We have discussed that in the past and I always said that the best serve ever was actually Karlovic. Goran's first serve might be the smoothest one but when it comes to efficiency, Karlo is lke his heighth: simply head and shoulders above the rest.



RICOH ATP MatchFacts - 1,000 Aces Club # (Since 1991)
Year Player No. of Aces Avg. Per Match
2007 Ivo Karlovic (CRO) 1,019 (entering SF) 20.4
2004 Andy Roddick (USA) 1,019 12.5
1998 Goran Ivanisevic (CRO) 1,065 15.0
1997 Goran Ivanisevic (CRO) 1,048 14.8
1996 Goran Ivanisevic (CRO) 1,477 (ATP season record) 15.4
1994 Goran Ivanisevic (CRO) 1,169 13.8
1993 Pete Sampras (USA) 1,011 10.8
# Includes ATP, Grand Slam matches

It's actually a shame they make those stats per match as a match is likely to be 2 or 3 sets providing mixed results. They shoudl do per set or even better number of aces per serve!!!

Why isnt Kraijcek on this list :shrug: Or is it in terms of aces only?

Oh - Because this is the list of players who hit 1000 + aces in a season. Only 4 players managed that. What is amazing is that Karlo achieved that having played much less matches than the others in a tougher returners environment. It says how good his serve is and how bad must be the rest of his game.

Yet the combination was too much for Hewitt once again.

Quite interesting.I wouldnt actually place aces as a criteria for a great serve.Its also pointed out there when you say that Ivo has a terrible game but a great serve. Very Interesting!

:darkangel:

It will be interesting to see if and when John Isner starts to appear in this kind of list...

On a more general level, I wonder why so many debates have to be sooo sweeping?

I mean.. the best serve EVER!!

THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME!!!

No-one is "EVER" able to answer this simply because they are too big.. unnecessarily dramatic and spreads the debate too wide ( I mean, competitive tennis has been going on for a very long time, and who really knows that far back?)

How about the best in the current game?

The best in the open era?

Start with little ranges first and build up from there.


It reminds me of those banal channel 4 programmes or Q magazine which list the 'greatest albums EVER!'

Whenever these are done, usually the top 20 has a lot of things from the last 5 years, most of which drop way down/ off the list when it is done just a few years later..

I guess it just ties in with sensationalist reporting.

Tenez, I realise that I'm being a bit pedantic here. But I guess that language and how it is used can be important. Maybe a more interesting debate could be 'what makes a great server in the game?'. Point out the key characteristics and then use players to illustrate this.

Sounds more constructive and ultimately more informative.

Yes one may argue that a Federer or Sampras may have a better serve than Ivo. Though they don't serve as many aces, they hit many winners and set the ball nicely for the next shot. I personally think that the ease at which one makes an ace and many of them defines a good server from a not as good server.

And in fact this list above justifies that to some extend as those 4 are indeed the best servers of all time. I think however that a percentage of aces per serves would be much more accurate and even better aces and winners per serve woudl be unquestionably the best way.

The 4 as the best servers of all time? The list is only from 1991 onwards.. :huh:

Again this list mentions the players that have hit 1000 aces in one season since aces have been recorded. That's all it says.

Entering a debate about the most efficient serve without having other details would be even more of a futile discussion as you say. Tanner was a great server but it seems he did not hit as many serves or, more likely, did not have them all recorded. In any case, I believe that players serve and return better nowadays (or in the last 2 decades) due to technics, material and physical training. We could also talk about the “most natural” server, the fastest, or the most difficult to read etc…but my point was that the guy who serves aces at will should simply have the “best serve”. And I stand by it. Now feel free to argue Petalp, there no harm in that.

I wouldn't sway too far away from your definition, but I would say that the guy who can serve the greatest percentage of "unreturnable" serves from his first and second serve... would be my definition of "best serve".

But that then does leave a hole for a player who can serve consistently to the corners with spin and power and the opponent can only just get the ball back into play leading to a winning shot after that from the server..... "best serve" is tough to define. Perhaps a player who wins the greatest percentage of his service games.... is the best server?

For me the best server is the one who gets an inconsiderable amount of First Serves in that are either unreturnable of set ups for cleans winners( the old 1 2 punch).Another point to consider is someone who almost never loses their serves.

But its one of those things like who has the Best Ever Forehand.Some could say Pete Sampras and there are us who would say Roger Federer but it a kettle of fish that really has no clear cut winner!

:darkangel:

Do you not include a player's second serve when rating their overall serving ability?

You point about someone who never loses their serve is essentially the same as my point about the person who wins the greatest percentage of service games. Surely someone who never loses their serve would need a decent second serve?

No!Second Serves are normally viewed in a negative light by just about anyone and is often one of the major causes that can either win or lose a match! so if a person is consistantly serving all their first serves in at high speeds and winning most service games because of it then why even consider the second serve.Unless the serve is a sfast as the first and equally consistant then technically there is no second serve.There was at one stage a time where Gorans first and second serves were the same speed and his second serve was as fast as Petes first serve.

So no GAV I dont really take second serves into the equation! Its a negative light!

:darkangel:

just as a matter of interest, and hopefully one of you tennis know-it-alls can answer, has there ever been a 'perfect set'?

I mean by that, one where a player has not conceded a single point on their serve.

But if one looks at Nadal on clay for instance, he hardly ever loses his serve cause he backs it up so well, so I don't think someone who wins his serve makes especially a good server (though Nadal's serve is certainly not bad).

I believe that a percentage of aces per serves would be much more accurate and even better "aces and winners" per serve woudl be unquestionably the best way. If the ball comes back, then it's not as good as an ace. Even if it might be a good/easy set up for the next shot.

Fair enough chap. But no-one is perfect enough to get their first serves in all the time. And even the best player is going to have lapses where their first serve percentage is low. And you can't tell me that every player is as risky on their second serve as their first. Goran's second serve may have been fast now and again, but he served a lot of double faults at that time... remember his Wimby final. But then you say if your second serve is good enough then it's technically a first serve... which in itself tells me you do rate how good a second serve is!

I rate a second serve very highly, because in tense situations it can be your "Get Out of Jail Free" card!

btw, by 'know-it-alls' I mean that in the most positive way possible, cuz I can't retain knowledge of who played whom and won by which shot type stuff..

By "aces and winners" do you mean "aces and unreturnable serves"?

Just to clarify, nothing sinister, as I know English is not your mother tongue chap. :ok:

Didn't Federer go through something like that at the US? Something like 35 points unanswered on his serve. That is more than a set ...I think! Was it against Roddick?

Exactly. I mean unreturned serves.

Wow, that would be some feat if he did do that. Would you rate that kind of serving better than a set from Karlovic where he served more aces, didn't drop his serve, yet lost on a tiebreak?

crikey :o

I guess the natural follow up question would be 'what's the greatest number of aces by a player in a match?'

Well yes Federer is definetely up there with the best serves but again it says also how good the rest of his game is or maybe how bad the opponent was ;).

Ivo hardly ever makes those lists of best servers because people tend to associate the serve with the rest of the game which is in my view a bit wrong when talking about one shot ....and especially the serve which is the only shot that can actually win a point on its own. A FH and a BH need a very good footwork or anticipation for instance. A serve is auto-sufficient.

The thing to consider with serve might be nerves. Serving under pressure certainly affects serves. But nerves or not nerves Ivo's serve is simply amazing. Roddick said once it was the biggest weapon (that is all shots considered) in the tour. And at 20 aces average per match (probably as many unreturned serves per match) I would certainly agree with that.

Well I dont rate second serves as you may seem to think! Thats a fact. Its always generates a bit of interest in a game when there is a second serve and for that added drama I will rate it but not for the context of this discussion.

Yes no one is perfect but there are those who are really impeccable on their first serves with both power and placement and not to mention consistency ala Pete Sampras.Thats why I hated him coz I knew that whenever someone maufactured a break chance against him,the next serve would be an ace or just as good.The guy was great with his serve.And his standards are the one we should use to measure great servers!

:darkangel:

But if I remember the 35 or was it 39 unanswered points span over 2 sets with the last game of the last set tarnished the perfect set record!

I am not sure it was versus Rod, though but it was this year USO.

No wasnt it this year at the Aussie Open! Im sure thats where it was!

Time flies by but not that fast Darky! Let me do some research and find out who against and when!

Yes - USO 07 versus Lopez!

Fed interview:

Q. Lopez didn't realize that you had won that many points on your serve. Were you aware of it as you were doing it? 35?
ROGER FEDERER: I don't know. What are you talking about?

Q. From the time you were down Love-40 in the first game of the third set, you did not lose a point of your serve until that mishit.
ROGER FEDERER: That's awesome. What, that last game or what?

Q. That last game.
ROGER FEDERER: Oh, come on, what have I done? I should have broken him to win 6-3 so I wouldn't have to serve it out. I was feeling great on the serve, my God. I was serving well and playing aggressive, and things really turned around for me. Yeah, it was an awesome match. I really enjoyed it because he did play very well. Right off the bat was hitting his best shot, and that was tough for me. I was relieved when I got that second set, no doubt.

Congrats to Ivo, I saw him play Max the Beast Myrni at Wimbledon in 2003 and it was a monster serve. It was on court 13 and the fans at the back were taking cover because the balls were hitting the backboard head height with amazing power. There were always murmurs and laughter in the crowd.

By the way Dark, that is some new Emoticon you have there,
quite scary! :pray:

Karlo comes out top for 2007 the highest ace count, but Goran triumphs for 4 yrears-with an albeit slightly smaller count. Surely it's the 'mean' ace count that is significant, again the general trumps the particular. If the particular were the vital stat then the logical conclusion of that would be the most aces in a match-but greatness is determined by the long haul, not an arbitrary cross section (a year).
The problem with a year is the subjectivity of the time period chosen, one could just as easily choose six months, or single match or single tournament?

Looking at the guys on the list it looks as though there is (as might be expected)
a correlation between height and serving ability.

Well obviously Goran did extremely well, consistently over the years. The thing with Ivo is that he has an average game to back up his serve so he is likely to lose earlier in a tournament than the other players in that list. That gives him less chance to hit the 1000s ace barrier in a season. Considering he has played less matches than the others, it says a lot about his serve. In short his serve is roughly the same years in years out but his result might just not be enough to have enough matches to hit 1000 aces every year like Goran.

I would never agree with the opinion Ivo is the best server of all time, the lad is 6’10”, that’s the difference. Imagine the net trimmed to half height; now you’re in Ivo world. He can aim pretty much downwards, so the court is relatively twice as big.
Besides; considering his serving technique to be that good, wouldn’t he have a slightly better forehand or forehand volley? What would be left of his serve if he was 6’1’’? Imo not much.
"What if" doesn't exist and stats don’t lie, I know, and Ivo does a great job to profit from his length but personally i’d say; we’ve seen better servers

point taken.

On a slightly different tac, i wonder who is the greatest player with the poorest serve? i'm trying to think of one, Agassi wasn't a great server by any means, but i'm sure there's another great with a weaker serve.

Davydenko! For me he is a great! ;)

Honestly, with a serve he would have had the better of Federer on a couple of occasions....I feel. This is what I call a would-be-great player.

I think to answer your question more accurately, Connors is the one with a great career with a poor serve and a poor FH! No kidding.

Fair enough Tenez.. well, if your gauging of the best server is by number of aces hit, and the recording of aces has only commenced since 1991, then I would say that you are looking for the best server since data on serves has been recorded, i.e. since 1991.

Could well be the best of all time. Of course I would argue that racquet technology has a huge say in that if you're talking about power of serves. So, already on dicey ground, pre 1991 as it is!

All that I would say is that I would break down the facets of what makes a great server. Just off the top of my head, I would state the following factors:

1. Power
2. Accuracy
3. Disguise
4. Variation
5. Height of player!! :P

Of course, all of these aspects are interlinked.

Maybe aces are a good measure? however, as has already been mentioned, height is a big factor.

Height has given Goran, Karlovic, Isner, etc a noticeable advantage.

That should therefore be factored into teh equation.

And to what extent should the weighting be in these factors?

Who has the best first serve?

Who has the best second serve?

Who has the best serve under pressure, full stop?

Who was the best serve with a wooden racquet in the open era?

Tenez, i'm not throwing any brickbats into your thread. i'm just a bit of a pedant sometimes I guess, and duly threw in my tuppence ha'penny (or euro equivalent).

anyway, i've merely asked questions rather than provided answers. but sometimes the questions that arise from such things are just as, if not more interesting than the original question asked :)

Ah Conners, i havn't seen much of him play as i was too young when he was in his prime, but his serve and forehand didn't look great on the few occasions i have seen him-all credit to him for winning with the talents he did posses.

Connors was a street fighter in tennis terms.. that was his main strength.. oh, and some pretty good groundstrokes.

Was he not one of the first to grunt when serving btw?

Mac's serve was one of the best disguised.. as well as most unorthodox.

Edberg's serve.. poetry in motion..


Fed's is well disguised. He often sets up the point to be wonn from his next shot rather than the serve itself. For me, number of aces isn't quite so important.

Edberg's serve wasnt the best technically or in terms of speed, but it was so precise and always backed it up with those impeccable volleys. Stefan probably had the best backhand volley of all time, and his serve gave him the chances to utilise this shot.

The best serve ever for me is a certain Mr Sampras. So hard to read, great variation in pace and placement and just so many aces anmd unreturnables. It took only exceptional returners to get racquet on ball sometimes( eg Becker, Agassi), but in the crunch, they could still not repel his serving.

Connors had a great slice serve, which i feel the other lefty Mcenroe took to a new level. Just swinging out to a right-handers backhand.

I agree that theres many factors to take into account in deciding who has the best serve ever .Being able to serve aces at will is one, but it says nothing about the number of double faults, or well-placed second serves on big points etc. Im surprised noones mentioned Lendl here , or Borg for that matter .Perhaps not as good as Sampras ,but came through a lot of close matches because of reliable serves . Mental strength is a big part of it as well , the ability to serve aces on big points like we saw Federer do so magnificently this Wimbledon final .
One other player not mentioned , Kevin Curren . He had great wins over McEnroe and Connors at Wimbledon .
I agree that extreme height is an unfair advantage (for the purpose of this debate at least :) )

That's a strange argument GP. :shrug:

I would not say Fed has only got great ground shots because he has a great footwork. Take his footwork away and you'll see his shots being framed more than ever. Great footwork, great heighth? whatever it takes I'd say!...and Karlo has the greatest serve.