Bublik's Underhand Serve Gamble Fails: Tommy Paul Advances at US Open – Analysis & Impact

Aug 31, 2025

Bublik's Underhand Serve Strategy Backfires: Tommy Paul Advances at US Open

The 2024 US Open witnessed a captivating clash between Alexander Bublik and Tommy Paul, a match that was as much about strategic choices as it was about raw tennis prowess. Bublik, known for his unconventional style and shot-making flair, deployed underhand serves at various points throughout the match. While the tactic is legal, its effectiveness and perceived gamesmanship sparked debate among fans and analysts alike. Ultimately, Paul navigated the unconventional approach, securing a victory and advancing in the tournament. This article delves into the intricacies of Bublik's strategy, its effectiveness (or lack thereof), the responses from Tommy Paul, and the broader implications for the sport.

Understanding the Underhand Serve: A Legal but Controversial Tactic

The underhand serve, though permitted by tennis rules, remains a contentious maneuver. It involves striking the ball below the shoulder with an upward motion, often imparting spin or targeting a specific weakness in the opponent's court positioning. While players like Michael Chang have famously used it in the past, it’s typically viewed as a surprise tactic, reserved for moments when a player feels they need an edge or disrupt the opponent’s rhythm.

Legality: The International Tennis Federation (ITF) rules stipulate that the serve must be delivered with the player standing behind the baseline and within the boundaries of the singles or doubles court. The manner in which the ball is struck is not explicitly restricted, making the underhand serve technically legal.

Controversy: The controversy stems from the perception that the underhand serve is unsportsmanlike or a sign of desperation. Critics argue it lacks the power and athleticism associated with traditional serves and is often employed to exploit an opponent's lack of agility or court awareness. Some consider it a form of psychological warfare.

Bublik's Underhand Serve Arsenal: Tactical Intentions and Execution

Alexander Bublik isn't a stranger to unorthodox plays, and his match against Tommy Paul was no exception. He didn't just throw in a few underhand serves randomly; he seemed to integrate them into his broader strategy, aiming to achieve a few specific objectives:

Disrupting Paul's Rhythm: Tommy Paul is known for his consistent groundstrokes and ability to dictate play from the baseline. By injecting underhand serves, Bublik likely intended to break Paul's rhythm and force him to adjust his court positioning and anticipation.
Exploiting Deep Return Position: Many players, including Paul, often position themselves deep behind the baseline to return serve, especially against powerful servers. The underhand serve, particularly one with significant spin, can catch a deep-positioned player off guard, forcing them to scramble forward and hit an awkward return.
Psychological Advantage: The sheer surprise factor of the underhand serve can unsettle an opponent. Bublik may have aimed to create doubt in Paul's mind, making him second-guess his positioning and strategy on return.
Conserving Energy: While less likely, especially given Bublik's fitness, underhand serves require less explosive energy output compared to traditional serves. This could be a factor in longer matches or when a player is experiencing fatigue.

However, the execution of Bublik's underhand serves wasn't consistently successful. Many of them lacked the necessary pace or spin to trouble Paul significantly. Some landed weakly, allowing Paul to step in and dictate the point with aggressive returns. Others were simply predictable, allowing Paul to anticipate and neutralize the tactic.

Tommy Paul's Response: Adapting and Overcoming the Unconventional

Tommy Paul's ability to adapt to Bublik's strategy was crucial to his victory. Instead of getting flustered or drawn into a psychological battle, Paul maintained his composure and focused on executing his own game plan. His responses to Bublik's underhand serves can be categorized as follows:

Anticipation and Positioning: As the match progressed, Paul became more attuned to the possibility of underhand serves. He started adjusting his return position slightly, anticipating the potential for a short, spinning serve.
Aggressive Returns: Paul consistently looked to attack the underhand serves, stepping inside the baseline and taking the ball early. He aimed to hit aggressive returns down the line or crosscourt, putting Bublik on the defensive.
Maintaining Composure: Perhaps most importantly, Paul didn't allow Bublik's tactics to rattle him. He stayed focused on his own strengths and executed his game plan with discipline, refusing to get drawn into unnecessary arguments or displays of frustration.
Capitalizing on Weak Serves: When Bublik's underhand serves lacked pace or accuracy, Paul pounced. He would often charge the net after a weak return, putting pressure on Bublik to hit a difficult passing shot.

Paul's mental fortitude and tactical adjustments were key to neutralizing Bublik's unconventional approach. He refused to let the novelty of the underhand serves disrupt his focus and consistently capitalized on opportunities to take control of the points.

Analyzing Key Moments and Turning Points

The match featured several pivotal moments where Bublik's underhand serves played a significant role. Analyzing these moments provides valuable insights into the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of the tactic:

Early Sets: In the initial sets, Bublik's underhand serves may have caught Paul off guard a few times, leading to some easy points. However, Paul quickly adjusted, demonstrating his adaptability.
Break Points: Bublik occasionally deployed the underhand serve on break points, presumably to add pressure. However, this gamble often backfired, as Paul was particularly focused and aggressive on these crucial points.
Tight Games: In close games, Bublik's reliance on the underhand serve became more pronounced. This suggests he may have felt the need to disrupt Paul's rhythm and inject some uncertainty into the rallies. However, Paul's composure and aggressive returns often proved decisive.
Late Stages of the Match: As the match wore on, the element of surprise diminished, and Paul became increasingly confident in his ability to handle the underhand serves. Bublik's continued use of the tactic, despite its diminishing returns, may have indicated a lack of alternative strategies.

Reviewing the match statistics, particularly the success rate of Bublik's underhand serves and Paul's return percentages against them, would provide further quantifiable data to support the analysis.

The Broader Implications for Tennis Strategy and Etiquette

Bublik's use of the underhand serve raises broader questions about tennis strategy and etiquette. While the tactic is legal, its perceived gamesmanship and potential for disrupting the flow of the match continue to fuel debate.

Strategic Considerations: The incident highlights the importance of adaptability and versatility in modern tennis. Players must be prepared to face a wide range of playing styles and unconventional tactics. Coaches need to incorporate strategies for dealing with underhand serves into their training programs.

Etiquette and Sportsmanship: The debate surrounding the underhand serve often touches on questions of sportsmanship. While some view it as a legitimate tactic, others consider it disrespectful or a sign of desperation. This underscores the subjective nature of etiquette in tennis and the importance of respecting the spirit of the game.

The Future of the Underhand Serve: It's unlikely that the underhand serve will become a dominant tactic in professional tennis. However, it may continue to be used as a surprise weapon by players looking to gain an edge or disrupt their opponent's rhythm. The key will be execution: the underhand serve must be delivered with sufficient pace, spin, and accuracy to be effective.

Expert Opinions and Commentary

Tennis analysts and commentators have weighed in on Bublik's use of the underhand serve, offering diverse perspectives:

Those in favor: Some argue that Bublik was simply using all the tools at his disposal to try and win the match. They believe that as long as the tactic is legal, players should be free to employ it. They might point to Michael Chang's famous underhand serve against Ivan Lendl as an example of a strategically sound and effective use of the tactic.
Those against: Others criticize Bublik's use of the underhand serve, arguing that it was unsportsmanlike or a sign of disrespect to Tommy Paul. They might suggest that the tactic undermines the athletic and competitive spirit of the game.
Neutral observers: Many analysts take a more nuanced approach, acknowledging the legality of the underhand serve but questioning its effectiveness in Bublik's case. They might argue that the tactic was poorly executed or that Paul was simply too strong and adaptable to be significantly affected by it.

Ultimately, the debate surrounding Bublik's underhand serves reflects the diverse opinions and perspectives within the tennis community. There is no single right or wrong answer, and the validity of the tactic likely depends on the specific context and execution.

Conclusion: Paul's Resilience Triumphs Over Bublik's Gamble

Alexander Bublik's decision to employ underhand serves against Tommy Paul at the US Open was a bold and unconventional strategy. While it may have briefly disrupted Paul's rhythm and caught him off guard, it ultimately proved ineffective in the face of Paul's resilience, adaptability, and superior overall game. Paul's victory serves as a testament to the importance of mental fortitude, tactical adjustments, and consistent execution in high-stakes tennis matches. The debate surrounding Bublik's tactic highlights the ongoing tension between strategic innovation and perceived sportsmanship in the sport, and it is likely to continue to fuel discussions among players, coaches, and fans for years to come.

Further Considerations: Analyzing Underhand Serve Success Rate

To truly understand the efficacy of Bublik's underhand serve strategy, a deeper statistical analysis is required. Key metrics to examine include:

First Serve Percentage: How did Bublik's first serve percentage compare when using the underhand serve versus a traditional serve? A significant drop in first serve percentage with the underhand serve would suggest lower effectiveness.
Second Serve Points Won: Did Bublik win a higher or lower percentage of second serve points when using the underhand serve? This is crucial, as the underhand serve is often seen as a safer option on second serves.
Paul's Return Success: What was Tommy Paul's return success rate against Bublik's underhand serves compared to his traditional serves? Higher return success against the underhand serve indicates its ineffectiveness.
Point Length: Did points initiated with an underhand serve tend to be shorter or longer than those initiated with a traditional serve? A significantly shorter point length might suggest the underhand serve was forcing errors or creating immediate opportunities.
Ace Percentage: While unlikely with an underhand serve, any aces would demonstrate a surprising element of success.

Unfortunately, readily available statistics on underhand serve performance are limited. Television broadcasts and official match data rarely break down serve types with such granularity. However, anecdotal observations and post-match analysis by tennis experts can provide qualitative insights to supplement the lack of quantitative data.

Case Studies: Other Notable Underhand Serves in Tennis History

While Bublik's underhand serves against Paul generated recent attention, the tactic has a long and somewhat checkered history in professional tennis. Examining other notable instances can offer valuable context and perspective:

Michael Chang vs. Ivan Lendl (1989 French Open): Perhaps the most famous example of a successful underhand serve. Chang, battling cramps, used the serve to disrupt Lendl's rhythm and ultimately win the match. This instance is often cited as a strategic masterstroke.
Nick Kyrgios: Kyrgios has frequently used the underhand serve throughout his career, often to varying degrees of success. His use of the tactic is often seen as more about entertainment and psychological gamesmanship than pure strategy.
Martina Hingis: Hingis occasionally employed the underhand serve, particularly on slow clay courts, to disrupt her opponents' rhythm and take advantage of her excellent court sense and touch.
Junior Tournaments: The underhand serve is more common in junior tournaments, as younger players often lack the power and consistency of their older counterparts. It can be a useful tactic for disrupting more powerful opponents.

Comparing and contrasting these different uses of the underhand serve highlights the importance of context, execution, and the individual player's overall game style. What works for one player may not work for another.

The Psychological Impact of Unconventional Tactics

Regardless of its technical effectiveness, the underhand serve undeniably has a psychological impact on opponents. This impact can manifest in several ways:

Disruption of Focus: The unexpected nature of the underhand serve can momentarily disrupt an opponent's concentration, leading to errors or missed opportunities.
Frustration and Anger: Some players find the underhand serve disrespectful or demeaning, leading to frustration and potentially affecting their performance.
Overthinking and Hesitation: The threat of an underhand serve can cause opponents to overthink their return positioning and strategy, leading to hesitation and less aggressive play.
Shift in Momentum: A well-executed underhand serve can create a sudden shift in momentum, giving the server a psychological advantage.

Players who are mentally strong and adaptable are better equipped to handle the psychological challenges posed by unconventional tactics like the underhand serve. Tommy Paul's composure in the face of Bublik's serves is a prime example of this mental fortitude.

Looking Ahead: Will We See More Underhand Serves in the Future?

The future of the underhand serve in professional tennis remains uncertain. While it's unlikely to become a mainstream tactic, it could continue to be used as a surprise weapon by certain players in specific situations.

Factors that could influence the prevalence of the underhand serve include:

Changes in Court Surfaces: Slower court surfaces, such as clay, might make the underhand serve more effective, as they allow for greater spin and placement.
Evolution of Return Strategies: If return strategies become increasingly focused on deep positioning, the underhand serve could become a more viable option for exploiting that positioning.
Increased Emphasis on Tactical Innovation: As tennis becomes increasingly data-driven, coaches and players may be more willing to experiment with unconventional tactics like the underhand serve.
The Influence of High-Profile Players: If a high-profile player consistently uses the underhand serve to great effect, it could inspire other players to adopt the tactic.

Ultimately, the success of the underhand serve will depend on its execution and its ability to generate positive results for the player using it. It's not a magic bullet, but it can be a valuable tool in the hands of a skilled and strategic player.

The Importance of Adaptability in Modern Tennis

Bublik's underhand serve and Tommy Paul's response underscore a critical element of success in modern tennis: adaptability. The sport is constantly evolving, with players pushing the boundaries of strategy, technique, and athleticism. To thrive in this environment, players must be able to:

Adjust to Different Playing Styles: Facing opponents with diverse strengths and weaknesses requires the ability to adapt tactics and strategies on the fly.
Respond to Unexpected Situations: Unforeseen events, such as weather delays, injuries, or unconventional tactics, can disrupt a player's rhythm and require quick thinking and adaptability.
Learn from Mistakes: Analyzing past performances, identifying areas for improvement, and implementing changes are essential for continuous growth and adaptation.
Embrace Innovation: Being open to new ideas and technologies can provide a competitive edge and facilitate adaptation to the evolving landscape of the sport.

Tommy Paul's ability to adapt to Bublik's unconventional serves was a key factor in his victory. His composure, tactical adjustments, and aggressive returns demonstrated the importance of adaptability in overcoming unexpected challenges.

In conclusion, the match between Alexander Bublik and Tommy Paul at the US Open was more than just a tennis match; it was a case study in strategy, adaptability, and the ever-evolving nature of the sport. Bublik's underhand serve gamble may not have paid off, but it sparked a conversation about the boundaries of tennis etiquette and the importance of embracing unconventional tactics. And while the underhand serve may remain a controversial topic, one thing is certain: Tommy Paul's ability to adjust and overcome the challenge solidified his position as a force to be reckoned with in the world of professional tennis.