Athleticism Is More Important Than Ever

Paul Fein

“A tennis player is the complete athlete. He has to have the speed of a sprinter, the endurance of a marathon runner, the agility of a boxer or fencer, and the gray matter of a good football quarterback. Baseball, football, basketball players are good athletes, but they don’t need all those attributes to perform well.” — Bobby Riggs, triple Wimbledon champion in 1939 and pro champion in 1946−1947, from his 1973 autobiography, Court Hustler

“In tennis you need everything. You need durability, hand-eye coordination, and mental endurance because it’s a one-on-one sport. There’s no help from your coach or manager or anyone out there. Tennis players are tremendous athletes, some of the best in the world. In some ways, it’s even more difficult to play tennis than to play in the NBA. There are no substitutions, no halftimes to recover. You definitely see someone’s true character on the tennis court.” — Pete Sampras, 14-time Grand Slam singles champion, in 2000.

From the sublime artistry of Roger Federer to the uncanny improvisation of Rafael Nadal to the all-court brilliance of Novak Djokovic, the 2012 Australian Open showcased dazzling athleticism. Athletes today are bigger, stronger and faster than ever. When those athletic attributes are combined with superb hand-eye coordination, agility, stamina, technique, tactics, concentration and courage, the results are extraordinary, almost super-human. No more so than in tennis, a sport that requires everything, except for physical contact, and must be sustained—alone—for several hours.

Bob Brett spent 24 years on the ATP circuit coaching players such as Boris Becker, Goran Ivanišević, Andrei Medvedev, Mario Ančić, Marin Čilić and John Lloyd.

After Djokovic and Nadal attacked and defended ferociously in their epic, 5-hour, 53-minute final, Patrick McEnroe, ESPN analyst and former U.S. Davis Cup captain, admiringly said, "You think you've seen almost everything. But it boggles your mind what two guys can do."

While tennis strokes and strategy are endlessly discussed and written about, athleticism has received surprisingly little attention. To learn more about this intriguing and complex subject, I consulted Bob Brett, a former Australian tennis coach and Harry Hopman protègè.

Brett spent 24 years on the ATP circuit coaching players such as Boris Becker, Goran Ivanišević, Andrei Medvedev, Mario Ančić, Marin Čilić and John Lloyd. When Brett, a consultant to under-12 and under-14 players for Tennis Canada, is not conducting seminars and clinics around the world, he's grooming future champions at his academy—Bob Brett Tennis Centre—in San Remo, Italy.

Who are the greatest athletes in tennis history and in tennis today? And why?

I would go back to Lew Hoad for his strength, speed and agility. Roy Emerson excelled as a high-jumper and sprinter. Emerson didn't have the most powerful game, but he had great athleticism, particularly at the net. Sampras and Ivanišević were very fast from 100 to 400 meters, and they were able to jump very high. Ivanišević could jump over seven high hurdles in a row, and he could run 400 meters in 53 seconds without any training, and go 3 meters in the standing long jump.

McEnroe covered the net very well, he anticipated and moved quickly, and his reflexes were terrific. Borg had tremendous speed both laterally and forward, plus great agility and endurance. He was such a versatile athlete that he won six of eight events and beat an Olympic medal-winning hurdler at the European Superstars competition in France in 1979.

Today, Federer has unbelievable speed around the court as well as the ability to change directions and recover. He doesn't cover the net as well as McEnroe did, but in terms of athleticism, Federer is one of the best ever. You don't necessarily think first of Nadal's athleticism, but when you see him move around the court, he has speed, unbelievable endurance, and agility.

Margaret Court was the first woman tennis player to work with weights.

Djokovic covers the court so well, even from outside the sidelines, and he has good balance when he gets there; and that requires excellent athleticism. He makes his opponent play long points, and he can do that because he has great endurance as well. One of the main factors that make all of these players champions is their exceptional athleticism

.Who are the greatest women athletes?

Margaret Court was an unbelievable athlete. Stan Nicoles, the man I worked with for 40 years, was a mentor of mine. He trained many Olympic champions, and he worked with Court starting when she was 15. She won the first of her 11 Australian titles when she was just 17. She was a great runner and once lost by only a small amount to a 200-meters champion. Her speed and strength were remarkable. She was the first woman tennis player to use weights.

Martina Navratilova was another great athlete. She was able to go forward and attack, and she covered the court really well. Steffi Graf was a great runner. She also had great endurance and agility.

I enjoyed watching both Justine Henin and Billie Jean King for their athleticism and the physicality they brought into their game style. Henin’s qualities in these two areas separated her from the others in her era.

Which athletic abilities are the most important and necessary in tennis today? And why?

Speed endurance. That means being able to run at full speed and change speeds and do that for a long period of time, which you saw Djokovic and Nadal do for a 5-hour and 53-minute match in the Australian Open final. They needed agility at the baseline and also to go forward and come back, although they don’t go to the net very often. Flexibility is also important to reach balls behind them and to change direction quickly.

You need strength, and this has changed over the years. There was a time when Andre Agassi was doing heavy weight work [bench pressing over 300 pounds]. Now players try to be lean and strong, but they don’t go for too much strength. Finding the right balance is very important.

Andre Agassi was bench pressing over 300 pounds. While players today try to be lean and strong, they don’t go for too much strength.

Excellent hand-eye coordination is essential. Tennis also requires quick reactions, so the ability to see the ball well and move to exactly where the ball lands is critical. Federer and Djokovic can play closer to the baseline because they need less time than other people, and they’re not pushed back behind the baseline as a lot of other players are.

Today you find that there are so many more physical trainers traveling with the players. So the players are working on their fitness and strength every day.

Which shots and situations require the most athleticism in tennis?

It's shot combinations. The serve-and-volley combination requires the most agility, and it's the most difficult, partly because it hasn't been taught to students at a really young age. So instinctively they don't go to the net as much. They need to have quick reactions to be able to volley balls that are down and away. Also, when the ball is lobbed over your head, you have to sprint back and take it as a smash. And then after the smash, come back quickly to the net. That requires a huge effort and especially to sustain it during a long match. Very few players are able to do that today.

I saw Federer during one of his US Open finals play a forehand on the right sideline and then play a forehand from the backhand corner on the following shot. Needless to say, Federer won the point. What speed, agility and flexibility! Wow!

What exercises and drills do you recommend to improve athletic abilities, such as hand-eye coordination, racket touch, speed, strength, agility, reflexes, flexibility and jumping ability?

Of course, you have exercises that require just your body weight, and you have exercises that include weights to improve your strength. You do running, track work. You need to get used to extending yourself. That's why I like athletics [track and field]. For some runs, you should relax and for others you should push yourself. You can change speeds, so it involves interval training over shorter distances and longer distances, up to 400 and 600 meters. Finding the right balance is really important to be able to sustain yourself during tough matches.

Plyometrics, in terms of jumping, is very good. Ivanišević did a lot of that. You can combine various exercises together effectively—for example, you can have kangaroo jumps, jack-knife jumps, and springing squats. A lot of fitness trainers believe tennis is a sport with only short sprints. That's true, but you definitely need to be able to sustain that for the duration of a point which may be 20 or 30 shots. For example, during Andy Murray's quarterfinal victory over Kei Nishikori at the Australian Open, they had a hard-hitting rally that actually lasted for 42 shots.

For power for your jumps, you can do single leg jumps. You hold a dumbbell in each hand and using a bench that is 20” high—the height depends on the size and maturity of the player—they step up and with the appropriate weight, they jump as high as they can with one leg. Then they land and come down and do three repetitions because it’s more dynamic. The player then repeats the exercise and repetitions without the weight. I have seen players improve significantly with this exercise.

Victoria Azarenka trounced Maria Sharapova 6-3, 6-0 in the Australian Open final, and Azarenka’s superior athleticism was the biggest difference between them. Would you please explain why.

Athletically, Azarenka is much more agile than Sharapova. And physically, the strength of her legs off the ground and her ability to drive the ball produced the power that gave Sharapova very little time to play. In a sense, Azarenka could return most of Sharapova's best shots, but Sharapova had trouble returning most of Azarenka's best shots.

Azarenka was playing closer to the baseline and driving the ball [hard], and that took time away from Sharapova. By driving the ball down the line, Azarenka was able to wrong-foot Sharapova. And Azarenka’s recovery, when she was out of position, was much better than Sharapova’s.

When Sharapova easily beat Serena in the 2004 Wimbledon final, she was driving the ball harder than anyone. Today Azarenka—and others such as Petra Kvitova—are able to do that. In the past year, Azarenka has become stronger and faster, and she’s able to sustain her athleticism throughout long matches. Her strokes and footwork are also very good technically.

In what ways is athleticism in doubles different from athleticism in singles?

The difference in doubles is that even though you’re at the net, it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re fit or a great athlete. The ability to sprint back for a lob and smash it from a difficult position and then sprint back to the net is the test of athleticism. But it’s actually not a great test of athleticism in doubles because you may only be covering 40 percent of the court when you’re serving and volleying with your partner at the net. However, athleticism in doubles is required for reflex volleying and agility during net duels. The doubles players volley better and intercept balls better at net, but it’s only covering a small range.

I remember watching Cilic and [Ivan] Ljubicic play [Leander] Paes and [Mahesh] Bhupathi in Beijing last year, and they completely overpowered Paes and Bhupathi [6-2, 6-3], who had no chance. They served bigger and generally had more weapons, and they didn't play the same percentages, which probably irritated the doubles players. If the singles players played doubles today, you would see fewer doubles specialists because the singles players would understand doubles more and beat many of the doubles specialists.

Since doubles is played much less than ever, has this trend hurt the level of athleticism for some players?

It's definitely hurt it. It's hurt the development of their volleying skills, such as their reflexes, agility and their ability to serve and volley, and especially volley balls that are low and away. Edberg won six major titles in singles, but he was also a very good doubles player with Anders Jarryd. Today's players would undoubtedly benefit from playing doubles.

Since the pace of tennis points has increased this century, has that trend made improvisational skills more important than ever? Which improvisational skills are most essential?

Lighter rackets and better strings allow players to hit the ball harder than ever and get out of trouble and even turn defense into offense. They can hit a backhand winner from two meters behind the baseline, which you could never do with a wood racket. Nadal hit some amazing crosscourt forehand winners from way out of position against Djokovic.

The rallies are generally much longer than before, and the speed of the ball is much faster. When they do come to net, players are quite good at improvising and hitting drop volleys or half-volley drop shots off low balls. They have soft hands.

It’s not really improvisation when Federer runs back and hits a trick shot between his legs with his back to the net for a winner. Other players do it, too. In the past, players hit a forehand or a backhand lob in that situation. But now they’re used to improvising this way because they practice it. Lighter rackets allow them to maneuver it in these situations. Djokovic improvises physically with his elasticity and reach by sliding beautifully on clay and even on hard courts. His flexibility and agility are amazing. He has better court coverage than anyone else.

In what ways do physiotherapists and fitness trainers help unlock and unleash various athletic abilities?

Physiotherapists and fitness trainers help reduce injuries and enable players to train on a consistent basis. Players do a lot of up-to-date exercises using their own body weight, such as spring squats, jack-knives, double-knee jumps or push-ups. They improve your athletic ability. You can also do stride squats which build your leg strength.

Since women have different physiques from men, aside from perhaps muscular and ultra-powerful Serena Williams, how do their athleticism and athletic potential differ from that of men?

The major difference is muscle strength. Often it’s height and power which can produce greater court speed for men. Women’s lesser amount of strength decreases their overall athleticism. Women are also not used to playing with top-level men, and therefore their reactions are a little slower. Their leg strength to get into a hitting position and then to recover is less. Their lesser arm strength doesn’t generate as much rotation [spin] on the ball because they don’t generate as much acceleration with their forearm and the racket head.

Great athleticism is a huge advantage, but not all great athletes, such as Gael Monfils, become great tennis players. Why not? What pitfalls do great athletes face?

The only pitfall I would see is lack of attention on developing a great athlete’s skills. Martina Navratilova honed her athletic skills by getting into great physical condition, but she already had the technical skills. A great athlete without the skills is just a great athlete.

I like Gael, but you have to look at what areas your opponents can expose and exploit in your game. Athleticism may help you win against some opponents, but the great athlete still needs great skills against every opponent to be a champion. Gael has a great serve, and I saw him working very hard with Roger Rasheed in the gym.

Another issue is loyalty to coaches. Breaking a coaching relationship often delays a player’s development because it takes six to nine months to see whether the new coaching is successful or not. Players who change coaches a lot, like Gael, struggle.

Gael’s backhand gets him into trouble because it’s not solid enough, and he can end up a long way behind the baseline. Gael has never used his athleticism enough offensively, and James Blake, another outstanding athlete, never has used his athleticism enough defensively.

What is the connection between great athleticism and smart strategy? Roger Federer exemplifies both assets. How can coaches and teaching pros teach their most talented players to take the utmost advantage of their athleticism?

Champions have athleticism and an intellect for smart strategy. Nadal has athleticism, and he’s also able to use his game effectively, particularly when he plays Federer. He’s tenacious in the long rallies, but he’s also able to come up with some great shots.

Federer has used his great athleticism to connect with his movement and to create an effective strategy. If you look at the 2007 ATP Finals in Shanghai when he beat David Ferrer, his agility, his movement, his recovery, his ability to get inside the court [baseline], and his anticipation was so good he was controlling the center of the court. It was amazing. It was one of the greatest matches I’ve ever seen. Federer has great hand-eye coordination. His movement and positioning when he hits the ball are a great lesson for coaches and for players.

Do different court surfaces require different kinds and amounts of athleticism?

Of course. A hard court requires driving the ball a little more, and it’s easier to hit the ball behind [wrong-foot] the opponent. So it requires taking the ball early at the top of the bounce and then driving it.

Whereas, on clay the ball is often bouncing higher and away, which makes athleticism more difficult to sustain over a long period. Greater endurance and sustainable agility, in terms of countering drop shots and sometimes lobs over your head, are required. There’s such a variety of shots on clay.

It’s a shame grass has become slower and the ball slower as well. If you’re attacking and coming to the net on grass, you need great agility. It’s much easier to attack [net] on grass than to run along the baseline because it’s easier for the opponent to hit the ball behind opponents during baseline rallies. There are some bad bounces on grass, but often the bad bounce is lower. The grass is so well-kept today, and the clay courts are so well-prepared, you don’t get a lot of bad bounces, but on clay the bad bounce tests your hand-eye coordination by jumping up much higher.

On hard courts it’s easier to use your opponent’s power and counter-punch as Djokovic did when he beat Federer in the 2011 Australian Open semifinals. That’s another aspect of athleticism because it requires touch and timing to absorb and control your opponent’s power. And you have to first get in the right position to be able to do that. And that also requires athleticism.

What are the best tactics to use when you play a highly athletic opponent?

Don’t give them too much speed on your shots. If they come to net, try to hit the ball down and away from them.

But it depends where they are really athletic. You might have an athletic guy who is great at the baseline. A good tactic is to give him the short slice [backhand] and find out how he handles it.

When Čilić played Federer at the US Open last year, one of the surprising things was that Marin could play a volley that would have most likely been a winner [against anyone else] and Federer made him play a second volley. And that’s because of his unbelievable speed.
Running forward to get a drop shot is what a highly athletic opponent likes, rather than hitting a short, angled slice that stays low and away and forces him to dig it out.

When Djokovic hits a drop shot against Federer and Nadal, it’s not usually effective. That’s because Djokovic is under more pressure when he hits the drop shot against them because Federer’s and Nadal’s balls come at him differently from the other lower-ranked players, and Federer, especially, starts off very close to the baseline. Both Roger and Rafa are so fast that when they get to drop shots they usually hit a winner.

Can and do super athletes play well with unconventional grips and strokes and footwork? Or should they stick to conventional technique, except when they have to improvise?

I remember when Borg burst on the tennis scene in the early 1970s. So-called “experts” said that he wouldn’t last and that his shoulder would wear out because he was trying to hit so much topspin. They didn’t think he could win Wimbledon. And he won Wimbledon five times. Borg had a Western forehand grip that was unconventional at that time and a two-handed backhand, which was also unconventional then. But he made it conventional, and now about 80 men and 90 women in the top 100 have two-handed backhands.

Today the players improvise with their strokes and grips when they are pulled way off the court and the ball is behind them, and they hit a slice forehand, like a squash shot, which is a new shot in the game. That requires a lot of athleticism and improvising. Kim Clijsters started that in the early part of this century, and then the men copied her.

Tennis players are taller, heavier, faster and stronger than ever, and commensurately pro tennis is more physical than ever. The Australian Open final—in which Novak Djokovic outlasted Rafael Nadal 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7, 7-5 in a record-shattering 5 hours, 53 minutes—was the most grueling match in tennis history. Nadal described it as “the toughest match I ever played.” What is the connection between this increased physicality and athleticism?

Physicality enables players to maintain that athleticism for a long period of time. It’s amazing that Djokovic and Nadal never called for a trainer or got cramps in the final, despite playing for 5 hours, 53 minutes.

As Rod Laver said, the rallies are much longer than before. Players don’t miss shots as much. That’s because of larger, state-of-the-art rackets, better strings and also their own greater athletic ability and size. They’re taller. Players today who are 6’3”, 6’4” and 6’5” are much more agile generally than players in the past. Edberg, at 6’2”, was agile but he didn’t have the same weight of shot that Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal have. He had a great game coming to net. But these guys played nearly six hours at such a high level, which made it, as you said, the most grueling match in history.

Athleticism is an efficiency of movement. Physicality enables players to maintain that athleticism for a long period of time. It’s amazing that Djokovic and Nadal never called for a trainer or got cramps in the final. Nadal went through a period in the second and third sets when he got pushed farther behind the baseline; and then in the fourth set, he started standing close to the baseline and he started moving Djokovic around much more. He saw that tactic as the only thing he could do to give himself a chance to win. It’s hard to believe, but the caliber of play got better in the latter half of the fourth set and in the fifth set.

Ivo Karlovic and John Isner are both 6’10” tall and are renowned for their incredibly powerful serves, but certainly not their athleticism. However, the NBA boasts quite a few super athletes between 6’8” and 7’, such as 6’8” LeBron James, 6’9” Kevin Durant and 6’11” Dwight Howard. Do you think tennis will ever have giants that have the terrific athleticism of 6’1” Roger Federer, 6’1” Rafael Nadal, 6’2” Novak Djokovic and 6’3” Andy Murray?

Rod Laver was a great tennis player, and he was just under 5’9” tall. Today champions from 6’1” to 6’3” are moving as well as Laver did and probably even faster.

You remember Victor Amaya [a world-class player from 1974 to 1983]. He was 6’7” and weighed 225 pounds, and he didn’t have the agility. Whereas now you have 6’6” Del Potro and 6’6” Čilić, and they are pretty agile. They don’t have the same speed as Federer, Nadal and Djokovic; they have other ways to play and win. But you’re seeing how well Andy Murray moves for someone 6’3”.

I think it will get to players 6’5”, 6’6”, and who knows, 6’7” and 6’8”, just as it has in basketball, who are fast and agile. People today, especially in tall families, are attracted to basketball, and they are likely to put their children into basketball. Tennis isn’t attracting that many of the tall individuals today. But that may change.

So how do tennis players stack up against top athletes in other sports?

Some of these sports are specialized and require fewer athletic abilities, and other sports have positions which don’t require all of the sport’s skills, but in tennis you have to do everything and over a longer period of time.

You have to constantly adapt to the ball coming from an opponent while you’re running, and it’s a technique-intensive sport with several different strokes and their many variations that have to be performed correctly while using a lot of athletic ability. And since you’re competing against one opponent, like in boxing, it makes it more intense and combative. In a lot of these other sports, you have a big break between periods and half-times; but in tennis you don’t. And in other sports you have coaching and you’re protected by teammates. You don’t have that luxury in tennis.

When you look at the Australian final between Djokovic and Nadal, they stayed out there much longer, for almost six hours, in an active role. That was a tremendous athletic achievement for both players. All things considered, what they did is more demanding athletically than what you have in other sports.

After the phenomenal, athleticism, skill and will displayed by Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal in the 2012 Australian Open final, Patrick McEnroe, ESPN analyst and former U.S. Davis Cup captain, admiringly said, “You think you’ve seen almost everything. But it boggles your mind what two guys can do.” This century Roger Federer, Nadal and now Djokovic have taken our sport to a new and amazingly high level. In what ways will future champions this decade play even better, even more athletically?

Since I came on the tour in 1979, the players position themselves much closer to the baseline, and they’re hitting the ball with more spin and power. That takes more time away from the opponent. A recent study conducted by the Junior Tennis Ambassadors science team, reported in Florida Tennis, showed in the late 1970s men averaged 3.5 seconds between groundstrokes compared to 2.2 seconds in 2011. For women, the time between shots has decreased from about four seconds to 2.5 seconds.

Federer made a great contribution to the game in his movement and tactics by taking the ball so early and pouncing on weak shots. Djokovic closely resembles Federer by stepping inside the baseline and taking time away from his opponent. Nadal showed how heavy topspin can still be used as an effective weapon because of its speed. And Nadal’s phenomenal physical ability and strength showed he could beat Verdasco in a five-hour Australian Open semifinal in 2009 and then come back [after only 44 hours] and play at that same high level again to beat Federer in five, close sets in the final. Djokovic surpassed even that feat of physical and mental strength at this year’s Australian Open.

In the next five to 10 years, guys will be taller on average, there will be more super-tall players, they will move better, they will serve even faster, and they will play on the baseline and take control of the point even earlier. There will definitely be some champion who people will say is better than Djokovic, Nadal or Federer.

It may not happen by, say 2018, but I definitely think there could be an athletic 6’8”, or even a 6’10”, version of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic by 2025. I would love to see a guy come along with the movement of those three guys and who would also come to the net a lot and use his athleticism there. It would be interesting to see someone with the super talent of Michael Jordan developed from an early age.

Your comments are welcome. Let us know what you think about Paul Fein's article by emailing us here at TennisOne.

Paul Fein

Paul Fein has received more than 30 writing awards and authored three books, Tennis Confidential: Today’s Greatest Players, Matches, and Controversies, You Can Quote Me on That: Greatest Tennis Quips, Insights, and Zingers, and Tennis Confidential II: More of Today’s Greatest Players, Matches, and Controversies. Fein is also a USPTA-certified teaching pro and coach with a Pro-1 rating, former director of the Springfield (Mass.) Satellite Tournament, a former top 10-ranked men’s open New England tournament player, and formerly a No. 1-ranked Super Senior player in New England.