This year at Wimbledon, we saw the ‘break-through’ of the younger generation, one of whom was Milos Raonic, the 23 year old, 6’5″ giant from Canada who made the semi-finals and subsequently rose to number 6 in the world. I’ve always had mixed feelings about Raonic, who is unlike the true big servers like John Isner and Ivo Karlovic, because he can move pretty effectively around the court and hits solid groundstrokes. However, his top 10 ranking got me thinking about what men’s tennis is going to look like if he is the future.
First, Raonic. He has won 5 titles, most recently defeating Berdych at the tail end of last year in Bangkok and has worked hard to shore up his ranking, with a QF showing at Roland Garros, followed by his remarkable run to the SF at Wimbledon. His game is characterised by the one-two punch: he hits an enormous serve. If it comes back, he uses his forehand to crush a winner or produce an even weaker return.
His serve is out of this world. Watching him live at Wimbledon, you really get a sense of the difficulty of the task someone has to break him. Against Kyrgios, he was hitting 120mph second serves. Sometimes, he would serve 132mph second serves. His height allows him extra clearance over the net which means that he can back himself to make the serve. His first serve is also incredible: he’s made 62% of first serves this year and won 82% of these points. He’s won 90% of his service games and won 72% of all his service points. This video gives an illustration as to how difficult it is to even make a return (please ignore the laughing and weird angle of the camera).
Such dominant serving really doesn’t allow a player to get into the match or gain any rhythm. Nor does it make for a good match.
Watching Raonic is boring. He serves, the other player either can’t get it back, or gives a weak reply and Raonic finishes the point. On his return games, Raonic tries his best, but usually his limited mobility (despite being better than Karlovic and Isner) means that he struggles to make balls which a top 10 player would make. Due to the lack of extended rallies and constant aces or unreturned serves, the match lacks any rhythm which means that the crowd have no energy to feed off. This in turn, creates a lack of any sort of atmosphere in the match.
Why is this a problem–Raonic is just one player?
The problem is that Raonic is just the most recent addition to a trend that has been increasing steadily over the last couple of years. Currently in the top 10, we have Berdych 6’5″, Raonic 6’5″ and Del Potro 6’6″. In the top 20 we have Isner 6’10”, Anderson 6’8″ and Cilic 6’6″. Who’s that I see at number 29? It’s the tallest of all, Ivo Karlovic, topping the chart at a lofty 6’11”. How many people do you know that are 6’5″? Djokovic is only 6’2″ and both Nadal and Federer stand at a comparatively diminutive 6’1″.
The issue is that as the men who play men’s tennis get taller, the serve becomes an increasingly dominant part of the game. To me, and most spectators, the serve is the least interesting aspect of the game. When someone like Federer serves 29 aces in a match, it is because he has precision placement and efficient technique. I respect Federer’s serve and the fact that he can clutch serve, bringing out the aces when it matters. Nadal’s serve has the lefty slice, he handcuffs people to that return, before bringing out the down the T on important points. These sorts of players differ to the giant servers who are so tall that they can access angles which are not available to shorter players and produce significantly more pace due to their jump up.
At the extreme, we have Isner and Karlovic who are almost identical in their serve stats. This year, Isner has won 92% of his service games and won just 9% of his return games. Karlovic has also won 92% of his service games and won just 8% of his return games. These sorts of players do not add anything to the game. They serve their way through the more complete players (to be fair to Isner, he has fairly good groundstrokes, Karlovic on the other hand…). For a talented player like Dimitrov to lose in straight sets to Karlovic at the French Open, only serves to illustrate the problem. Take a look back at the video above and try to imagine breaking the serve of someone who had 5 inches more than Raonic.
I believe that this is an issue which has to be tackled. I find matches with two big servers, mind-numbingly boring and believe I am not alone in this. Otherwise, in ten years the top 20 may all be at least 6’3″, matches will become serving contests not providing the sorts of rallies that spectators come to tournaments for, and ultimately this would result in people not watching tennis.
What can be done?
I’m not sure if anything can be done to tackle this issue. These tall players are supreme athletes, they are able to consistently serve at huge pace without injuring themselves, and talented players like Berdych and Del Potro hit flat groundstrokes which penetrate the court like an Exocet missile.
However, one thing that has helped these players is the consistency of bounce across all the surfaces. The homogenisation of the courts which means that they all play similarly, means that the ball bounces into the taller players’ hitting zone. Wimbledon used to be much slicker with a low bounce: this would have hindered the big servers on the ground because they have to bend so much more to get down to the ball. This would take a heavy toll over the course of a match which would in turn, mean that their serve would be less effective as they tired.
Moreover, the kick these tall players can get on their serve means that the ‘shorter players’ have to hit the return at shoulder height. This is unsustainable over the course of a match. A lower bouncing surface would negate the effect of the kick to some extent, which would make it easier for players to put pressure on the big servers. Many people are arguing that the surfaces should be changed so that there is a marked difference between each. The rise of the big server is another reason why there should be serious consideration of changing the surfaces so that there is a marked difference.
I am concerned about the rise of the big server and how it will affect men’s tennis. I can’t see people tuning in to watch Milos Raonic vs John Isner serve it out. To some, the big servers provide a dynamic change up, they’re players who can knock out anyone and keep the top players sharp. In my opinion, the big servers are creating a new type of tennis which is neither interesting nor skilful and could affect the marketability of tennis in the future.
Let me know what you think in the comments–I’d be interested to hear what people think about the big servers and whether I’m alone on this one!
Thank you for reading. Please take a moment to follow me on Twitter – @TennisObsessive. Support LWOS by following us on Twitter –@LastWordOnSport – and @LWOSworld and “liking” our Facebook page.
Don’t forget to check out our friends at Sports Injury Alert for the latest in Sports injuries.
