PDA

View Full Version : Women's Serve


Navratil
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:28 AM
I just don't understand this: How is it possible that a top-ten-player serves like Radwanska does? :confused:

The technique is horrible and some male club-players serve better than that. :lol:

No speed, no variaty, no consistency, no nothing! :eek:

Well, she's not the tallest but why doesn't she work on that?

And Radwanska is not the only example. Hingis was such a gifted player but her serve was so bad. She didn't change anything since she was 12! Maybe that's the key: Girls start to early and never work on their serves again. Maybe they think it not worth it: "I need to work so much to serve 10 % better".
But I do believe that the serve is the most important shot in tennis! It's the only shot that is not influenced by your opponent. Thank god, a lot of female players understood that too. :rolleyes:

Williamsser
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:35 AM
Women's serves are a joke.

simplydeep
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:41 AM
yes i agree that her serve is rubbish expect as she attempts to stay in the top ten she will have to improve that, this is what happens girl rocket down the rankings with a good game no half complete. You can however get away with a rubbish serve becuase thye cover it up by being ready to move for the return. She has a serve like hingis soft opt m ore for direction than bot together and get away with it because most returns do nothing with it. There does come come an opponent that does expose that but not too mant do to force her to better her serve, that is why.

Wojtek
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:42 AM
It's not only Radwanska who has bad serve. Jankovic, Dementieva, Bartoli have very bad serve. They don't know what it is kick serve.

The Dawntreader
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:50 AM
Women's serves are a joke.

In general?:lol:

Venus, Serena, Petrova, Sharapova, Stosur, Davenport, Vaidisova.

Yeah, universally women's serves are a joke(!):rolleyes:

QUEENLINDSAY
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:51 AM
I don't get it either. Why are some top ten players can get away with it? It wouldn't happen in the mens field.

QUEENLINDSAY
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:53 AM
In general?:lol:

Venus, Serena, Petrova, Sharapova, Stosur, Davenport, Vaidisova.

Yeah, universally women's serves are a joke(!):rolleyes:
put in Justine, Maria and Alicia on this list.

The Dawntreader
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:54 AM
put in Justine, Maria and Alicia on this list.

Well Justine's serving could come and go, by far the weakest element in her game. That's only comparitively speaking though.

Alicia had a great serve, so yes she would go in. I did mention Maria:p

Direwolf
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:13 AM
because they can outplay about 80 percent of the tour!!

QUEENLINDSAY
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:14 AM
Well Justine's serving could come and go, by far the weakest element in her game. That's only comparitively speaking though.

Alicia had a great serve, so yes she would go in. I did mention Maria:p
Justine's serve is underrated because of how good she is. She is definitely one of the best servers I know specially during her peak period. It may not be her natural talent but she made it there, top list of good servers.

SM
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:23 AM
No one mentioned Mary Pierce :)

SM
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:25 AM
the thread starter has a point...

weve named alot of players with good serves, but good is a relative term...and its only good relative to the other serves on womens tour most of which s*ck

QUEENLINDSAY
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:29 AM
the thread starter has a point...

weve named alot of players with good serves, but good is a relative term...and its only good relative to the other serves on womens tour most of which s*ck
exactly! Those serves of the women that's on the list are the only one's which deserves to be in a professional sport.
Maybe the reason why women can get away with a weak serve in womens professional tennis is because women players are generally wear returners too?
Or maybe those players who made it to the top with bad serves are great on groundstrokes, like Dementieva?

Shonami Slam
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:48 AM
less hight means you need more percentage to clear the net, meaning slower, or higher clearing of the net.

why they don't hit the kicker is a better question, but in general - the girls reaching 6'0 foot/180 CM and higher usually own a pretty useful first serve, and they usually rack up the second one quite nicely too.

judging the top10 to all own great serves is pointless. Karlovic has a mch better serve than Simon, yet no one is really expecting him to challenge federer, murray and nadal back to back as simon already has.

perhaps in men's tennis, the vice-versa is more common:
"how can a player with such awful ground strokes get to the top10 with serve alone"?

crazillo
Mar 20th, 2009, 12:45 PM
Serving is the most important part in tennis.I agree that Radwanska's serve really shocked me, espacially her second serve: there was no depth, no consistency.

I think Sandrine Testud had a great second kick serve. :)

miffedmax
Mar 20th, 2009, 01:59 PM
:yawn:

What's next? A thread on the mythical "backhand down the line?"

AndreConrad
Mar 20th, 2009, 02:56 PM
Why do we insist on comparing men to women. We don't want them the same, do we? This is what I actually enjoy about tennis here that it takes more than serve well. I am not against women improving their serve, especially Agnieszka, but c'mon if you don't like the game don't watch it. I liked someone's comment earlier (see few messages above) that it is more pathetic to get to the top 10 with theserve alone.

volta
Mar 20th, 2009, 03:23 PM
:yawn:

What's next? A thread on the mythical "backhand down the line?"

:haha:

Dawson.
Mar 20th, 2009, 04:29 PM
Why do we insist on comparing men to women. We don't want them the same, do we? This is what I actually enjoy about tennis here that it takes more than serve well. I am not against women improving their serve, especially Agnieszka, but c'mon if you don't like the game don't watch it. I liked someone's comment earlier (see few messages above) that it is more pathetic to get to the top 10 with theserve alone.

When applying this question to other issues such as prize money, the apparent answer is: Yes. One could argue why should men and women be equal in one respect but not the other.

Larrybidd
Mar 20th, 2009, 04:45 PM
Well because the truth is that the serve is NOT the most important shot in the game, womem's OR men's. What good is it if you have a great serve, but a lousy forehand, backhand and return game - and can't move very well? What is clear is that you need a good serve to compete at the very top of the woman's game (but even then you have Elena D) but you can survive quite well in the WTA with a mediocre serve, assuming you have some of the other skills more important.

Orbis
Mar 20th, 2009, 04:52 PM
Yeah, well, not everyone can be great at serving, some people suck. So they make up for it with other skills.
Radwanska, for example, has excellent movement and court tactics. It's good to see a little variety.

Patrick345
Mar 20th, 2009, 04:59 PM
Which brings up another question: Has the return game regressed? What made Monica Seles so dangerous is that she had no repsect for anybody´s serve, especially second serve. She´d be a metre or two inside the baseline to put some extra pressure on the opponent. Hardly see that anymore, Bartoli does it, and often opponents DF.

Larrybidd
Mar 20th, 2009, 05:28 PM
Which brings up another question: Has the return game regressed? What made Monica Seles so dangerous is that she had no repsect for anybody´s serve, especially second serve. She´d be a metre or two inside the baseline to put some extra pressure on the opponent. Hardly see that anymore, Bartoli does it, and often opponents DF.

No, i'd say the return game has gotten better for most players simply because of the equipment which allows better control of the ball. That's another reason why you don't need a great serve to survive in the WTA.

I'm spoiled because I watch WS matches and the next serve they return from behind the baseline from anybody will be the first.

Dunlop1
Mar 20th, 2009, 06:06 PM
The serve is the most important shot in tennis, followed by the return. Anyone who says otherwise, doesn't understand tennis or the professional game.

As for the serve, shoulder and upper body strength are paramount. Men naturally have broader shoulders and stronger upper bodies than women.
Also boys develop these muscle groups as kids with ball throwing in various sports or just playing around. Less so for girls.
(example of girls that did are William Sisters. Their dad would make them throw racquets at the top of the service motion.)

This leads to why men can hit serves bigger and with more spin than women.

And yes, I agree with the OP: In general, women's serves suck.

Lunaris
Mar 20th, 2009, 07:13 PM
On the women's tour serve is not nearly as important as it is on the men's tour. Combined with lesser competition amongst women in general these are the reasons why girls with good game can go pretty high in the rankings despite having worse serve.

miffedmax
Mar 20th, 2009, 07:21 PM
So what? Women's serves have always been inferior to the men's.

The issue for me is are the matches entertaining? For me, the answer is yes. I enjoy watching both ATP and WTA tennis, partly because the weapons and tactics that good male and female use can be so different to achieve the same end--a winner.

Even with the growth of ballbashing, women tend to player longer rallies, stick to the baseline, and construct points with more shots. Men tend to move more, approach more and finish points faster. It's an interesting contrast. I can learn from both. Whether on TV or live I feel like I am entertained when I watch pros who are as good as they players are.

That's all I care about. Well, that and Lena D.'s exquisite hotness.

Lunaris
Mar 20th, 2009, 07:25 PM
women tend to player longer rallies
Are you sure about that?

fnuf7
Mar 20th, 2009, 07:31 PM
Just a random question about the serve, not sure if it's exactly in keeping with this thread but it is about the serve so here goes...what's the "normal" or average number of aces served in a women's match? I mean how many would you usually expect to see say Venus or Serena serve in match? Is it shocking for a woman to serve over 10 aces in one match or is that usual? (obviously would have to be someone with a fairly good serve though...) Would you usually expect less? More?

Beny
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:05 PM
Aga doesn't have a bad serve. It's nothing exceptional but it has some spin, more spin than Dementieva, Pin etc.

She won Eastbourne a grass tournament, also Istanbul a clay tournament where some kick is needed. I've seen her hit some good serves.

pov
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:07 PM
Women's serves are a joke.
Your comment is a joke.

Direwolf
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:08 PM
amongst the
GS winners....
and people who became number 1...

not all of them have a very good serve!!

Marionated
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:10 PM
It's not only Radwanska who has bad serve. Jankovic, Dementieva, Bartoli have very bad serve. They don't know what it is kick serve.

She does?

pov
Mar 20th, 2009, 08:10 PM
But I do believe that the serve is the most important shot in tennis! It's the only shot that is not influenced by your opponent. Thank god, a lot of female players understood that too. :rolleyes:
And thank you for realizing that many women do have good serves. Some of the responses missed that part.e

Vanity Bonfire
Mar 20th, 2009, 09:57 PM
Kuznetsova has a very underrated serve.

rjd1111
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:20 AM
Which brings up another question: Has the return game regressed? What made Monica Seles so dangerous is that she had no repsect for anybody´s serve, especially second serve. She´d be a metre or two inside the baseline to put some extra pressure on the opponent. Hardly see that anymore, Bartoli does it, and often opponents DF.

Serena. And Venus. I think sometimes there should be a law

against what they do to their opponets serve.

frenchie
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:26 AM
You can't expect someone with Radwanska's frame to serve like Davenport!

theDreamer
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:01 AM
In general?:lol:

Venus, Serena, Petrova, Sharapova, Stosur, Davenport, Vaidisova.

Yeah, universally women's serves are a joke(!):rolleyes:


Try to list good servers on the men's side - I think you'll find there are more than on women's (percentage-wise).

I think the OP is right - in general, poor service technique
is a common problem on the women's side.

Navratil
Mar 21st, 2009, 09:33 AM
Davenport's serve was ok although it was not that powerful. Venus is serving faster than some ATP-players but she's so inconsistent and can look very fragile with her second serve.

Especially the second serve is the biggest problem for most girls.

But overall I just don't get it! I mean, Venus, Maria, Lindsay & Co are taller and stronger than some male players but they still far away from that top level.

What's the reason? For most male players the serve is their best and most important shot and for most female players it's exactly the opposite!

?????

bandabou
Mar 21st, 2009, 09:50 AM
:lol: I guess the only player who really "got" it about the serve is Serena. She probably has a better serve than plenty of male players...so no surprise that she's the best of her generation.

The Witch-king
Mar 21st, 2009, 02:34 PM
less hight means you need more percentage to clear the net, meaning slower, or higher clearing of the net.

perhaps in men's tennis, the vice-versa is more common:
"how can a player with such awful ground strokes get to the top10 with serve alone"?

Roddick has been in the top 10 since forever and he has subpar groundstrokes.

Shonami Slam
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:46 PM
Roddick has been in the top 10 since forever and he has subpar groundstrokes.

well, i wasn't really into specifics - there were plenty in the past.
just saying women don't own great serves, men have serves so great they don't have to learn how to play a complete baseline game as well as some of the women can and do.

Super_Marion
Mar 23rd, 2009, 05:24 PM
I just don't understand this: How is it possible that a top-ten-player serves like Radwanska does? :confused:

The technique is horrible and some male club-players serve better than that. :lol:

No speed, no variaty, no consistency, no nothing! :eek:

Well, she's not the tallest but why doesn't she work on that?

And Radwanska is not the only example. Hingis was such a gifted player but her serve was so bad. She didn't change anything since she was 12! Maybe that's the key: Girls start to early and never work on their serves again. Maybe they think it not worth it: "I need to work so much to serve 10 % better".
But I do believe that the serve is the most important shot in tennis! It's the only shot that is not influenced by your opponent. Thank god, a lot of female players understood that too. :rolleyes:

Your being too prescriptive.

The most important weapon a player posesses is more important than the "most important shot in tennis". it may be serve, it may be return, it may be fh dtl or whatever,

It's what's important to each individual's players game that is the most important thing imo.