In sports, where motor responses produced by expert performers are constrained by time, the type of visual information experts detect in the environment (e.g., opponent’s swing) is important. The purpose of this study was to determine which opponent’s body segments provide the most salient information to direct player movement. Fourteen (7 males and 7 females) highly-skilled (national tennis rating of 5.5 or above) intercollegiate tennis players and fourteen (7 males and 7 females) beginning tennis players were recruited as participants. Four strokes (forehand down-the-line and cross-court and lob to forehand and backhand corner) performed by the opponent were videotaped and edited using digital computer graphics techniques (Adobe premiere and photoshop). Participants observed the opponent in five visual conditions: (1) opponent's head, (2) opponent's racquet and forearm, (3) opponent's trunk, (4) opponent's lower body, and (5) the opponent in full. Five edited display conditions were produced for each of the four strokes, and 20 edited sequences were duplicated three times and randomly placed on a S-VHS tape. This resulted in 60 randomly ordered sequences. Participants observed the opponent from ready position to ball-racquet contact when the screen turned to background color (green) without the opponent's image and the participant then moved towards the anticipated ball destination as quickly as possible. A 2 x 2 x 5 (Skill x Gender x Display) analysis of variance (ANOVA) mixed design was performed on stroke anticipation accuracy and on response delay time. Significant effect was found for skill, F(1, 24)=13.77, p < .01, but not for gender, p > .05. There was a significant effect for display, F(4, 24)=4.22, p < .01, but no significant interaction between the factors, p < .05. A post-hoc (Bonferonni) analysis showed significantly greater anticipation accuracy in full opponent display compared to the accuracy in head display, p < .05. No significant effect was found on response delay time, p > .05. The motions of all individual body parts provided some information to the players except for the head display. Among the body parts, the relative motion between racquet and forearm provided the most valuable visual information to the players. The relative motion of racquet and forearm was not found to be important when perceiving directional outcome of the opponent’s swing but was important when perceiving the stroke type performed by the opponent.