Every Tuesday, this site takes a look at a training or technology concept that shapes how tennis is played. This week’s inspiration comes from an unexpected place. One of the feeds available on Tennis Channel Plus during the Miami Open is a “Behind the Scenes” feed from the player training areas. It is a continuous stream of what the players are doing immediately before they take the court. I am a person who operates with multiple active screens, and I have been watching a lot of that content over the past week.
Last Wednesday, the tournament was completely rained out. That provided “Behind the Scenes” viewers with an unusual opportunity to watch players attempt to stay match-ready as the rain delays kept pushing start times further and further back. It was a fascinating window into how professionals manage preparation when the competition start time is uncertain. That is pretty much how tennis operates, but last Wednesday, the Miami Open had that effect on steroids.
In my aggregate viewing of that feed over the past week, something odd suddenly occurred to me. Core strength and stability are clearly central to high performance in tennis. That is not exactly a groundbreaking insight. However, what caught my attention was what I did not see. I cannot recall a single instance of a player performing a sit-up or a traditional crunch in the Miami Open training area, or, for that matter, any other tournament, either.
There are a couple of possible explanations for that. The first is fairly straightforward. Sit-ups and crunches may not be particularly effective at activating the core engagement that tennis demands, especially in a pre-match setting. Tennis is a sport built on rotation, balance, and dynamic stability rather than on isolated torso flexion. It makes sense that players would gravitate toward exercises that better reflect those movement patterns.
The second explanation is a little more personal. I hate sit-ups and crunches. I am not entirely sure why. It isn’t getting down on the mat because I do not mind that when performing stretching or mobility work. However, I straight up don’t do sit-ups or crunches as part of my regular training routine. Watching that training feed, I could not help but wonder if my long-standing resistance to those moves might actually have some legitimate merit.
My own fitness routine has evolved to focus on standing core work that emphasizes stability and control. That includes exercises that require maintaining posture while moving through space, resisting rotation, or generating controlled rotational force. In many ways, that feels more aligned with what actually happens on a tennis court.
It is an approach that feels logical. Tennis strokes are initiated from the ground up. Force is transferred through the legs, stabilized by the core, and then expressed through the upper body. The core’s role is often less about bending and more about resisting unwanted movement while enabling efficient energy transfer. Exercises that reinforce that function, particularly those performed in a standing position, may have more direct carryover to on-court performance. At least, that is what I like to tell myself.
That said, I recognize that it might be a mistake to dismiss sit-ups and crunches entirely. They can still serve a purpose in building baseline strength, especially for individuals who are developing general fitness or rehabilitating specific areas. There is also the simple reality that not everything a professional player does in a tournament setting reflects the full scope of their training. It is entirely possible that traditional core exercises still have a place in off-court routines that are not visible in behind-the-scenes feeds during tournaments.
So now I have to ask. Is this a legitimate training insight, or am I simply building a convenient theory around exercises I have never particularly liked? More importantly, am I alone in that thinking, or have others quietly moved away from sit-ups and crunches as well?
