do not have 2 attempts at any other shot.

Yah and I also think there's no reason for the field to be rectangular, when it could easily be circular or elliptic. Also, it's silly for pros to have such big racquets, tennis would be much better with baseball bats (beat that). The net should be at least 2 yards high, it's pathetic how low it is right now. If badminton players can cope with such nets, why can't tennis players do the same?

:devil:

Seriously, do I really need to explain why it is feasible to allow 2 attempts at the FIRST shot of a point, while it is practically and even theoretically impossible to have 2 attempts at 'any other shot'? Sheesh.

NyGeL
02-03-2007, 05:08 PM
I think its time now where they reduced the serves to 1 rather than 2, and then we can concentrate on the real tennis.

I like this idea :)

and yeah.. "Only Serve" players sux...

El Legenda
02-03-2007, 05:11 PM
"weight classes"? :silly:

Fat Dave would be the best server in the world. ;)

DrJules
02-03-2007, 05:13 PM
Seriously, do I really need to explain why it is feasible to allow 2 attempts at the FIRST shot of a point, while it is practically and even theoretically impossible to have 2 attempts at 'any other shot'? Sheesh.

But why do players need 2 serves to start a point? These are highly capable professionals who only need 1. We certainly would have less serve domination.

Apemant
02-03-2007, 05:21 PM
I like this idea :)

and yeah.. "Only Serve" players sux...

There is no player who is 'only serve'.

There are those whose game apart from the serve is way below other players in the same ranking class, but it doesn't mean they literally don't know how to hit a ball other than overhead from the baseline, with a controlled toss.

Any player who is literally 'only serve' would be unable to win a single match. You just have to win points on other player's serve to win a set, let alone the whole match.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 05:21 PM
But why do players need 2 serves to start a point? These are highly capable professionals who only need 1. We certainly would have less serve domination.

Because a surprisingly large amount of players use their serve to end a point as well as start it, and that includes the players with pretty decent groundstrokes, believe it or not. Serve doesn't dominate to an unacceptable extent now, how many huge servers can you name who are in the Top 10, or even Top 20?

Apemant
02-03-2007, 05:29 PM
But why do players need 2 serves to start a point? These are highly capable professionals who only need 1. We certainly would have less serve domination.

Why do they need 2 serves? What kind of question is that? Why is the field of that exact size and shape? Why can't the ball bounce twice? Why do you have to serve to the serve field and not anywhere else? Why is the serve repeated if the ball touches the net?

And what serve domination are you referring to? Rogi is far from the best server in the world, Rafa has no serve to boast about, and neither does Davy. These are the first 3 players on the entry list.

sykotique
02-03-2007, 08:53 PM
Servers do not dominate tennis, so to argue that the serve gives an unfair advantage is to turn a blind eye to the facts.

And perhaps the reason that you have two chances at a serve is because, whereas you have the whole court to hit your other shots, you really only have a quarter of the court in which to land your serve...that kind of makes it more difficult. Just a little.

And of course tall players have an advantage serving!

Guess what: tall players also have an advantage dunking in basketball...should we remove the dunk?

Tall players have an advantage in longer strokes in swimming...should they swim using their feet only?

Tall players have an advantage in boxing with longer reach...should they wear straps around their elbows to restrict them?

Certan aspects of certain sports cater to certain physical qualities which certain people do not have, which is why everyone can't be a sportsman. We shouldn't alter a sport for the sake of "equalising" it. We should alter it for the sake of bettering it wholistically, rather than just benefitting one specific group of players.

Snowwy
02-03-2007, 09:49 PM
But tall players are generally slower.

GlennMirnyi
02-03-2007, 10:02 PM
There's a whole level of depth in having two serves. The necessity of controlling nerves in a crucial point, the ability to serve deep but safe. Taking that off, most players would only serve safe.

In fact, I can't believe any serious tennis fan would really want matches without second serves.

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 10:46 PM
There is no player who is 'only serve'.

There are those whose game apart from the serve is way below other players in the same ranking class, but it doesn't mean they literally don't know how to hit a ball other than overhead from the baseline, with a controlled toss.

Any player who is literally 'only serve' would be unable to win a single match. You just have to win points on other player's serve to win a set, let alone the whole match.
There are players like Karlovic who actually are crap at everything else in their game......yet they can still manage to win not because they are good at returning, but because they put so much pressure on the opponent due to the fact they serve ace after ace, and thus reduces them to errors. Its more to do with that than anything else.

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 10:47 PM
There's a whole level of depth in having two serves. The necessity of controlling nerves in a crucial point, the ability to serve deep but safe. Taking that off, most players would only serve safe.

In fact, I can't believe any serious tennis fan would really want matches without second serves.
Someone should be able to control their nerves, no matter how many serves they have. Thats what seperates a very good player, from a great one.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 10:53 PM
Your reasoning is becoming more and more loony by the minute.

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 10:57 PM
Your reasoning is becoming more and more loony by the minute.
Anything sounds loony that you don't agree with.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 11:01 PM
Is it my fault that your posts manage to be both disagreeable and loony at the same time?

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-03-2007, 11:03 PM
Is it my fault that your posts manage to be both disagreeable and loony at the same time?
When someone has an opinion its not a fact is it. You don't have to agree with it, but at least you can respect it.

In fact I'm looking at tennis from a totally different angle, and am not going along with the norm.

Sjengster
02-03-2007, 11:08 PM
I find it hard to respect an opinion based on conclusions that would almost instantly be disproved if this great serving reform was put into action.

It's safe to say you're looking at tennis from an obtuse angle, a little too obtuse for those of us in the land of the sane.

Neely
02-03-2007, 11:34 PM
Yes, it is still a talent, I would like to call it a 'hard skills' talent. But it should be clear that somebody who is, I'm exaggerating now, 7 feet tall could usually achieve in the power serve department much more just by practice practice practice learning to execute (or lifting some weight for the power), because he is approaching this shot with excellent stats and is offered angles that other players are not able to hit with flat serves. Physically giftedness is required and the ability to execute a stroke where you have to coordinate many things (again somebody 7 feet tall has likely a bigger error margin regarding the timing of tossing the ball compared to a smaller player).

The other sort of talent are soft skills, willingness, commitment, ambition, strong nerves, things like anticipation, natural giftedness regarding touch and feeling for the ball, making intuitively the right decisions in the biggest moments - something which is hard to learn or not to learn at all by sheer practice or just by brute force or physical abilities.

Johnny Groove
02-03-2007, 11:39 PM
yes, serving is a talent, it is difficult to do, and those who do it well worked very hard to make it so


Only a Rafatard would make such a stupid thread.

:rolleyes: obligatory response

Apemant
02-03-2007, 11:53 PM
There are players like Karlovic who actually are crap at everything else in their game......yet they can still manage to win not because they are good at returning, but because they put so much pressure on the opponent due to the fact they serve ace after ace, and thus reduces them to errors. Its more to do with that than anything else.

And? There are women who manage to earn crapload of money just because they look good, while they might be utterly incapable of producing a meaningful sentence of over 4 words, for example. Life isn't fair. And yet, Olie Rochus is a living proof that you can beat a guy who is half a meter taller than you. I just don't understand your position here. One really interesting side of men's tennis is the endless battle between good servers and good returners. And here, you'd like to scrap all that and make men's tennis the same as WTA. Way to go. :devil:

jocaputs
02-03-2007, 11:55 PM
YA-HOOOOOOOO!!!! i love this thread!

sykotique
02-04-2007, 12:25 AM
Anything sounds loony that you don't agree with.

But surely you realise that some opinions are - in the immortal maxim of George Orwell's Animal Farm - "more equal than others."


It's all well and good to say "that's my opinion and you must respect it", but it's hard for persons to respect an opinion that seems baseless and inane. No offence.


You're a Rafa fan, right? Well, what if GlennMirnyi, being the volleying fanatic that he is, proposed that all clay courts be banished because "running 10 feet behind the baseline acting like a human backboard and reducing a match to a game of pong just isn't real tennis"? You would probably respond that he is loony (and most would agree - lol, no offence, Mirnyi), to which he could reply "that's my opinion and you have to respect it."


It's simple. Give people a reason to think that your "opinion" is more than just some fickle, biased whim without much thought put into it and you won't have to ask people to respect it - they will feel that it is their duty to do so.


NB: When going against tradition that has been engrained in a sport since time immemorial, you should be especially careful to tread softly on such matters. It is exactly the reason why a certain Etienne de Villiers and his famous boss don't have many fans right now.

Denise
02-04-2007, 12:26 AM
Yeah, more and less :p

oz_boz
02-04-2007, 10:29 AM
This thread reminds me of a question in "Trivial Pursuit": is the thumb a finger?

Duh.

jazar
02-04-2007, 10:37 AM
yeah of course serving is a talent. it takes many components to make a good serve and they all must work in harmony with each other for it to be effective

GlennMirnyi
02-04-2007, 03:45 PM
Someone should be able to control their nerves, no matter how many serves they have. Thats what seperates a very good player, from a great one.

Wrong. That would reduce the depth. Everybody would have the same serve = WTA.

When someone has an opinion its not a fact is it. You don't have to agree with it, but at least you can respect it.

In fact I'm looking at tennis from a totally different angle, and am not going along with the norm.

Your angle is totally different because your head is stuck up where the sun doesn't shine. You know nothing about tennis and don't care a bit about the sport. What kind of "angle" do you presume to have?

jayjay
02-04-2007, 03:49 PM
One of the few times Glenn Mirnyi warrants being agreed with.

Of course the serve is a talent, as is any shot in tennis. The ability to hit the forehand, the backhand, the volley, the drop shot etc etc, they all require varying degrees of talent and expertise. Some make certain shots look alot easier than others, and vice-versa.

The serve is a talent. But a great serve alone is not enough to make you a great player, as evidenced by Ivo Karlovic.

Jogy
02-26-2007, 12:08 PM
I think serve when you are so big like Karlovic is only very little talent. He mainly uses his size and has it easier to hit it over the net.

The same how a 225cm guy blocking a shot in volleyball is not much talent if he reaches over 3m high from standing only without having to jump. He only must stretch is arms out and blocks the shot while smaller player needing the jumping coordination or right instinct.
And the same how a darts player with a 4 meter long arm (only oversized example to show) needs less accarucy to hit the right spot with dart on target because the rule is that you only need to be with your feet behind the line, and he may stretch out with the arms to the target and is nearer than a normal player.

oz_boz
02-26-2007, 01:07 PM
I think serve when you are so big like Karlovic is only very little talent. He mainly uses his size and has it easier to hit it over the net.


Less talent than if he were shorter OK, but "very little"? Get a grip.

rocketassist
03-08-2011, 11:09 PM
Bump.

The amount of incoherent Rafatards on this forum who troll on every player whose serve is their biggest weapon makes this topic worthy of debate I feel.

Johnny Groove
03-08-2011, 11:11 PM
WTF? Of course it is a talent.

This has to be the most moronic thread ever created on this forum, and that is saying something.

fast_clay
03-08-2011, 11:15 PM
watching muller's silky smooth motion last weekend, in all it's glorious fluency, rhythm and snap is mere reaffirmation that the serve is one of the toughest shots to master properly... and one stroke for which you need either sublime talent + motor skills to pick up yourself or a great coach to grant you before the age of 14... for after that your action, with all it's faults, is pretty much what it will be...

Topspindoctor
03-08-2011, 11:19 PM
Depends on the player's height. Someone like Karlovic has zero talent. Allow any tennis player to serve while standing on a chair and he'll get similar serves to Karlovic.

oranges
03-08-2011, 11:20 PM
Depends on the player's height. Someone like Karlovic has zero talent. Allow any tennis player to serve while standing on a chair and he'll get similar serves to Karlovic.

That must be why there's only two of them on tour :clap2:

Action Jackson
03-08-2011, 11:21 PM
Kavcic, Volandri and Seppi have made it on tour with such shit serves says enough.

shiaben
03-08-2011, 11:24 PM
Agree with topspindoctor on the issue of height.

When it comes to the typical tennis player with normal height. I would definitely argue it's a talent.

Many of the top competitors like Davydenko, Nadal, Djokovic, and many more, had average or weak serves initially speaking. Overtime they turned it into their strengths.

So I think talent is one portion (some like Roddick have always had their serve as a weapon initially), while technique is another (some like Djokovic and Nadal, have evolved their techniques to make it a weapon).

oranges
03-08-2011, 11:28 PM
Actually, Djoko had a better serve than he has now, than he seriously messed it up as per Martin's advice to change it, now he's back to fairly good. Kolya's serve is not a weapon by any stretch of imagination. So, basically two out of three off mark :p

Action Jackson
03-08-2011, 11:31 PM
Berankis a midget with an excellent serve.

shiaben
03-08-2011, 11:37 PM
Actually, Djoko had a better serve than he has now, than he seriously messed it up as per Martin's advice to change it, now he's back to fairly good. Kolya's serve is not a weapon by any stretch of imagination. So, basically two out of three off mark :p

I saw Kolya get some aces off his serve in the last 2 years and to get a ton of winners off of it.

But you are right to a degree. It's returnable unlike the other players' serves.

Though...I'm not sure how consistent his serve has been (how much double faults he gets off of it if he still does).

Haven't kept up with him in a long time.

GlennMirnyi
03-08-2011, 11:40 PM
The serve is the most difficult shot in tennis.

Only an idiot would think that just being tall means you have a good serve. Chela is a pretty good example. He's pretty tall and has a shit serve.

Filo V.
03-08-2011, 11:42 PM
Yes.

rocketassist
03-08-2011, 11:44 PM
Depends on the player's height. Someone like Karlovic has zero talent. Allow any tennis player to serve while standing on a chair and he'll get similar serves to Karlovic.

Yeah so if we give the Big Show a tennis racket he will be guaranteed at least a TB every set...

Topspindoctor
03-08-2011, 11:48 PM
Yeah so if we give the Big Show a tennis racket he will be guaranteed at least a TB every set...

Make Karlovic 30cm shorter and he'll be a mug server, guaranteed.

Serving talent = Olderer, Sampras, Duck.

All average to slightly above avrarge height with insane serves. Nadal and Novak are getting up there too.

If you're a giant, serving flat bombs with little variety will still get you results. That's not talent. That's physical attribute.

rocketassist
03-08-2011, 11:51 PM
Make Karlovic 30cm shorter and he'll be a mug server, guaranteed.

Serving talent = Olderer, Sampras, Duck.

All average to slightly above avrarge height with insane serves. Nadal and Novak are getting up there too.

If you're a giant, serving flat bombs with little variety will still get you results. That's not talent. That's physical attribute.

Nadal and Novak have no business being in any great serve discussion. They're okay for this era, but we're talking all-time or a longer period.

shiaben
03-08-2011, 11:56 PM
Nadal and Novak have no business being in any great serve discussion. They're okay for this era, but we're talking all-time or a longer period.

Mate I think the topic starter, meant good serve in general. Not just all-time.

shiaben
03-08-2011, 11:57 PM
The serve is the most difficult shot in tennis.

Only an idiot would think that just being tall means you have a good serve. Chela is a pretty good example. He's pretty tall and has a shit serve.

Chela is 6'3. That's not that big compared to a 6'9 Isner, a 6'10 Karlovic, or a 6'6 Del Potro.

fast_clay
03-09-2011, 12:03 AM
Chela is 6'3. That's not that big compared to a 6'9 Isner, a 6'10 Karlovic, or a 6'6 Del Potro.

not sure about that... chela (@ 6'3") would give his left nut to have chang's (@ 4'11") 2nd delivery...

for his size, chela rolls 'em in like a mentally challenged oompa loompa...

shiaben
03-09-2011, 12:05 AM
not sure about that... chela (@ 6'3") would give his left nut to have chang's (@ 4'11") 2nd delivery...

for his size, chela rolls 'em in like a mentally challenged oompa loompa...

With that said, he needs either a psychologist or a trainer to teach him how to serve.

jmf07
03-09-2011, 12:25 AM
Haven't read the entire thread but it's pretty obvious that if serving wasn't a tennis talent then there wouldn't be players out there spending hours on end fine tuning their serves. You could say that someone like Karlovic is at an advantage but in saying that his movement would probably be a lot better if he was 30cm shorter.

freeandlonely
03-09-2011, 12:45 AM
Yes

Ajk822
03-09-2011, 02:13 AM
If you're a giant, serving flat bombs with little variety will still get you results. That's not talent. That's physical attribute.

So by this thinking, even though CC Sabathia can throw 95 MPH he isn't talented because he's tall? Or because Aroldis Chapman is 6'5" he isn't talented despite his ability to hit triple digits on the radar gun?

abraxas21
03-09-2011, 02:23 AM
serving is actually one of the most difficult strokes in tennis.

hard to get the coordination right.

abraxas21
03-09-2011, 02:25 AM
Haven't read the entire thread but it's pretty obvious that if serving wasn't a tennis talent then there wouldn't be players out there spending hours on end fine tuning their serves. You could say that someone like Karlovic is at an advantage but in saying that his movement would probably be a lot better if he was 30cm shorter.

yeah and besides, you don't necessarily need to be tall to have a good serve. look at benjamin becker. the guy is short and yet has an awesome serve.

Mjau!
03-09-2011, 02:29 AM
:cuckoo: thread

It is one of the most tennis specific talents.

laurie-1
03-09-2011, 10:48 AM
I haven't read the whole thread but the original poster has Nadal in his avatar. I remember writing an article on Bleacher report last September pointing out how the improvement in Nadal's serve gave him the edge to win the US Open, Nadal was consistently serving 1st serves at over 125 mph during that tournament - don't think he's served like that since.

I liken a good server to a good drummer, a lot of co-ordination and timing involved, with power and skill. And when I talk about drummers I'm not talking boom chick beats! I mean proper skillfull drummers like Stewart Copeland or Peter Erskine or Jack DeJohnette :).

I also liken good serves to good fast bowlers in cricket, these guys are manipulating the ball. In cricket, if you bowl fast you will get hit for fours and sixes all day. But if you bowl fast and manipulate the ball, with off cutters, leg cutters, reverse swing etc etc, then you become a quality bowler and have the batsmen more on their toes.

In Tennis, if you just serve fast, guys will pick that up and return well. The best fast servers are the ones who combine slice to move the ball away from, topspin to get the ball up at you, and the swinging serve into the body, these are all skills which not everyone can do and take a hell of a lot of practice.

The only problem I see right now is that there a lot of players who are over 6 ft 6, these guys will always serve well, but they are just too big to move well on a Tennis court, so returning serve will always be a problem for them - which makes them open to probably unfair criticism. In years gone by these guys may have played Basketball instead of Tennis.

A clip here from a player who was 6 ft 5. Not only was he a great server but he was actually a good returner and moved well for his height.

kIk42jEZRK4

jonathancrane
03-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Serving is not a talent, its a ridiculous thing that harms tennis and the sooner they take it away the better. In what other sport, if you fail something first time around, do you get another go. Its time to move on from that.

:haha:

Only a Rafatard would make such a stupid thread.

:yeah:

peribsen
03-09-2011, 11:32 AM
How can one of the main aspects of a sport not be a talent?
One thing is to say that those very few players who 'only' know how to serve are a bore, but to deny the relevance of the serve is just plain dumb.

green25814
03-09-2011, 12:39 PM
Haven't read the entire thread but it's pretty obvious that if serving wasn't a tennis talent then there wouldn't be players out there spending hours on end fine tuning their serves. You could say that someone like Karlovic is at an advantage but in saying that his movement would probably be a lot better if he was 30cm shorter.

Exactly. Movement plays an even bigger role in tennis than the serve, particularly today. Guys like Karlovic and Isner are actually at a disadvantage with their height. The fact that they have made it this far says a lot about them.

Anyone who agrees with the OP has never played tennis properly, I 100% guarantee.

Myrre
03-09-2011, 02:59 PM
Only someone who haven't played tennis or is crap at it, would start a thread like this.

Sonja1989
03-09-2011, 03:09 PM
Yes. It isn't random that just few players has good serve. I think this is one of the best thing. Many people don't like it (understandable) but it's talent too.
If all my fav would have very good serve...

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2011, 04:21 PM
Chela is 6'3. That's not that big compared to a 6'9 Isner, a 6'10 Karlovic, or a 6'6 Del Potro.

Del Potro isn't a great server for his height, by the way.

Chela is 1,90. Tsonga, for instance is 1,88. The difference between their serves is abysmal.

156mphserve
03-09-2011, 06:20 PM
Is the OP Verdasco?:scratch:

laurie-1
03-09-2011, 06:55 PM
Is the OP Verdasco?:scratch:

Hehe - The OP might say fast bowlers bowling bouncers shouldn't be allowed in cricket. Perhaps he's had a bad experience playing against someone with a big serve in a match.

ossie
03-09-2011, 08:17 PM
it really irritates me how overrated talent is especially here on mtf where the tards love to talk about how talented player x could have won so many slams if it wasn't for some cheap excuse. fed has more shots than the next 20 guys combined but he still get's exposed by players like rafa. Just shows that all the talent in the world is not going to help you if you have a faulty gameplan.

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2011, 08:24 PM
it really irritates me how overrated talent is especially here on mtf where the tards love to talk about how talented player x could have won so many slams if it wasn't for some cheap excuse. fed has more shots than the next 20 guys combined but he still get's exposed by players like rafa. Just shows that all the talent in the world is not going to help you if you have a faulty gameplan.

:sobbing: :baby:

As if Nadull had ANY gameplan.

ossie
03-09-2011, 08:38 PM
:sobbing: :baby:

As if Nadull had ANY gameplan.
the number one gameplan in tennis.

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2011, 08:39 PM
the number one gameplan in tennis.

When has moonballing become a game plan?

I mean, outside crap amateur tennis and children's tennis, of course.

Sonja1989
03-09-2011, 08:45 PM
the number one gameplan in tennis.

Clear.

GlennMirnyi, you are the biggest troll.

Snowwy
03-09-2011, 08:46 PM
When has moonballing become a game plan?

I mean, outside crap amateur tennis and children's tennis, of course.

I thought the point of the sport was to win? If he wins the most, doesn't he have the best game plan? Maybe you just like losing?

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2011, 08:49 PM
I thought the point of the sport was to win? If he wins the most, doesn't he have the best game plan? Maybe you just like losing?

I like tennis, not moonballing.

Winning isn't everything. Unless you're Carlos Irwin Estevez.

ossie
03-09-2011, 08:52 PM
I like tennis, not moonballing.

Winning isn't everything. Unless you're Carlos Irwin Estevez.:bigcry:
:rain:

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2011, 08:57 PM
:bigcry:
:rain:

Maybe it is for people frustrated about their own lives.

#win in life like Charlie and you won't need to cheer a moonballer who can't even hold a racket right.

ossie
03-09-2011, 09:05 PM
Maybe it is for people frustrated about their own lives.

#win in life like Charlie and you won't need to cheer a moonballer who can't even hold a racket right.you are following a sport you haven't been able to enjoy for years now and mtf is nothing for you but a place where you can post away your bitternes, believe me if there is anyone frustrated here it's you.

tennishero
03-09-2011, 09:08 PM
generally no, taller players have an advantage. it's hard to measure, but I give more credit to shorter/average players with good serves, i.e federer.

Doomach777
03-09-2011, 09:09 PM
The serve is the most difficult shot in tennis.

Only an idiot would think that just being tall means you have a good serve. Chela is a pretty good example. He's pretty tall and has a shit serve.

This.

Action Jackson
05-07-2011, 01:33 PM
Of course.

leng jai
05-07-2011, 01:34 PM
Probably the worst thread of all time

asmazif
05-07-2011, 01:38 PM
Probably the worst thread of all time

Yeh, definitely up there.