The very well developed essential elements of a good service are here mainly a well-controlled toss, excellent eye control of the ball, a good build-up of a tension in the body and a sound understanding of the targeted pronation channeling energy against the target in the first part of the follow through. Such a solid Service 3.0 is an excellent base for further growth and shows that good developmental technical work on service was done with Kayla in the past.
Photos below show Casper's service during 2015 Orange Bowl. Even thought that his service was not that dominant back then, the most important basic characteristics of the Service 3.0 were already there at that time and provided a solid base for further development/improvement. The most important among them is the proper understanding of the "follow through 1" with a well-executed (well-pronounced) targeted pronation.
This former top 10 player in both singles and doubles as well as twice Davis Cup Champion with the team of the Czech Republic belongs to the best servers on the Tour from the technical point of view. Despite his just average body size of 185cm (6'1''), he has a quite high career ace probability of 51% per game played.
Roger's service has more pronounced pronation and he spends a higher percentage of the service energy on the dominant (=right) side of the body than Andy. Over his entire career on the tour (data until mid-January 2017), Federer has the 1st service percentage of 62% (Murray 58%, Djokovic 65%, Nadal 69%) on which he won 77% of the points (Murray 75%, Djokovic 73%, Nadal 72%)...
The above numbers tell us that Andy's service margins are mostly (besides aces) quite below the ones of his closest competitors. It's mainly his excellent return and rally game that make him to such a successful player he is. From the technical point of view, as I personally see it, a limited pronation and a rather unclear distinction between the follow through 1 and follow through 2 are the reasons behind Andy's lower service margins. Interestingly enough, Ivan Lendl (1st serve 56%, overall service points won 66%) had similar issues in his career.
With his 1st service, Frances could have quite a potential weapon at his disposal (after all his fastest service during the 2016 US.Open was clocked at 142 mph, same like the fastest service from John Isner), but small details are in my opinion often taking a bit away from its potential. The main issue is for me in the rather suboptimal integration of the body energy into the stroke in the moment of impact at most of Frances' services.
Tall Garbine (182 cm / 6'0'') can consider her serve as one of her weapons. The photos from her practice during the 2015 US.Open show that Garbine well fulfills the requirements of the Service 3.0.
Here the distinction between her typical first service (usually more or less direct with just a slight topspin) and her famous kick service (heavy topspin with some sidespin used mostly as a second service) are quite visible. In both varieties, Samantha spends almost the entire stroke energy on the dominant (right, in her case as a right-handed player) side. The "follow through 1" (= the active part of the follow through) of the kick/topspin serve then goes, besides other differences to the first service, much more to the right.
Ivo Karlovic (*1979 / CRO) belongs to the most dominant servers/servicemen in the history of tennis and his more than 11,500 aces served throughout his professional career (as of December 2016) on the tour are a record hardly to be matched. At the height of 211 cm (6’11”) and weight of 104 kg (230 lb), Ivo...
Naomi correctly fulfills all the essential Service 3.0 (of Tennis 3.0) requirements. Certain distinct improvements bringing higher margin and better efficiency would be still possible though. Some of the main aspects to work on are mainly around the rather arm-power forced pronation, which is quite normal when proper pronation was introduced to the player later in the career but should still become a bit more fluid (with better contraction-relaxation coordination) over the time to make an optimal....
