Executing a Successful Third Shot Drop in Pickleball

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2501.00163
• Title: Executing a Successful Third Shot Drop in Pickleball
• Authors: Douw Steyn, Troy Mithrush, Chris Koentges, Susan Andrews, Andre Plourde
• Classification: physics.soc-ph physics.flu-dyn
• Publication Date: January 3, 2025 (arXiv submission)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00163

Abstract

This study employs a pickleball aerodynamic numerical model to define and investigate successful third shot drop techniques. The research objective is to determine the ranges of initial velocity, angle, and spin that enable successful execution of the third shot drop. The findings indicate that: straight shots require initial velocities of 10.9-13 ms⁻¹, while diagonal shots require 13.3-16 ms⁻¹; straight shots require initial angles of 15.5°-22.5°, while diagonal shots require 12.5°-18°; spin effects on the third shot drop are secondary. These results provide technical guidance for coaches and players.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Context

1. Rapid Growth of Pickleball: Pickleball is reported as the fastest-growing sport in North America and is gaining international popularity
2. Tactical Importance of Third Shot Drop: This is a critical technique in pickleball, used almost universally across all competitive levels
3. Lack of Technical Guidance: Existing guidance is primarily experience-based, lacking quantitative scientific analysis

Research Significance

1. Tactical Criticality: The third shot drop is the serving team's first unrestricted shot in a rally, crucial to match outcomes
2. Technical Complexity: Requires precise trajectory control to land the ball in the opponent's kitchen zone after clearing the net
3. Scientific Gap: As a relatively new sport, pickleball lacks in-depth technical analysis research

Limitations of Existing Approaches

1. Experience-Oriented: Current guidance is primarily based on coach and player experience, lacking quantitative analysis
2. Insufficient Aerodynamic Research: The unique perforated structure of pickleballs creates complex aerodynamic characteristics with limited related research
3. Lack of Precision: Absence of scientific analysis of the precise velocity, angle, and spin parameters required for successful third shot drops

Core Contributions

1. Established Pickleball Aerodynamic Model: First determination of drag coefficient (Cd = 0.30±0.02) and lift coefficient (Cl = 0.195S) for 40-hole pickleballs through measured trajectories
2. Quantitative Analysis of Third Shot Drop Parameters: Determined precise velocity and angle ranges required for successful third shot drop execution
3. Evaluated Spin Effects: Demonstrated that spin effects on third shot drop landing points are relatively secondary
4. Provided Practical Technical Guidance: Supplied coaches and players with scientifically-based training reference standards

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: Initial conditions of the shot (velocity, angle, spin) Output: Ball flight trajectory and landing point Constraints:

• Ball must clear the net (height 0.81-0.86m)
• Ball must land within the opponent's kitchen zone (area 2.13m from net)
• Shot point at baseline (6.71m from net), height 0.75m

Model Architecture

Aerodynamic Model

Two-dimensional trajectory model based on Newton's second law:

Equations of Motion:

d²z/dt² = -ρₐA/2m [v²z + v²x] (Cdsinθ - Clcosθ) - g
d²x/dt² = -ρₐA/2m [v²z + v²x] (Cdcosθ - Clsinθ)

Where:

• ρₐ: Air density
• A: Ball's frontal projection area
• m: Ball mass
• Cd, Cl: Drag and lift coefficients
• θ: Instantaneous trajectory angle

Coefficient Determination Method

1. Experimental Measurement: Single camera recording of actual ball flight trajectories
2. Numerical Fitting: Determination of Cd and Cl by minimizing deviation between calculated and measured trajectories
3. Parameter Relationship: Established linear relationship between lift coefficient and spin parameter: Cl = 0.195S

Technical Innovations

1. First-Time Measurement: First determination of pickleball aerodynamic coefficients through actual flight trajectories
2. Simplified Effective Model: Reduced complex three-dimensional problem to two-dimensional model while preserving main physical effects
3. Practical Orientation: Converted physics model results into technical parameters directly applicable by coaches and players
4. Quantitative Analysis: Replaced empirical judgment with scientific methods, providing precise technical standards

Experimental Setup

Data Collection

• Ball Type: 40-hole® Selkirk pickleball
• Measurement Method: Single camera recording, 125 fps frame rate (one frame per 0.008s)
• Trajectory Count: 6 measured trajectories
• Data Points: 12-20 digitized points per trajectory
• Reference System: Court boundary lines as reference, using net height and field markings to determine coordinates

Physical Parameters

• Ball Diameter: 0.0730-0.0755m (average used)
• Ball Mass: 0.0221-0.0265kg (average used)
• Reynolds Number Range: 4.7×10⁴ - 6.1×10⁴
• Spin Parameter Range: 0.03 - 0.3

Model Validation

Model accuracy verified by comparing calculated trajectories with measured trajectories, with errors controlled within twice the ball diameter.

Experimental Results

Aerodynamic Coefficients

1. Drag Coefficient: Cd = 0.30±0.02 (constant across measured Reynolds number and spin parameter ranges)
2. Lift Coefficient: Cl = 0.195S (linear relationship with spin parameter S)

Third Shot Drop Parameter Ranges

Velocity Requirements

• Straight Shots: 10.9-13.0 ms⁻¹
• Diagonal Shots: 13.3-16.0 ms⁻¹

Angle Requirements

• Straight Shots: 15.5°-22.5°
• Diagonal Shots: 12.5°-18.0°

Spin Effects

• Extreme spin variations (from 15s⁻¹ topspin to 10s⁻¹ backspin) produce trajectory changes equivalent to:
  • Straight Shots: approximately 0.8 ms⁻¹ velocity change
  • Diagonal Shots: approximately 1.0 ms⁻¹ velocity change

Key Findings

1. High Precision Requirements: Successful third shot drops require relatively narrow velocity and angle control ranges
2. Velocity and Angle as Dominant Factors: Velocity and angle control are more important than spin control
3. Higher Demands for Diagonal Shots: Diagonal shots require higher initial velocity and more precise angle control

Related Work

Aerodynamics of Sports Balls

1. Review Work: Mehta (1985) provided early review of sports ball aerodynamics
2. Sport-Specific Research:
   • Soccer: Asai (2007)
   • Baseball: Alaways and Hubbard (2001)
   • Golf: Bearman and Harvey (1976), Mizota (2002)
   • Tennis: Cross and Lindsey (2017), Ivanov (2021)

Pickleball-Specific Research

1. Computational Fluid Dynamics: Creer (2023) attempted CFD methods to estimate lift and drag coefficients, but results were uncertain
2. Trajectory Modeling: Emond, Sun, and Swartz (2024) studied wind effects on matches, using Cd = 0.6 (based on wiffle ball data)

Uniqueness of This Study

Compared to existing research, this paper is the first to:

• Determine pickleball aerodynamic coefficients through measured trajectories
• Conduct quantitative analysis specifically for third shot drop technique
• Provide technical parameter guidance directly applicable to training

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Clear Parameter Ranges: Successful third shot drops require execution within specific velocity and angle ranges
2. Secondary Nature of Spin: Spin effects on landing points are secondary compared to velocity and angle control
3. Importance of Precision: High-level third shot drops require considerable technical precision

Practical Application Recommendations

1. Training Focus: Players should prioritize developing velocity and angle control abilities over spin techniques
2. Coaching Tools: Recommend using instant video replay to analyze and improve shot initial velocity and angle
3. Skill Development: Extensive practice is needed to achieve the required precision levels

Limitations

1. Model Simplification: Two-dimensional model ignores sidespin effects and three-dimensional trajectories
2. Limited Measurement Range: Relatively small measurement ranges for Reynolds number and spin parameters
3. Neglected Bounce Effects: Does not account for post-landing bounce trajectories, where spin has important effects
4. Individual Differences: Does not account for variations in physical conditions and technical characteristics among different players

Future Directions

1. Three-Dimensional Trajectory Modeling: Extension to three-dimensional trajectory analysis including sidespin
2. Post-Bounce Trajectories: Investigation of spin effects on ball trajectories after landing
3. Wind Tunnel Verification: Validation of aerodynamic coefficients through wind tunnel experiments
4. Comparison of Different Ball Types: Investigation of differences between 26-hole and 40-hole balls

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Scientific Rigor: Employed strict physical modeling methods with experimental data validation
2. High Practical Value: Research results directly applicable to teaching and training practice
3. Fills Research Gap: Provides first quantitative study in pickleball technical analysis field
4. Methodological Innovation: Cleverly used single camera and geometric projection to determine three-dimensional ball coordinates

Weaknesses

1. Limited Sample Size: Determination of aerodynamic coefficients based on only 6 trajectories, relatively weak statistical foundation
2. Simplifying Assumptions: Two-dimensional model cannot fully reflect complex situations in actual matches
3. Spin Measurement Precision: Significant uncertainty in spin rate measurement, affecting accuracy of lift coefficient
4. Limited Applicability: Results primarily applicable to specific shot heights and positions

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new research case for intersection of sports science and fluid mechanics
2. Practical Application: May transform pickleball teaching and training methods
3. Foundation for Future Research: Establishes basis for further pickleball technical analysis research
4. Cross-Disciplinary Significance: Methods generalizable to technical analysis of other ball sports

Applicable Scenarios

1. Professional Coaches: Development of scientific training plans and technical standards
2. Competitive Players: Provision of quantified targets for technical improvement
3. Amateur Enthusiasts: Understanding technical requirements and improving training efficiency
4. Equipment Development: Scientific basis for racket and ball design

References

This study primarily references the following important literature:

1. Mehta, R.D. (1985). "Aerodynamics of Sports Balls". Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics
2. Cross, R. and C. Lindsey (2017). "Measurements of drag and lift on smooth balls in flight". European Journal of Physics
3. Emond, K., W. Sun, and T.B. Swartz (2024). "Pickleball Flight Dynamics". arXiv preprint
4. Bearman, P.W. and J.K. Harvey (1976). "Golf Ball Aerodynamics". The Aeronautical Quarterly

Overall Assessment: This is an excellent study combining theoretical physics with practical sports technique, providing quantitative guidance for pickleball technical training through rigorous scientific methods. Despite certain limitations, its pioneering nature and practical value make it a valuable contribution to the sports science field.