Tennis skill assessment

Research Article
DOI: 10.1002/jst.112

Towards a wearable device for skill assessment and skill

acquisition of a tennis player during the first serve
Amin Ahmadi1,2, David Rowlands1 and Daniel Arthur James1,2,
1
Centre for Wireless Monitoring and Applications, Griffith University, Australia
2
Centre of Excellence for Applied Sport Science Research, Queensland Academy of Sport, Australia

In this article, the possibility of using wearable gyroscope sensors for skill
assessment and skill acquisition was investigated. Marker-based methods were Keywords:
. tennis
used initially to capture the fast rotational motions and simulate the outputs of . serve
gyroscope sensors. Utilizing the marker-based methods, the angular velocity of . assessment
the upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation were . skill
calculated for a range of athletes using the trajectory of Vicon markers with . inertial sensor
respect to the Plug-in Gait model during the first serve in tennis. Participants
from amateur to elite participated in this study. Thirty successful serves from
each participant were assessed. The results showed that the peak values of the
upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation just before
impact are indicative in classifying the participants’ skill level. It was shown
that all the three parameters, as well as the racquet head speed, increased as
the level of proficiency of the participants increased. A line (R2 5 0.89) was
fitted to the scatter data containing the upper arm internal rotation, wrist
flexion, and racquet head speed. The fit line is a function of upper arm rotation
and wrist flexion. The fit line can be used as a potential skill acquisition tool to
provide feedback on which variables (upper arm internal rotation, wrist
flexion, or shoulder rotation) need to be improved. The positions of three
gyroscope sensors to detect the same trends as those from the marker-based
methods were determined. Therefore, it is envisaged that gyroscope sensors
could be used for skill assessment and skill acquisition for a first tennis serve.
r 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd

1. INTRODUCTION assess the performance is based on the observation of an expert

Evaluating the performance of athletes during competition or
even during training sessions has always been a hot topic
among coaches and sports scientists [1]. This is important, as
the correct evaluation feedback could result in enhancing the
performance of athletes. One common and traditional way to
*Griffith School of Engineering, Nathan Campus, Griffith University,
170 Kessels Road, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia.
E-mail: d.james@griffith.edu.au
person, such as a coach. However, there are two disadvantages
associated with this subjective method. First, since it is a sub-
jective method, different coaches could have slightly different
ideas based upon their experience. Second, there are some fast
motions during an action that cannot be captured by human
eyes. Therefore, the need for an objective method rather than
a subjective method was raised.
Videography was used by sports scientists to monitor and
study the biomechanics of various actions, such as the tennis
serve, to provide insight into physical activity levels associated
with performance, as well as the skill-based technique involved

Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136 & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd 129
 Research Article
in the activity [1]. There are some disadvantages associated with
this method. One of the main disadvantages is that it is not
possible to provide real-time feedback to the athletes, and in
particular, tennis players during a training session, as tedious
post-processing is required to extract and analyze the collected
data. This leads to use other technologies to monitor the
athletes during sporting activities. Inertial sensor technology as
one of the growing technologies in the field of sports monitoring
is becoming more popular, as it has some advantages over the
previous method.
Improvements in microelectronics and other microtech-
nologies have made it possible to take advantage of using
miniaturized, light, inexpensive inertial sensors, including
accelerometers and gyroscopes to capture and analyze the
movements of athletes during many sporting activities. For
instance, acceleration sensor technology has been used to
analyze kinetic processes for golfers’ lateral swing [2] and in
swimming [3].Within many sporting applications, the sensors
are now used to measure and classify activity and effort
levels [4–5]. For instance, inertial sensors were employed to
distinguish between amateur and subelite tennis players during
the first serve [6]. It is envisaged that these inertial sensors can
be worn by athletes at all levels to monitor their performance
without hindering it. In spite of all the advantages, inertial
gyroscope sensors are not fast enough to capture fast-rate
rotational motions. Therefore, a method to simulate the
behavior of the gyroscope sensors is required.
Marker-based virtual gyroscopes (MBVG) were developed
to overcome the drawback associated with gyroscopes to mea-
sure the upper arm internal rotation [7]. The MBVG method
works with the help of optical monitoring motion capture sys-
tems, such as Vicon (Vicon Motion Systems Ltd., Oxford, UK).
The trajectory of three reflective markers, which were not in a
straight line in 3-D, were captured and passed to the MBVG
algorithm to measure the rate of rotational motion. The main
purpose of the MBVG is to predict the maximum value, as well
as the trends in rotational velocities when the inertial gyroscope
is not able to measure the action due to high-speed motion.
Also, the MBVG method can save a lot of time by eliminating
the trial-and-error method to find out the best sensor position.
Tennis is recognized as one of the most popular sports
around the world, as it is played at all levels, including socially
and professionally [8]. In order to win the match, or at least get
better results, athletes need to improve their ground strokes, as
well as their serves. According to Bahamonde [9], among
various strokes in tennis, the tennis serve is the most important
and critical stroke. It is also known that a fast serve can
dominant the game at the elite level [9–10]. Therefore, for a
tennis player to be more successful during the match, he/she
needs to master the serve action. In order to master the tennis
serve, it is important to recognize the main contributors to
produce the fast serve. According to Marshall and Elliott [11],
internal upper arm rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rota-
tion play critical roles in generatin the fast first serve from the
maximum knee flexion to hit the ball.
The aim of this article is show that gyroscope sensors as
wearable devices can possibly be used for skill assessment and
acquisition during the tennis serve motion once the fast-enough
gyroscopes are developed. In order to show this, the behavior of
130 www.sportstechjournal.com & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd
A. Ahmadi, D. Rowlands and D. A. James
gyroscopes was simulated using the marker-based methods. By
using the Vicon standard Plug-in Gait marker placement (Vicon
Motion Systems Ltd., Oxford, UK), four male tennis players
during the first tennis serve were assessed. One amateur, two
subelites, and one elite player were studied. In order to determine
the upper arm internal rotation, the MBVG method was used.
Other marker-based methods were used to determine the wrist
flexion and shoulder rotation. The upper arm internal rotation,
wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation velocity were measured,
since they were reported as the main contributors for the tennis
serve after the maximum knee extension [11]. Also, the output
from the developed methods were compared and found to be
closely matched with those from the gyroscope sensors.
2. METHODS
2.1 Marker-Based Technology
Four right-handed, male tennis players, including one
amateur, two subelites, and one elite tennis player were studied
in this experiment. The Vicon motion-capturing system using
the standard Plug-in Gait model was used, and optical markers
were attached on the upper body of each participant. The place-
ment of markers, with respect to the standard Plug-in Gait
model, is shown in Figure 1a. Eight cameras were used to record
the data at 100 frames per second. The participants were to
serve at a target region. If the serve was not inside the region, it
would not count as a successful serve. This corresponded to the
area needed to serve the ball into the service box. Thirty success-
ful first serves were collected from each player for analysis. All
the players used the same tennis racquet during the experiment.
Some marker-based algorithms were developed to calculate the
upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation
during the first tennis serve action.
Upper arm internal rotation is one of the main con-
tributors (54 per cent contribution) [11] to the forward speed of
the racquet at impact during a first tennis serve [11]. Three
markers on the right upper arm, including the right shoulder
(RSHO) marker, right elbow marker, and the right upper arm
Figure 1. (a) Marker placement with respect to the Vicon Plug-In Gait
model, as well as the required vectors, to determine the wrist flexion
ƒ! ƒ! !
( V1 and V2 ) and shoulder rotation (U ). (b) Markers M1 and M2
attached at the sides of the head of the tennis racquet. Centre point C
is also shown.
Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136
Tennis skill assessment
marker, were used to measure the angular rotation and thus
the angular velocity of the upper arm using the MBVG
method. The calculation was based upon the developed algo-
rithm by Ahmadi et al. in 2009 [7]. The act of upper arm
internal rotation is shown in Figure 2.
Wrist flexion is the next main contributor (31 per cent con-
tribution) [11] to the forward speed of the racquet at impact.
Wrist flexion is the bending action of the wrist joint, as shown in
Figure 2. In order to determine the wrist flexion, three markers
were used: one on the forearm (RFRA), one on the wrist
(RWRB), and one on the hand (RFIN). Using the three mar-
~ and vector V2
kers, vector V1 ~ were created, as shown in Figure
~
1a. The V1 was defined as a vector from RWRB to RFRA, and
~ was defined as a vector from RWRB to RFIN. The angle
the V2
between the two vectors was calculated and then differentiated
over time to obtain the wrist flexion angular velocity.
Forward shoulder rotation (positive rotation about the
medial axis) is another main contributor (10 per cent contri-
bution) [11] to the forward speed of a tennis racquet at impact.
In this article, instead of forward shoulder rotation, the term
‘shoulder rotation’ will be used. Shoulder rotation motion is
shown in Figure 3(a).
A marker on the RSHO and the left shoulder (LSHO)
joints were used to define vector U ~ from marker point RSHO
Figure 2. Upper arm internal rotation and wrist flexion (with 54 per
cent and 31 per cent contribution during the forward swing of the
serve, respectively) [11].
Figure 3. (a) Shoulder rotation in the transverse plane about the medial
axis (10 per cent contribution during the forward swing of the serve) and
the direction of rotation are shown.(b) Horizontal plane (transverse plane)
!
(P), vector from right shoulder to left shoulder (U ), vector in a stationary
! ! !
position (U s ), and the projected vector (U P ), projected U onto the P
plane through angle a and the rotation angle b are shown.
Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136 & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd
to marker point LSHO. Vector U ~ is shown in Figure 1.
In order to calculate the shoulder rotation, some terms need to
be defined as follows: U ~s , the U
~ vector when an athlete is
standing upright without any movement prior to the serve; P,
horizontal plane (transverse plane) encompassing the U; ~ and
~ is projected U
U, ~ onto the P plane through angle a.
Due to the normal movement of an athlete during the
tennis serve (trunk incline/decline), the U~ vector can make an
angle with the horizontal plane. Therefore, it is needed to
project the U~ vectors first on a horizontal plane to obtain U ~P
and then calculate the angle between the projected vectors U ~P
~
and the Us to determine the shoulder rotation angle. In other
words, shoulder rotation is angle b subtended between U ~P
and U~S on the P plane, as shown in Figure 3(b). The shoulder
rotation angular velocity can be then calculated by differ-
entiating the calculated shoulder rotation angle over time.
In order to calculate the forward racquet head speed, two
markers, M1 and M2, were attached on the sides of the head of
the tennis racquet in a way that the median point of the two
markers could define a point C as the centre of the head of the
racquet. The tennis racquet, the attached markers, and the
calculated centre point C are shown in Figure 1(b). It should be
noted that throughout this article, the term ‘racquet head speed’
is used instead of ‘forward racquet head speed’. The horizontal
component of the centre point of the racquet head (forward
motion) was extracted to calculate the linear forward racquet
head speed. The linear velocity of the extracted centre point was
calculated by differentiating the position of point C over time.
2.2 Inertial Sensor Technology
Three inertial sensor-based devices [12] were used in this
study. Each sensor-based device contained one 1D ADXRS300
gyroscope sensor (Brisbane, Queensland, Australia) and was
sampled at 100 Hz [12].
The dimension of the sensor device is 52 mm long  34 mm
wide  12 mm high, weighs approximately 22 g, and is small and
light enough to be mounted on different segments of an athlete.
It is a microcontroller-based platform contacting a tri-axial ac-
celerometer to measure acceleration, a 1-D gyroscope to measure
angular velocity, on-board memory to record the sessions, radio
frequency (RF) link to control the unit from distance, LCD
screen to interact with the device, USB port to download the
collected sessions and charge the device, and five-way push
buttons to turn the device on and off and control data recording.
The technical details of the device are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Technical specification for the inertial sensor device [12].
Components Description
Processor Atmel ATMEGA 128
Sensors Kionix KXM52-1050,3axis 2G accelerometer
ADXRS300 gyroscope
Radio Nordic NRF2401, 2.4 GHz radio with internal
patch antenna
Memory 128-MB flash memory
Inputs/outputs LCD screen, USB port, and a push button
www.sportstechjournal.com 131
 Research Article A. Ahmadi, D. Rowlands and D. A. James

Figure 4. Placement of gyroscope sensors on the chest to measure

shoulder rotation (gyroscope A), the upper arm to measure upper arm
internal rotation (gyroscope B), and the hand to measure the wrist
flexion (gyroscope C).

The placement of the three gyroscope sensors to determine

the upper arm rotation, shoulder rotation, and wrist flexion is
shown in Figure 4. Gyroscope sensors were light enough to be
mounted on the body using double-sided tape. Gyroscope A,
which was mounted on the chest, determined the shoulder
rotation; gyroscope B, which was mounted on the upper arm,
determined the upper arm internal rotation; and gyroscope C,
which was mounted on the hand, determined the wrist flexion.
The correlation between the maximum peak of upper arm
internal rotation, wrist flexion, shoulder rotation, racquet head
speed, and skill level is presented in the Results and Discussion
sections. In addition, the output comparison between the
marker-based methods and gyroscope sensors is shown.
The following Results and Discussion sections are divided
into five topics: skill assessment, skill acquisition, removing rac-
quet head speed dependence, gyroscope sensor placement, and
simulated gyroscope. The focus of the skill assessment section is
to show how athletes can be assessed with respect to the peak
values of their main contributors during the first serve prior to
impact. The focus of the skill acquisition section is to show how
to apply the obtained results from the skill assessment section to
provide possible feedback to the athlete so that they are able to
compare their serves with an elite’s serves to try to improve their
swings. The focus of the removing racquet head speed depen-
dence is to show that skill assessment and skill acquisition can be
done in the absence of racquet head speed. The focus of the
gyroscope sensor placement section is to show that there is a close
relationship between the output of the sensors on the chest and
on the hand and those from the marker-based methods. Finally,
the focus of the simulated gyroscope section is to show that Figure 5. Peak of the angular velocity of (a) the upper arm internal
simulated gyroscope sensors are capable of measuring skill as- rotation, (b) the wrist flexion and (c) the shoulder rotation versus
sessment and skill acquisition for high-speed serves. racquet head speed. Participant 1 is an amateur, participants 2 and 3
were subelite, and participant 4 was an elite tennis player.
participant 1; J participant 2; + participant 3; } participant 4.

3. RESULTS
3.1 Skill Assessment
The angular velocity of the upper arm internal rotation,
wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation was calculated for the 31st
serves for each athlete. Figure 5 shows the relationship bet-
ween the peak values of the main contributors containing the
upper arm internal rotation (54 per cent contribution), wrist
flexion (31 per cent contribution), and shoulder rotation
(10 per cent contribution), with respect to the racquet head
speed during the first tennis serve for all the participants.
Participant 1 was an amateur player, participants 2 and 3
were subelite players, and participant 4 was an elite player.
3.2 Skill Acquisition
In this section, a possible method for skill improvement is
shown. Scatter plots for the upper arm rotation and the wrist

132 www.sportstechjournal.com & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136
Tennis skill assessment

Figure 6. Line of improvement as a function of upper arm internal

rotation, wrist flexion, and racquet head speed.

flexion as dependant variables, and the racquet head speed as

an independent variable, are shown in Figure 6.
Upper arm internal rotation and wrist flexion were chosen
as they have more contribution effects and importance to the
maximum racquet head speed after the maximum knee flexion
in the first tennis serve. As shown in Figure 6, there is well-
separated clustering for different skill levels. According to
the shape of the scatter data, a straight line can be fitted to the Figure 7. Use of a line of improvement in the absence of racquet head
data. The least-squared fit technique was applied to create speed by (a) using upper arm and wrist data and (b) upper arm, wrist,
the fit line (R2 5 0.89). The equation of the fit line is: and shoulder data.

x  18:19 y  5:45 z  20:94
¼ ¼ ¼t
30:90 19:04 9:65
3.3 Removing Racquet Head Speed Dependence
It has already been shown in Figure 5 that there is a linear
relationship between each main contributor (upper arm in-
ternal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation) to the
racquet head speed. This means that the values of the con-
tributors were increasing as the racquet head speed increased.
Therefore, it is possible to remove the racquet head speed and
define the line of improvement in 2-D by only using the upper
arm data and wrist data instead of the 3-D case as shown in
Figure 7(a). It is also possible to remove the racquet head
speed and define the line of improvement in 3-D by using the
upper arm, wrist, and shoulder data as shown in Figure 7(b).
Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and significant difference
ð1Þ
test results (P) were used to quantify the relationship between
the slow motion serve and the normal speed serve action. The
correlation between the slow motion serve and the normal speed
serve was found to have similar trends (r 5 0.8680, Po0.0001).
A previous study [7] has shown that a gyroscope can
follow the trends of a slow motion serve. Figure 8(a,b) shows
that a gyroscope can follow the trends of the wrist flexion and
the shoulder rotation for a slow motion serve. This shows that
gyroscopes are capable of following the trends of a serve.
It was shown that gyroscopes can capture the components
of the movements for a tennis serve. Further in the text,
simulated gyroscopes are developed and used for classifying
athletes during a high-speed first serve in tennis.
4. DISCUSSION

4.1 Skill Assessment

3.4 Gyroscope Sensor Placement
The aim of this section is to show that gyroscope sensors
could be used as wearable devices to determine the peak of the
upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation
during the forward motion of the tennis serve and thus, they can
be used as a potential skill assessment and acquisition tool. Due
to the limitation of gyroscope sensors to detect the fast rate of
rotational motions, slow motion serves rather than a normal
power first serve were performed. The biomechanic movement
of the slow motion serve was observed to be similar to that of
the normal speed serve, except that ball was hit with less power.
In Figure 5(a–c), clear bands can be seen between the main
contributors and the racquet head speed. A relationship between
each main contributor and the racquet head speed can be seen for
each banding. The band shows that the racquet head speed is
increased for increasing skill level as expected from the literature
[11]. It can be seen that the upper arm internal rotation, wrist
flexion, and shoulder rotation are increasing for increasing skill
level. For instance, participant 4 (elite player) has higher peak
values than participant 1 (amateur player), and the peak values
from participants 2 and 3 are higher than those of participant 1
and lower than those of participant 4.

Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136 & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd www.sportstechjournal.com 133
 Research Article
Figure 8. Comparison between the gyroscope sensor output (mea-
sured) and the marker-based developed methods (calculated) for (a)
shoulder rotation angular velocity (b) and wrist flexion angular velocity
during the slow motion tennis serve. measured; calculated.
Also, distinct clustering can be seen between the different
skill levels. In Figure 5, it can be seen that the lower cluster
belongs to an amateur player, the middle cluster relates to the
subelite players, and the top cluster corresponds to the elite
player. This is also expected due to the fact that elite players
generate more racquet head speed, which means that upper
arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation are
also increased, since they contribute approximately 85 per cent
to the racquet head speed at impact. Therefore, According to
Figure 5a–c, athletes can be assessed and classified with respect
to the peak of the upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion,
and shoulder rotation respectively prior to impact.
4.2 Skill Acquisition
It can be seen in Figure 6 that higher values on the line
correspond to more skilful athletes. For instance, low racquet
head speed, upper arm, and wrist values belong to amateur
player right at the bottom of the line. Those values are growing
for subelite players and the highest values correspond to the elite
players. The line shows a progression from amateur to subelite to
elite, so it is possible to think of this line as a line of improvement.
134 www.sportstechjournal.com & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd
A. Ahmadi, D. Rowlands and D. A. James
Figure 9. Suggested method to use the line of improvement is shown.
P1 is a new collected data point and P2 is the mapped version of P1 in
!
a way that both P1 and P2 have the same racquet head speed. d is
the distance vector between P1 and P2.
It indicates that the higher one is on the line, the closer to the
professional serve. This line is not the line of ‘best technique’, but
indicates a traversal path that can be followed to improve from
amateur to elite. It should be noted that this line is generated
from the available population of athletes and would benefit from
a greater number of players and serves. However, the line is still
an indicator of skill acquisition and skill improvement.
All athletes have different needs, so the different require-
ments from athletes in different levels dictate the way the line is
used. It is up to the coaches and sport scientists to interpret
the results and provide the relevant feedback to a player. An
example method of using the line of improvement for the 3-D
case is as follows. Data point P1 consists of the racquet head
speed, wrist flexion, and upper arm internal rotation collected
from a player during the first serve in tennis. The collected data
point (P1) can then be mapped onto the line of improvement to
give point P2, as shown in Figure 9. P2 is obtained in such a way
that both points (P1 and P2) have the same racquet head speed.
The components of the distance vector d~ between P1 and P2
can identify the amount of upper arm rotation and wrist flexion
improvement needed to approach the line of improvement.
Once the athlete has approached the line, it is possible to climb
up the line to obtain a higher skill level. The ability to traverse
the line may be limited based upon the physiology of the player,
which may prevent him/her traversing further.
As will be discussed in the next sections, the ultimate aim is
to use the gyroscope sensors and measure the players and pro-
vide real-time feedback on the field during a training session.
However, using the gyroscope sensors, the racquet head speed
cannot be easily determined. Therefore, it is needed to show that
skill assessment, as well as the skill acquisition, are still feasible in
the absence of the racquet head speed. In the following section,
it is shown that it is possible to remove the dependence of the
racquet head speed and still see banding and separate clustering.
4.3 Removing Racquet Head Speed Dependence
Figure 7(a) shows the relationship between the upper arm
and wrist data and the skill level. According to the shape of the
Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136
Tennis skill assessment

data, a straight line was fitted to the data (direction vector

V~d1 ¼ h10; 16:5i, R2 5 0.85). It shows that the line of im-
provement is valid in the absence of the racquet head speed.
Similar to the 3-D case, the line of improvement (direction
vector V~d2 ¼ h37:9; 9:05; 11:44i, R2 5 0.87) can be defined in 4-
D by including the shoulder rotation as another dependant
variable and can be reduced to the 3-D case by removing the
racquet head speed as shown in Figure 7(b). Figure 7(b) shows
that the line of improvement can be defined by using the
data of the three main contributors (upper arm rotation,
wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation) in the absence of the
racquet head speed. The linear relationship between the
three main contributors and the skill level is clearly shown
in Figure 7(b). Therefore, skill assessment and acquisition
can be done without any knowledge of the racquet head
speed values.

4.4 Simulated Gyroscope

The aim of this section is to show that simulated gyroscope

sensors are capable of measuring skill assessment and skill
acquisition for high-speed serves. In the previous sections, the
marker-based methods were used to calculate the upper arm
internal rotation, wrist flexion, and shoulder rotation only,
and athletes were assessed based upon the peak values of the
angular velocities of those three elements. However, gyroscope
sensors show more complex rotations due to linkage of seg-
ments of the body. Therefore, simulated gyroscopes based
upon marker positions were developed to simulate the output
behavior of the gyroscope sensors. In this section, the effect of
segment linkage on the upper arm internal rotation, wrist
flexion, and shoulder rotation during the forward motion of
the tennis serve is discussed.
A previous study [7] indicated that the output of a simu-
lated gyroscope sensor on the upper arm is influenced by the
upper arm internal rotation, as well as the shoulder rotation.
Therefore, simulated gyroscope for the upper arm will contain
the summation of the calculated upper arm internal rotation
and the calculated wrist flexion only. In Figure 10(a), the peak
values for the shoulder rotation plus upper arm internal
rotation versus racquet head speed is shown during a high-
speed tennis serve. A clear banding can also be seen, as well as
different clustering for different skill levels. This indicates that
a gyroscope sensor on the upper arm can allow skill level to be
distinguished.
In order to determine the wrist flexion, a simulated gyro-
scope needs to be placed on the hand, as shown in Figure 4. As
can be seen in Figure 8(b), the measured sensor output and the
calculated wrist flexion angular velocity only are very close.
Thus, a simulated gyroscope for wrist flexion will consist of the
calculated wrist flexion only.
In order to determine the shoulder rotation, a simulated
gyroscope needs to be placed on the chest, as shown in Figure 4.
It was found that the gyroscope sensor on the chest is not
greatly influenced by any segment linkages of the body during
the service action, as can be seen in Figure 8(a). Therefore, the
calculated shoulder rotation can be used for the simulated
gyroscope as it can follow the trends.
Figure 10. (a) Skill assessment using the simulated gyroscope.
(b) Line of improvement created using the simulated gyroscope.
participant 1; J participant 2; + participant 3; } participant 4.
To determine if skill assessment can be seen using simu-
lated gyroscopes, the racquet head speed versus simulated
gyroscopes were plotted, as seen in Figure 10. In Figure 10(a),
well-separated clusters are apparent for different skill levels.
In Figure 10(b), different clusters for different skill levels are
shown. It can be seen that a line of improvement (direction
vector V~d3 ¼ h21:75; 5:5; 20:94i, R2 5 0.87) can be fitted to the
clusters as a potential tool for skill assessment.
Since the simulated gyroscope sensors can be used to
model a high-speed serve, it can be suggested that the sensor
technology as a wearable technology can be used to assess the
performance of athletes and to provide the required feedback
to the athletes on the field during a training session. However,
due to the technology limitations, the currently-available gy-
roscope sensors are not yet capable of measuring the fast ro-
tational motion. As a result, as soon as technology is advanced
enough to develop high-range gyroscopes, it is feasible to
employ them as a training device on the tennis court.
5. CONCLUSION
In this study, athletes were assessed according to the mea-
surements of the main contributors between the point of the
maximum knee flexion and the point of impact during the first
serve in tennis. The trajectory of marker positions on the upper
body with respect to the Vicon Plug-in Gait model was used to
develop the marker-based methods to calculate the angular ve-
locity of each main contributor to generate the serve. The peak

Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136 & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd www.sportstechjournal.com 135
 Research Article
values of the upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion, and
shoulder rotation angular velocities were calculated for athletes
with different skill levels and plotted against racquet head speed.
Clear banding and well-separated clustering were shown for
different skill levels. Due to the fact that skill acquisition was an
important aspect of this study, the line of improvement was
developed. The line was the best fit through the clusters obtained
from the available population and indicated the path of im-
provement from amateur players to elite player. The distance
vector between any new collected data and the mapped data on
the line contains required vector components information on
how to fix the deficiency. It was also shown that due to the linear
relationship between the racquet head speed and all the three
main contributors (upper arm internal rotation, wrist flexion,
and shoulder rotation), skill assessment/acquisition can be ap-
parent without the use of the racquet head speed.
It was also shown that there is a reasonably close match
between the calculated results and the measured results using
the inertial gyroscope sensors during the slow motion serve in
tennis. It was found that all the required angular velocities for
the skill assessment and skill acquisition can be obtained using
three gyroscope sensors mounted on the upper arm, the chest,
and the hand. Therefore, it will be possible to measure the
athletes on the field and provide them with time feedback when
the fast gyroscopes are developed.
In this study, three gyroscopes were suggested to measure
performance, and thus classify the athletes according to the
peak of the main contributors during the first tennis serve. In
future, further studies will be required to minimize the number
of sensors and ideally use only one sensor to capture the whole
swing.
Overall, this article suggests a method to examine the use
of gyroscope sensors as a wearable device to assess the per-
formance of tennis players during the first serve. This helps
athletes with different skill levels to be monitored and assessed
in the real environment (tennis court) instead of laboratories,
and obtains real-time or close to real-time feedback on the field
during training sessions. Also, since the gyroscope sensor
technology is cheap compared to the other technologies, it
makes it possible that a wide range of tennis players could
benefit from using the sensor technology.
136 www.sportstechjournal.com & 2010 John Wiley and Sons Asia Pte Ltd
A. Ahmadi, D. Rowlands and D. A. James
REFERENCES
1. Sprigings R, Marshall B, Elliott B, Jennings L. A three-dimensional
kinematic method for determining the effectiveness of arm segment
rotations in producing racquet-head speed. Journal of Biomechanics 1994;
27: 245–254.
2. Ohgi Y, Baba T. Measurement of deceleration of golfer’s sway and unlock
timing in driver swing motion. In Subic A, Ujihashi S (Eds), The Impact of
Technology of Sport. Australasian Sports Technology Alliance: Japan,
2005; 349–354.
3. Davey N, Anderson M, James DA. Validation trial of an accelerometer-
based sensor platform for swimming. Sports Technology 2008; 1(4): 202–207.
4. Harding JW, Mackintosh GC, Martin DT, Hahn AG, James DA.
Automatic scoring for elite half-pipe snowboard competition: important
sporting development or techno distraction? Sports Technology 2008; 1(6):
277–290.
5. Wixted A, Thiel D, Hahn A, Gore C, Pyne D, James DA. Measurement of
energy expenditure in elite athletes using MEMS–based inertial sensors.
IEEE Sensors Journal 2007; 7(4): 481–488.
6. Ahmadi A, Rowlands D, James DA. Investigating the translational and
rotational motion of the swing using accelerometers for athlete skill assessment.
Proceedings of IEEE Sensor Conference; 22– 25 October 2006, Daegu, Korea.
7. Ahmadi A, Rowlands D, James DA. Measuring upper arm rotation in
tennis serves using videography, inertial and a novel marker based
technologies. Journal of Sports Engineering, submitted April 2009.
8. Ahmadi A, Rowlands D, James DA. Technology to monitor and
enhance the performance of a tennis player. In Pope N, Kuhn K, Forster J
(Eds), Digital Sport for Performance Enhancement and Competitive Evolution:
Intelligent Gaming Technology 2009; pp 101–121. USA: IGI Global.
9. Bahamonde R. Changes in angular momentum during the tennis serve.
Journal of Sports Sciences 2000; 18: 579–592.
10. Gordon BJ, Dapena J. Contributions of the joint rotations to racquet speed
in the tennis serve. Journal of Sports Sciences 2004; 24(1): 31–49.
11. Marshall RN, Elliot BC. Long-axis rotation: The missing link in
proximal-to- distal segmental sequencing. Journal of Sports Sciences
2000; 18: 247–254.
12. Davey N, Wixted A, Ohgi Y, James DA. A low cost self contained plat-
form for human motion analysis. Proceeding of the 3rd Asia Pacific
Conference on Sports Technology; 23–26 September 2007, Singapore.
Received 11 July 2009
Revised 9 October 2009
Accepted 12 October 2009
Published online 7 February 2010
Sports Technol. 2009, 2, No. 3–4, 129–136