PDA

View Full Version : Slice Backhand Study


Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 05:55 PM
Following are my open notes on the slice backhand. You can comment if you want, however, keep in mind it is a study that I am also gathering more information on and understanding. Got to edit some of this stuff...

EDIT: The study I am trying to do is simply isolated to the arm swing of the slice backhand and not the footwork, balance, movement, ball judgement, etc...These are also my notes on the swing. In other words, my take on it and what I see. Whether right or wrong, good or bad, it is just notes and not necessarily instruction unless of course you agree with what I am seeing and want to try it out in practice. I am also not discounting the importance of balance, timing, movement, footwork, etc...if you have read any of my posts in the past, you would know that footwork and movement are thee most important things in my book for stroke improvement.

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 05:58 PM
Several things noted about the slice backhand in order to practice and develop a good one:

1. The slice backhand is swung from the shoulder.

2. The arm makes an L shape and mainly stays like that throughout the swing motion.

3. You must get a good shoulder turn on the slice or you will open your shoulders and hit inconsistently when uncoil. You must rotate the shoulders during racquet preparation to get the front shoulder under that chin. No exceptions here.

4. You must have excellent balance and hit the slice off your front foot with knees bent.

There are several swing types for the slice.

1. The classic high to low and up towards the target swing. This is usually done with an "L" shaped arm.

2. The Ken Roswall swing with racquet head almost resting on the back arm flat and as it comes forward you supinate the forearm area to turn the racquet head into the ball as you go out and forward toward the target.

http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/rosewall/Rosewall5.jpg

3. The slice that is seen a lot today with players extending their arm through contact and maintaining the "L" just before and into followthough after the arm extended. But the followthrough is going out to the side of the body with the racquet head not flying out dangling which a lot of recreational players miss or don't see. Also, in the followthrough there is still the "L" maintained.The swing flow is tracing a U shape that is nearly happening in front of the body plane. Watch how Federer accelerates the swing from the shoulder nearly driving the front shoulder through the ball over the front foot. The legs are used to add motion to his swing and for timing. Watch the hand pattern for U shape I mentioned.

FIND PICTURES

Edit: Between these two photos, this is where you hit the slice. The other stuff is preparation and followthrough. The slice is hit on the front foot, it is a feel shot not a "hard" shot. It is funner than heck to hit this shot when you got it down. The portion of the swing these two photos show is where your feel and touch on the ball are developed. It is in this quick and short part of the slice movement that you will gain the most. Let the followthrough happen and maintain that L as long as you can.

No matter which you choose, hitting a slice off your front foot with a good shoulder turn is a must. I have players hit an abbreviated slice backhand by hitting slowly fed balls and stopping just after they make contact. Their weight needs to be loaded over their front foot and they must balance themselves over that front foot for 5 seconds.

If you look at the greats in slices, they all have the following:

1. They make contact over their front foot.

2. They have excellent balance over their front foot.

3. They have an excellent shoulder turn.

4. They maintain an L shape in their arm to racquet head mostly throughout the swing.

5. The hit through the ball.

6. They are bent in their knees. Then do not bend over at the waist.

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 05:59 PM
1. The "newer" style slice that you see used a lot today, does extend the arm through contact.

2. The pro raises the arm with the arm slightly bent (as shown in the Federer pics above). Then as they go down in their swing, they extend the arm right before and through contact. Where a lot of recreational players mess up is they allow their wrist to break too much with it and they lose the "L" shape that Federer maintains deep into his followthrough.

3. The slice backhand is a very disciplined stroke. It is not a stroke you just "do". There are things to it to hit a good one.

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 06:00 PM
Looking at Federer's "current style" slice backhand.

Purpose: I am studying this a bit because I do not hit slice backhand this way. So, I want to learn how to do it this way for whatever reason (bored, getting old and just want to show off, etc....).

FIRST PICTURE REVIEW:
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger2.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger3.jpg

Okay, so what I see here is we are looking at some photos slightly after the uncoiliing has begun. So, we can assume based on the shoulder position that the front shoulder was tighter to the chin at the end of the racquet preparation phase. So sequencially I see:

1. Weight being transferred to the front foot before contact.

2. Hitting arm is bent to allow for it to extend as the racquet hits the ball at contact.

3. Verified my previous finding that the swing is definetly from the shoulder with that element of arm extension most likely to really spin the crap out of the ball for wicked slice. So he has the stability of the shoulder dominating the stroke as the major hinge in the stroke with a minor hinge (the elbow) used to accelerate the racquet head through the ball. This is very much the same thing the wrist release does in the forehand. Except we are spinning the ball faster rather than putting more power through the ball as the wrist release does in the forehand. Now, for those that understand air flow for topspun and underspun balls, you will understand that Federer is using physics to send the ball over a cushion of air towards his target.

4. A lateral position is established and the back arm is beginning to exert itself to maintain that position.

5. Head is in the proper position and the racquet face from this point of view looks near square.

6. The other thing I see is Federer is establishing a different kind of swing motion. Much like the Windshield wiper motion goes from left to right, this swing is following a clock face going down clockwise (3 o'clock, 4 o'clock, 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock, and so on as you will see in the next frames.

SECOND PICTURE REVIEW
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger4.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger5.jpg

And there it is. The racquet face and hand (always watch the hand pattern which is most important) is following a clock face in front of Federers body using a near perpendicular racquet face.

In this picture:

1. The wrist has slightly broken, however, it isn't allowing the racquet to dangle or get out of control. It will move the racquet back into the "L" shape position as the followthrough matures.

2. Front foot hitting - check.

3. Body is lateral maintaining classic form - check.

4. Head is still, well after the ball is struck - check. Remember the ball is only on the strings for 4 milliseconds, so Federer has maintained his head position well into the stroke and well after he hit the ball. In other words, a long time.

5. There is very little effort here from Federer. It is an effortless swing. Federer truly understands the art side of the slice backhand.

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 06:01 PM
THIRD PICTURE FRAMES
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger6.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger8.jpg

Okay, this is where a lot of recreational players go wrong. Yes, in the followthrough. DO NOT MISINTERPRET THESE PICTURES. I supplied the animation above to help you to not do so and I will post it here as well.

It is very important that you understand because the slice is a feel shot, losing control of the slice followthrough and your racquet only tells me you hit the slice like your topspin forehand - as hard as you can. This is actually a dumb thing to do.

1. Look closely at Federer's followthrough discipline. Even though he broke the wrist for added acceleration through the ball, this disciplined stroke remains true to form in keeping the L shape at the end of the stroke.

2. As the racquet extend out away from the body, because of the swing force and swing weight of the racquet, Federer hones it back in to the L shape with a beautiful finish showing the arm straight and the wrist cocked back forming the L that is usually maintained through the classic stroke.

3. The finish of the stroke is lateral with back arm extended.

4. He is well over his front foot with the ball long gone.

5. The only shoulder that has opened up do to rotation is his front shoulder while his back shoulder is holding tightly (or anchored down) to the lateral position established throughout the stroke. You can learn a ton here. This position is a key.

Here is the animation that shows discipline and purpose for each element (arm extension, wrist break, and then bringing it back to the L)

http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/fedslice.gif

The final thing I want you to keep in mind is this kind of slice is not necessarily an offensive slice. This is a neutral or defensive slice used to mix things up, change pace, change spin, etc...

user92626
10-22-2009, 09:20 PM
Thanks, BB

This is quite a lot to absorb.

Is a certain stance important?

As for shoulder turn, is it like that you turn to have your chin touch the shoulder while keeping the arm straight and racket in L shape?

BravoRed691
10-22-2009, 10:07 PM
I love to slice...i don't think i have a good one but i do think it's competent...threfore i thank you soo much for this post BB ... When will the pics be available?

Question: whether we are to maintain a bent L-shape arm position throughout our stroke or to release the forearm thru contact and into the followthru, should we be trying to finish with our racket on the same side of the body, or letting the racket come across?

I know the diff btw the two, i was just wondering which one should we be learning or teaching others to do? I've heard from certain people that the slices of today is more "floaty" than the slice of "yesterday" partly because we tend to come across our body too much...what are your thoughts of this?

Br

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 10:44 PM
Thanks, BB

This is quite a lot to absorb.

Is a certain stance important?

As for shoulder turn, is it like that you turn to have your chin touch the shoulder while keeping the arm straight and racket in L shape?

Yes, it is and it needs to be edited and perhaps combined. The pictures sure would help this a lot but for some reason it takes to time for them to come through. I dont know why that is. When I right-click on the icon where the photo should be it says SHOW PICTURE, then if I wait it eventually loads.

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 10:45 PM
I love to slice...i don't think i have a good one but i do think it's competent...threfore i thank you soo much for this post BB ... When will the pics be available?

Question: whether we are to maintain a bent L-shape arm position throughout our stroke or to release the forearm thru contact and into the followthru, should we be trying to finish with our racket on the same side of the body, or letting the racket come across?

I know the diff btw the two, i was just wondering which one should we be learning or teaching others to do? I've heard from certain people that the slices of today is more "floaty" than the slice of "yesterday" partly because we tend to come across our body too much...what are your thoughts of this?

Br

Well that is what I would like to define further. I dont know if I would use the term floaty because that can mean different things to people and perhaps be misconceived.

As far as finishing on the same side of the body, I assume you mean if you are right handed you finish on the right-hand side?

AlpineCadet
10-22-2009, 10:49 PM
How do you finish a slice shot without having the L shape? I mean, who would keep their racket pointed in such an awkward postion like the "I" shape?

Bungalo Bill
10-22-2009, 10:53 PM
How do you finish a slice shot without having the L shape? I mean, who would keep their racket pointed in such an awkward postion like the "I" shape?

The L shape is referenced as a discipline. It is also mentioned because some people swing and perform the slice from the elbow vs. swinging from the shoulder. Therefore, when I mention maintain the L position. I referring to swinging from the shoulder and allowing the arm to work more like a lever or a unit. This should be maintained throughout the stroke.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 01:06 AM
Federer doesn't maintain it through the stroke, but then again, I ain't fed, nor am I BB. IMO, the slice bh isn't just about stroke mechanics. You're obviously overlooking footwork, contact point, and having the proper stance to initiate the drive. A perfect stroke means nothing when you're totally out of position to hit it.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 01:08 AM
Sorry, didn't mean to hijack.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 01:18 AM
I think the "'L' shape" comes from trying to keep the racket head above the wrist throughout the stroke, like in a volley.

That's how I learned it (well, my current slice at least), and right now even though I don't maintain the same angle all the way it works very well for me.

ttbrowne
10-23-2009, 06:11 AM
Good stuff, Bill. My slice is my strongest shot.
I will disagree with you on one point, It can be an offensive shot in that if you hit it with a lot of pace (Fed does every once in a while) the ball does not come up but a couple of inches off the court. That is an offensive slice.

Jay_The_Nomad
10-23-2009, 06:46 AM
Good stuff, Bill. My slice is my strongest shot.
I will disagree with you on one point, It can be an offensive shot in that if you hit it with a lot of pace (Fed does every once in a while) the ball does not come up but a couple of inches off the court. That is an offensive slice.

Well, its offensive only if you approach the net behind that slice.

Nellie
10-23-2009, 06:52 AM
I totally agree that a good slice is hit from the shoulder [[not elbow - typo], but I am curious regarding the role of the elbow. Between this shot:
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger1.jpg

and this shot:
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger2.jpg

there is an obvious arm extension/straightening of the elbow to accelerate the racquet. I am curious because the amount of elbow extension seems to vary by player and shot. Does maintaining the elbow bend allow for better control/touch? I would think, based on volleys, this would be true since the bending the elbow would place the racquet head closer to your body.


Another thought I had in looking at this picture:
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger3.jpg

is that the contact point is pretty far forward - likely as far forward is his BH drive. This seems different from the conventional thinking that the contact point for the slice would be closer to the body versus a drive BH.

bad_call
10-23-2009, 06:58 AM
How do you finish a slice shot without having the L shape? I mean, who would keep their racket pointed in such an awkward postion like the "I" shape?

here's one of Henin who finishes fully extended and not L shaped.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GzW401yri4

obviously the slice can be varied to produce different shot types.

tennisdad65
10-23-2009, 08:43 AM
Great posts...BB

I primarily use L shape slice backhands on my 1HBH. .i.e. 1 & 3 on your swing type list.

I am gonna try the second swing type (ken rosewall). I did not realize that he held the racquet face almost parallel to the ground and then suppinated. I often hit with underspin but keep the same racquet face angle prior to contact... i.e no suppination.

VaBeachTennis
10-23-2009, 08:58 AM
Well, its offensive only if you approach the net behind that slice.

I like this type of slice backhand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHA2gfRSmro

He really has it grooved. That said, there are different times to use different slices.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 09:05 AM
Federer doesn't maintain it through the stroke, but then again, I ain't fed, nor am I BB. IMO, the slice bh isn't just about stroke mechanics. You're obviously overlooking footwork, contact point, and having the proper stance to initiate the drive. A perfect stroke means nothing when you're totally out of position to hit it.

Geeez, man, I haven't even got that far yet and won't in this study. I am not even looking at the "perfect" stroke. I am simply reviewing three different swing paths and opening my notes. Not your notes, not the person down the streets notes, nor other peoples note.

As I mentioned above, these are my open notes on swing paths, not the entire slice backhand. If you want to think that I wouldn't include or are ignorant to think that being in position is not important, you are sadly mistaken.

I am simply giving out my notes on three different swing paths. Of course, I haven't included footwork and getting in position.

Look, I really dont want to argue about this. If you can't appreciate my willingness to share my insights, ideas, notes, etc, for an area I chose to study, can you just move on? However, if you want to flame it up, jump to conclusions or twist my intent with my own notes, then let's get the moderator involved.

Bottom-line, I am simply opening my notes, if you dont like what I write, don't read it.

And regarding Fed? At times he does maintain the L in his slice backhand. However, I don't care about those because I am isolating the study to just the more current swing path version simply to disect it for learning purposes. In other words, I am using a model for study and note taking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHPdlGW4vEE

If you think you know more, then make your own post on the subject and give us your take on things. Why dont you take over and post your own notes. Would you like for me to criticize them?

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 09:08 AM
I like this type of slice backhand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHA2gfRSmro

He really has it grooved. That said, there are different times to use different slices.

haha, yes, and then right when you get to the serve line, make your shoes squeek to really get the hairs on the back of your opponents neck to rise.

user92626
10-23-2009, 09:31 AM
Beautiful Fed slice BH and returner's anticipating FH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvY0qP4mCXg&NR=1

bad_call
10-23-2009, 10:11 AM
Beautiful Fed slice BH and returner's anticipating FH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvY0qP4mCXg&NR=1

excellent vid posting. demonstrates more than one non L shaped slice producing varying resultant shots.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 10:18 AM
excellent vid posting. demonstrates more than one non L shaped slice producing varying resultant shots.

Actually the L is there at contact. It also comes back in the followthrough but cant see it in this video. The elements are still there, the stroke style is different which is being noted in slice #3. It is a variation. With stroke style #3, we are still seeing normal slice discipline but it adds somewhat of a hand release just before contact is made and into extension as noted above. The swing path somewhat follows a clock face which is a variation which is why I am simply reviwing them and taking notes on what I am seeing.


"L" shape. It is all there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHPdlGW4vEE

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 10:58 AM
I need to get back to my study and out of digression.

MethodTennis
10-23-2009, 10:59 AM
not seen any of your threads or posts in donkeys

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:00 AM
Good stuff, Bill. My slice is my strongest shot.
I will disagree with you on one point, It can be an offensive shot in that if you hit it with a lot of pace (Fed does every once in a while) the ball does not come up but a couple of inches off the court. That is an offensive slice.

I dont know where you got that I think the slice shot is defensive only. I have argued that the slice can be hit both offensively and defensivly. I hit the slice shot defensively and offensively. Maybe you can point where I mentioned it was defensively only.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 11:03 AM
Geeez, man, I haven't even got that far yet and won't in this study. I am not even looking at the "perfect" stroke. I am simply reviewing three different swing paths and opening my notes. Not your notes, not the person down the streets notes, nor other peoples note.

As I mentioned above, these are my open notes on swing paths, not the entire slice backhand. If you want to think that I wouldn't include or are ignorant to think that being in position is not important, you are sadly mistaken.

I am simply giving out my notes on three different swing paths. Of course, I haven't included footwork and getting in position.

Look, I really dont want to argue about this. If you can't appreciate my willingness to share my insights, ideas, notes, etc, for an area I chose to study, can you just move on? However, if you want to flame it up, jump to conclusions or twist my intent with my own notes, then let's get the moderator involved.

Bottom-line, I am simply opening my notes, if you dont like what I write, don't read it.

And regarding Fed? At times he does maintain the L in his slice backhand. However, I don't care about those because I am isolating the study to just the more current swing path version simply to disect it for learning purposes. In other words, I am using a model for study and note taking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHPdlGW4vEE

If you think you know more, then make your own post on the subject and give us your take on things. Why dont you take over and post your own notes. Would you like for me to criticize them?

I think you need to chill out and read my post again.. you're getting too far ahead of yourself.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:06 AM
here's one of Henin who finishes fully extended and not L shaped.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GzW401yri4

obviously the slice can be varied to produce different shot types.


What? In this shot Henin is in the L shape throughout the shot. Watch the wrist position.

Are you looking for a perfect L in the shot and in every single slice shotever hit by man?

You really need to reread post #4 because I feel you are taking things out of context and are simply looking for a fight.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:08 AM
I think you need to chill out and read my post again.. you're getting too far ahead of yourself.

Okay so two people here just want to start a fight and flame.

Once again, these are my notes! Reread your own post for goodness sakes! Are you kidding me? You are digressing into footwork, and movement and you failed to read the purpose or get the purpose of the analysis. Who is getting ahead of who?

If I say I am analyzing three SW"ING PATHS and you interject other things, who is moving ahead? You or I?

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:12 AM
Anyway, so I need to move on and just continue. Three swing paths are being analyzed and that is all is being analyzed. We are not analyzing footwork, movement, conditioning, keeping the head still, when to slice, defensive or offensive slices, or anything else.

Swing paths, that is it.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 11:13 AM
Okay so two people here just want to start a fight and flame.

Once again, these are my notes! Reread your own post for goodness sakes! Are you kidding me? You are digressing into footwork, and movement and you failed to read the purpose or get the purpose of the analysis. Who is getting ahead of who?

If I say I am analyzing three SW"ING PATHS and you interject other things, who is moving ahead? You or I?I only added my insight to your posts, it was pretty simple to understand, right? You must be confused? How are you not getting ahead of yourself when you're accusing me of all types of behavior when I haven't done anything wrong?

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 11:17 AM
The slice is a defensive shot from the baseline. Just because someone does not handle low slices well does not change that fact. One handers will slice more usually because of consistency problems, like steffi graf. Rarely you see guys like agassi and nadal slice their two hander if they can hit a powerful two hander. Why would they set themselves up to be punished if they don't have to? Still it is nice to have the slice in your arsenal, but it's not a offensive shot any way you look at hit from the baseline.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:19 AM
I only added my insight to your posts, it was pretty simple to understand, right? You must be confused? How are you not getting ahead of yourself when you're accusing me of all types of behavior when I haven't done anything wrong?

How can I be confused about my own post? I posted my own notes. I stated the purpose of the post and set out the direction of the the threads.

Then in comes you with movement and other stuff that is obvious but is not being discussed nor do I care to discuss it.

There has been no accusations here. Nothing of the sort. However, this post is about swing paths and it is something you are confused about.

Do you have notes to share? Do you want to teach me? By all means, take over.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 11:20 AM
Sorry, didn't mean to hijack.

BB, just because someone adds their opinion/more info to your insight, it doesn't mean they're flaming or wanting to fight with you. :oops::shock::( You're acting too defensive when there is no need to be. My insight ended with my second post in this thread. But it seems you keep trying to bring me back with your replies.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 11:26 AM
BB, just because someone adds their opinion/more info to your insight, it doesn't mean they're flaming or wanting to fight with you. :oops::shock::( You're acting too defensive when there is no need to be.

Here is what started this:

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=4049171#post4049171)
Federer doesn't maintain it through the stroke, but then again, I ain't fed, nor am I BB. IMO, the slice bh isn't just about stroke mechanics. You're obviously overlooking footwork, contact point, and having the proper stance to initiate the drive. A perfect stroke means nothing when you're totally out of position to hit it.

Yes, it is obvious I am not looking at footwork and movement. This was stated above in the first few posts.

I am defensive because I dont care for this post whatsoever.

If you have something to say, add to the analysis. Or provide your own notes on the the swing path of the arm.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 11:30 AM
Good stuff, Bill. My slice is my strongest shot.
I will disagree with you on one point, It can be an offensive shot in that if you hit it with a lot of pace (Fed does every once in a while) the ball does not come up but a couple of inches off the court. That is an offensive slice.

You don't ever need to hit a slice with pace, though it does add to how aggressive the shot it. And you definitely don't need to use pace to make the slice skid. The idea helps because you really have to hit through the ball to generate that pace (which will help you knife through the ball) but sometimes people will also try to overdo the spin while doing that (and maybe even with an open face too) and float a hard one long. But if you understand how to hit it, it's no problem.

Bottom line, I feel that a slice is a CONTROL shot. What you do with it determines whether it's an offensive shot or not (floater or knifer).

Well, its offensive only if you approach the net behind that slice.

No; good players can hit offensive slices from most (if not all) positions and your response will generally be a weak one (or very conservative). This is why Federer is known to have one of the best (if not THE best) slice backhands on the tour. He plays it low, places it exactly where he wants it, and uses it to set up offensive situations.

In 2007, Roger Federer played a VERY aggressive slice (in a somewhat defensive position) at a key moment (break point on Nadal's serve in the 5th set) to force a weak shot from Nadal and set up his winning forehand for the break! Nadal was lucky just to get the ball over the net, let alone get to it.

I totally agree that a good slice is hit from the elbow

O.o When did he ever say that? And a good slice is NOT hit from the elbow. That's how you get tennis elbow. A good slice is hit from the shoulder using the back muscles around that shoulder.

I would much rather hit a slice with my wrist than with my elbow.

Great posts...BB

I primarily use L shape slice backhands on my 1HBH. .i.e. 1 & 3 on your swing type list.

I am gonna try the second swing type (ken rosewall). I did not realize that he held the racquet face almost parallel to the ground and then suppinated. I often hit with underspin but keep the same racquet face angle prior to contact... i.e no suppination.

I think people did that back when they used wood rackets and you didn't really have much room for error when putting spin on the ball.

I like this type of slice backhand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHA2gfRSmro

He really has it grooved. That said, there are different times to use different slices.

Yeah... Form of hitting a good slice backhand using a wood racket + graphite racket = insane spin + very little bounce.

What? In this shot Henin is in the L shape throughout the shot. Watch the wrist position.

Are you looking for a perfect L in the shot and in every single slice shotever hit by man?

You really need to reread post #4 because I feel you are taking things out of context and are simply looking for a fight.

Well, that sort of confused me as well to start. A perfect L is possible, but most people don't do it. It's uncomfortable and requires some considerable wrist strength to keep that throughout the stroke with faster swing speeds.

Like I said before, I feel this pattern of the L comes from the idea of keeping the racket head above the wrist on contact and trying to maintain that degree of bend as much as possible without losing comfort when hitting the shot.

Nellie
10-23-2009, 11:31 AM
BB -I always think of the Laver BH as an unnatural shot and not repeatable. However, would you consider the stroke to be mostly a drive with a continental grip with a natural supination of the racquet to close the face .

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 11:31 AM
I don't know why people think they can post 'instruction' on how to slice or anything really from posting videos or reading a book. You need hands on instruction that a teacher will see what you are doing wrong when you yourself will never see it. No matter how much you study, or post videos of super slo-mo shots.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 11:36 AM
I am defensive because I dont care for this post whatsoever.

How can you consider yourself a "teaching professional" when you get worked up over having to read something that rounds out your thread? I didn't insult you, nor did I take anything away from you. I just ADDED to the discussion by sharing my opinion on your post.


FYI, keep in mind:
Following are my open notes on the slice backhand. You can comment if you want, however, keep in mind it is a study that I am also gathering more information on and understanding. Got to edit some of this stuff...
:idea:

Geeez, man, I haven't even got that far yet and won't in this study. I am not even looking at the "perfect" stroke. I am simply reviewing three different swing paths and opening my notes. Not your notes, not the person down the streets notes, nor other peoples note.

:confused: :shock:

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 11:51 AM
How can you consider yourself a "teaching professional" when you get worked up over having to read something that rounds out your thread? I didn't insult you, nor did I take anything away from you. I just ADDED to the discussion by sharing my opinion on your post.


Well alpine when it comes to teaching you won't ever change the mind of a teacher. It's their way or the hiway. No inbetween. If you take lessons from a pro you don't argue with what they are teaching. You either have faith they know what they are talking about or you don't. I personally think the best way to get good at tennis is to listen to someone you trust and never debate. I like BB but think he gets WAY to technical when it comes to tennis strokes. It's actually much easier imo than what he makes it out to be. Strokes should come natural and as little thinking as possible. Everything will go haywire if you start overanalyzing every little thing a pro does and watching super slo-mo vids of pro's and try to duplicate every little nuance of a pro like federer.

VaBeachTennis
10-23-2009, 11:51 AM
The slice is a defensive shot from the baseline. Just because someone does not handle low slices well does not change that fact. One handers will slice more usually because of consistency problems, like steffi graf. Rarely you see guys like agassi and nadal slice their two hander if they can hit a powerful two hander. Why would they set themselves up to be punished if they don't have to? Still it is nice to have the slice in your arsenal, but it's not a offensive shot any way you look at hit from the baseline.

Almost any shot can be used both offensively and defensively in my opinion. If you know that your opponent doesn't handle low or side spin slices well, and you use it to set you up for a winner or an approach shot, you are using the shot offensively. The same thing with a moon ball, lob, etc...................

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHA2gfRSmro

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 11:53 AM
The slice is a defensive shot from the baseline. Just because someone does not handle low slices well does not change that fact. One handers will slice more usually because of consistency problems, like steffi graf. Rarely you see guys like agassi and nadal slice their two hander if they can hit a powerful two hander. Why would they set themselves up to be punished if they don't have to? Still it is nice to have the slice in your arsenal, but it's not a offensive shot any way you look at hit from the baseline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOFaMQXJA1c

So that's NOT a shot used to set up a situation in Federer's favor? And it's NOT forcing errors? Okay then...

NOBODY can handle a ball that's inches from the court well. YOU CAN'T GET UNDER IT TO PUT HEAVY SPIN ON IT!

One handers don't slice because of consistency problems, it's cause of POWER problems. If you've ever tried BOTH a one hander and a two hander (and can hit them both proficiently), then you realize that the ability to consistently bomb flat shots harder than a two hander is difficult (unless on the run, in which case the one hander is better)

You will frequently see players (even Nadal and Verdasco who have very nice backhands) slice the ball. It is a GREAT changeup.

You only set yourself up to be punished if you hit a floater. If you knife the ball, they CAN'T attack it unless they're a VERY good player and you didn't knife it well enough.

Using an insanely low ball is the same thing as using an insanely high ball. It's an aggressive shot. Unless you say Nadal's being defensive when he pounds those heavy forehands to Federer's backhand.

Benefits of a good slice:
-They CAN'T pound it because you give them no pace to feed off of
-It's lower, so they have to hit UP and might not be able to put heavy topspin on it, which means they have to hit a more conservative shot due to lack of spin
-It requires the opponent to move their feet more accurately
-You can easily use it to manipulate your opponent's position and open up the court
-The change in speed and bounce messes people up because they've become accustomed to dealing with high-bouncing topspin shots, flat bombs, or anything in between.

You see very few people in general use a slice very often when they can rip on the ball. You will rarely see Blake use a slice when he can rip one. Now why is that? HE'S ONE DIMENSIONAL! He constantly whacks the ball and doesn't think. People WILL slice the ball even if they're not on defense as a changeup. People who do (Federer, Nadal, Verdasco, Sampras, Courier, EVEN AGASSI) become people who THINK on the court. In this age of banging tennis, people would rather bang the ball back and forth all day than THINK of how to work a point. This is why Federer dominated the tour so successfully for so long. He had ALL the tools, and was always thinking on how to use them to break open a point.

I'm guessing you don't have a very good slice... I've torn people apart with nothing but a slice to such a degree they'd rather face my forehand, which is clearly my more powerful wing. People would rather deal with power than low slices the same way people would rather blast mid court sitters all day than hard balls from behind the baseline. A slice is SUBTLE aggression. Just cause it isn't hit at 80+ mph doesn't make it any less aggressive than a flat one up the middle (if you hit it well WITH A PLAN).

4sound
10-23-2009, 11:53 AM
Guys,
Don't forget the role of the ball coming in hitting the slice.
Slice is typically hit on low balls or on the rise balls.

You can hit the slice for balls coming down from the ball arch, but you will typically get more float than knife on the ball.

Fed does the float slice from the baseline on balls coming down to actually take pace off. There are a lot of guys that like pace coming for the timing of their strokes so this is a great change up. You don't see a lot of people do this shot because its harder to control the height.

As far as the different swing paths; I think this has a lot more to do with the height of where the ball is received (high vs low balls).

Robert Lansdorp talks about american vs european slice styles which is an interesting breakdown of the strokes.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 11:57 AM
Guys,
Don't forget the role of the ball coming in hitting the slice.
Slice is typically hit on low balls or on the rise balls.

You can hit the slice for balls coming down from the ball arch, but you will typically get more float than knife on the ball.

Fed does the float slice from the baseline on balls coming down to actually take pace off. There are a lot of guys that like pace coming for the timing of their strokes so this is a great change up. You don't see a lot of people do this shot because its harder to control the height.

As far as the different swing paths; I think this has a lot more to do with the height of where the ball is received (high vs low balls).

Robert Lansdorp talks about american vs european slice styles which is an interesting breakdown of the strokes.

A slice is more difficult to hit on a ball rising off the court just like every other shot in the book. But when given the option of hitting a rising shot over the shoulder with either a drive or a slice, the choice is easy. Comfort clearly dictates that a slice should be used.

My best knifers come from the peak of just after. But I can still take it on the rise, but I prefer it closer to the peak because right off the bounce is pretty tough. Not impossible, but it's very tough.

VaBeachTennis
10-23-2009, 12:01 PM
I don't know why people think they can post 'instruction' on how to slice or anything really from posting videos or reading a book. You need hands on instruction that a teacher will see what you are doing wrong when you yourself will never see it. No matter how much you study, or post videos of super slo-mo shots.

That may be true for you and other people, but not true for others...................
Because of the nature of the game (no coaching when playing) we tend to troubleshoot ourselves quite often. Look at various pro players after they miss a shot and they sometimes talk to themselves and demonstrate the proper swing path to themselves, etc. .

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 12:04 PM
I'm guessing you don't have a very good slice... I've torn people apart with nothing but a slice to such a degree they'd rather face my forehand, which is clearly my more powerful wing. People would rather deal with power than low slices the same way people would rather blast mid court sitters all day than hard balls from behind the baseline. A slice is SUBTLE aggression. Just cause it isn't hit at 80+ mph doesn't make it any less aggressive than a flat one up the middle (if you hit it well WITH A PLAN).


I'm guessing you are not a power player. I never said the slice is not effective. Yes i do have a good slice but it all depends on the style you play. With two handers it's usually all power two handed shot's in a baseline match. They throw in a slice and usually regret it. It's like decideing to play 50% baseline and 50% serve and volley. Usually you need to commit to one gameplan to be great at it. For a power player, especially two handers, the slice is a defensive shot. I'm guessing you have a one hander.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:12 PM
How can you consider yourself a "teaching professional" when you get worked up over having to read something that rounds out your thread? I didn't insult you, nor did I take anything away from you. I just ADDED to the discussion by sharing my opinion on your post.


FYI, keep in mind:

:idea:



:confused: :shock:

Geez, man, look at the thread again. Read the first post and then the next four posts. Am I looking at footwork? How about the "perfect" stroke? No, all I am doing is analyzing the arm movement.

Also, I am not a tennis teaching professional hence the word former.

Do you have notes to add to the swing paths or not?

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:18 PM
I'm guessing you are not a power player. I never said the slice is not effective. Yes i do have a good slice but it all depends on the style you play. With two handers it's usually all power two handed shot's in a baseline match. They throw in a slice and usually regret it. It's like decideing to play 50% baseline and 50% serve and volley. Usually you need to commit to one gameplan to be great at it. For a power player, especially two handers, the slice is a defensive shot. I'm guessing you have a one hander.

I guess everyone is putting words in people's mouths. Can you please show me where I am getting too technical? IF a player wants to learn what he needs to do to improve his technique, how can you help a person unless you understand the entire stroke in a technical way?
Definition: tech·nique (thttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ebreve.gifk-nhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/emacr.gifkhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gif)
n. 1. The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished.
2. also tech·nic a. The way in which the fundamentals, as of an artistic work, are handled.
b. Skill or command in handling such fundamentals. See Synonyms at art (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/art)1.


[French, technical, technique, from Greek tekhnikos, technical; see technical.]

If you think I am technical, you should see some of my friends. I dont get into physics, or mathmatical explanations on ball spins, the formulas on angular momentum or anything else like that.

However, I will learn how one hits a ball. I will learn the key areas and phases of the stroke. This is because when a player asks for help, I want to be able to see exactly what the problem is and provide an explanation of not only where the problem is but how to fix it.

Please, you will save me a lot of time this weekend. I have two people that have requested my help. Now, I dont want to bog them down with needless technical jibberish from my advice, I want to sitback and read your advice.

Edit: So, JackB1 and Cody asked for help. Can you please help them?

user92626
10-23-2009, 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by user92626
Beautiful Fed slice BH and returner's anticipating FH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvY0qP4mCXg&NR=1


bad call: excellent vid posting. demonstrates more than one non L shaped slice producing varying resultant shots.


I'm not sure I follow. Fed does show an L shape going thru the contact point. I think what's more important than this L shape thing is how you turn and move your body and drive the racket in a way that propels the shot effectively. That's the subtle point.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by user92626
Beautiful Fed slice BH and returner's anticipating FH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvY0qP4mCXg&NR=1


bad call: excellent vid posting. demonstrates more than one non L shaped slice producing varying resultant shots.


I'm not sure I follow. Fed does show an L shape going thru the contact point. I think what's more important than this L shape thing is how you turn and move your body and drive the racket in a way that propels the shot effectively. That's the subtle point.

Exactly. I want to talk about post #4. The one I am trying to understand better. The other two swing paths, I have studied, know how to hit them and teach them. So, what is your thinking about post #4? Would it help if I try to get those pictures?

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 12:32 PM
I guess everyone is putting words in peoples mouths. Can you please show me where I am getting too technical? IF a player wants to learn what he needs to do to improve his technique, how can you help a person unless you understand the entire stroke in a technical way?


How do you understand what is technically correct? Do you judge by federers technique and a L shape to conclude that is the correct technique? And try to teach people 'exactly' like federer from every little thing he does in super slo mo? I can only help a person by what i see he is doing wrong and try to correct it. I would not try have him emulate a federer slice to the exact nuance. If you watch pros you can clearly see everyone has there own unique strokes that are recognizeable from a far distance away.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:38 PM
How do you understand what is technically correct? Do you judge by federers technique and a L shape to conclude that is the correct technique?

Lol, not just Federer dude. If you think I limit my understanding of how to hit a slice backhand to one player, you are sadly mistaken. And how do I know the L shape is "technically" correct? Well, by the students you teach and the people you help. Finding a common arm shape in a stroke is important to help those that have an arm that moves around all the time. How would you help someone improve clean contact with the ball and consistency? Just let them do whatever they want? Where is your baseline?

Well, what do you do? I have not looked at just Federer, I have looked at many many players. And why not? If you can see common traits in a good slice backhand that is verifiable, wouldnt you be able to say that this common characteristic can be taught? How else would you know?

Isn't that how we teach the open stance, the onehanded backhand smile pattern, the twohanded backhand, the grips, the head positions, the footwork, etc...

Do you have a way? I have asked you to help two players because obviously you know something I dont.

Further, these are notes of mine, they are not instruction. Are you saying that my notes and what I see in the strokes analyzed are wrong? Can you point out what is wrong?

And try to teach people 'exactly' like federer from every little thing he does in super slo mo? I can only help a person by what i see he is doing wrong and try to correct it. I would not try have him emulate a federer slice to the exact nuance. If you watch pros you can clearly see everyone has there own unique strokes that are recognizeable from a far distance away.

Federer is a model. Not a rule. I am using his video because it is the only one I can find that helps me look at the swing path. Is that wrong? Can you provide others? I looked for others but either it wasn't much different or I couldnt find them.

Do you have anything that states otherwise? Is my post on #4 wrong?

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 12:48 PM
Do you have anything that states otherwise? Is my post on #4 wrong?


It's obviously not wrong for federer. Take 20 pros and analyze there swing paths AFTER they hit the slice and i bet they all look different. And it depends on the shot they hit. One slice might look different than another one they hit. So how do YOU know which is the correct technique when 20, virtually all, players all have unique slices, takebacks, followthroughs? If you can see repeatability in EVERY good pro's slice from the tackback to followthrough than you have something. But from my opinion every one's strokes will look different in some form. For me i just watch someone's stroke and if they are obviously not hitting a good shot it should not be too hard to notice what they are doing wrong. I would just tweak their shot and technique to hit a better shot. Not totally overanalyze the shot and teach exactlly like a federer form every little thing he does. That would be a nightmare to a student imo.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:49 PM
I don't know why people think they can post 'instruction' on how to slice or anything really from posting videos or reading a book. You need hands on instruction that a teacher will see what you are doing wrong when you yourself will never see it. No matter how much you study, or post videos of super slo-mo shots.

Wow, now this is just a flame post. How can you say this when I have taught people on court and I am simply sharing my notes and insight on hitting a slice backhand?

And isnt a video posting of player beneficial as well? What is the difference? I can offer much better advice watching a video of a stroke thna trying to see it in real speed.

Is there something so different that it renders providing advice useless here? I think you are just picking a fight. You have yet to provide anything meaningful.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 12:54 PM
Wow, now this is just a flame post. How can you say this when I have taught people on court and I am simply sharing my notes and insight on hitting a slice backhand?



Right, you teach people on the court. Trying to put it down on words for a player and have them think they will have a great slice from reading your notes is laughable. In any stroke. They need to be taught on court. They will never see what they are doing wrong when they try to aplly advice on paper. If you think it's possible that's even more laughable.

Cody
10-23-2009, 12:54 PM
Hopefully you can ignore these guys, i don't think they appeciate you work,

Anyway it thought you might like this video of Slow Mo McEnroe, he hits a slice around :40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI-QiXbIw_I&feature=sub

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:55 PM
It's obviously not wrong for federer.

It is not wrong for Federer? Nobody is comaring what is right and wrong in this thread, just what is common.

Is it against the law to see what is common? Is it wrong to draw a conclusion after you have seen one hundred clips? When do you stop playing the videos, look at the evidence, and decide what is common and can be taught? Never? Everything is always different and nothing is common?

Well, let's look at another pro with a simlar stroke. And by the way, how did these players get a stroke that looks so similar? Are you saying that if Tommy Haas uses the same technique as Federer that we aren't allowed to create instruction around the common traits? Who says so? And can you point to evidence that sa ys, we dont learn by learning from others?

If instruction is being given to players that hit a stroke very similar, is the instruction wrong?

Take 20 pros and analyze there swing paths AFTER they hit the slice and i bet they all look different. And it depends on the shot they hit.

Why after they hit a slice? Again, you are not understanding. I am not trying to analyze the DIFFERENCES in the stroke but the COMMONALITIES.

Do you understand that? I have mentioned plenty of times that players will develop their own unique characteristics.

But what are we doing here? We are trying to understand what is common. And the common stuff also comes from instruction. Anytime you provide advice, it is coming from what you learned and is common amongst players.

One slice might look different than another one they hit. So how do YOU know which is the correct technique when 20, virtually all, players all have unique slices, takebacks, followthroughs?

Easy, because each player will also have things in common.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 12:57 PM
Hopefully you can ignore these guys, i don't think they appeciate you work,

Anyway it thought you might like this video of Slow Mo McEnroe, he hits a slice around :40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI-QiXbIw_I&feature=sub

Nice.

Well, what I hope is the moderator sees that fights start from people like these. UltraHolyGrail has done this since I probably rated him lower than he expected. However, the moderators do not want to see that. I don't know why.

Anyone can sit back and pick someone apart. However, if this person knows so much, I have asked him to help you. I want to sitback and learn. :)

user92626
10-23-2009, 12:59 PM
Exactly. I want to talk about post #4. The one I am trying to understand better. The other two swing paths, I have studied, know how to hit them and teach them. So, what is your thinking about post #4? Would it help if I try to get those pictures?

BB,
It took me a second reading of the post 4 to grasp it. Although I understand your steps in words, pictures will always help.

The way you emphasize in step 3 comfirms with me that the subtle points are the hardest to get. Shoulder being the main hinge, the way your body moves into the shot and especially the physics of hitting and causing the ball to go as you intend, which has to be experienced, is particularly important to me. Recently I just revised my FH because I finally figured out the physic to the contact point! LOL (the result is my FH is now a lot more consistent, powerful and ladened with topspin :))

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:05 PM
Right, you teach people on the court. Trying to put it down on words for a player and have them think they will have a great slice from reading your notes is laughable. In any stroke. They need to be taught on court. They will never see what they are doing wrong when they try to aplly advice on paper. If you think it's possible that's even more laughable.

Well, that is okay if you think they are laugable. However, I havent seen yours yet. And you have two players that need your help.

Also, it isn't instruction, they are what is called observations and notes on what I have observed. I am still waiting for you to point out what is wrong with them.

And I dont disagree with you that strokes are taught on court. Where we disagree is that the court is the only place to learn how to hit a ball.

You also mentioned that we can't teach anyone that posts a video unless we are on court. I disagree with that also. And if that were true, why are you here? Shouldnt you be on the court? ;)

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:08 PM
Nice.

Well, what I hope is the moderator sees that fights start from people like these. UltraHolyGrail has done this since I probably rated him lower than he expected. However, the moderators do not want to see that. I don't know why.


Since when did you ever rate me rofl. Are you joking. I've seen your picture and i rate you 3.5 :)

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:08 PM
BB,
It took me a second reading of the post 4 to grasp it. Although I understand your steps in words, pictures will always help.

The way you emphasize in step 3 comfirms with me that the subtle points are the hardest to get. Shoulder being the main hinge, the way your body moves into the shot and especially the physics of hitting and causing the ball to go as you intend, which has to be experienced, is particularly important to me. Recently I just revised my FH because I finally figured out the physic to the contact point! LOL (the result is my FH is now a lot more consistent, powerful and ladened with topspin :))

yeah, I got to get those pictures up. I will figure it out this weekend.

Dont know much about the physics of stroke and things nor do I want too. However, the obervations I am finding are common in the #4 post for that type of slice bakchand which we see used a lot today.

I can break it down if you want.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:09 PM
Since when did you ever rate me rofl. Are you joking. I've seen your picture and i rate you 3.5 :)

Oh I was just guessing, couldnt remember. But thanks!! I will have to see what is common amongst professional strokes and create some self-study for me to improve. lol

Remember Cody and JackB1 need help. I am very tired and need someone like you to step in with a fresh perspective on learning. I definetly dont want to bog them down with technical jiberish. So, please, take over.

And I am still waiting for your take on #4. What is wrong?

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 01:10 PM
I'm guessing you are not a power player. I never said the slice is not effective. Yes i do have a good slice but it all depends on the style you play. With two handers it's usually all power two handed shot's in a baseline match. They throw in a slice and usually regret it. It's like decideing to play 50% baseline and 50% serve and volley. Usually you need to commit to one gameplan to be great at it. For a power player, especially two handers, the slice is a defensive shot. I'm guessing you have a one hander.

I'm a former power player. Now I use more spin and thought in my game.

And they regret hitting a slice because they hit a poor one. I've never seen anyone do more with my slice than they would with my hardest hit backhands into the corner. Granted that backhand into the corner is more likely to get an obvious short ball, but the slice draws out the slow ball without applying any effort.

And yes I have a one hander. It came more naturally to me but I'm experimenting with a two hander (for fun) and the difference in power is clear. I can easily generate power with a two hander while my one hander usually requires me to feed off of someone else's pace. That's why I've developed the ability to easily handle pace and become more aggressive in my placement instead of power. Though I've done it for so long, my backhand became predictable. (EVERY shot went into the corner if I aimed crosscourt, which makes it easy to set up for if you're sitting crosscourt)

And a power player using a slice isn't being 50/50 in your game plan. Granted some people are 5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5 in their game plan because they have that many options and it prevents the opponent from getting into any kind of groove. It works as long as you can pull it off.

Power players are very one dimensional. That's why there have been so many one handers that have become #1 in the world. They aren't one dimensional. They have options to do different things and think. They aren't robots who hit the same shot over and over again (unless they served and volleyed). They hit a few shots with heavy spin, then throw in the change up. Then they'll throw in the flat bomber and go back to heavy spin. Then they'll rush the net. Being a power player means your limited in your ability to win. Against other power players, the one who wins is the one who can fire the bigger ball. Against smart players, the power player has to think, which he's never done in his life, and it tears him apart. Smart players against smart players, the winner is the one who overall performs their tactics better. You can have smart players who can bang insanely powerful shots like Federer as well as big bangers who try to add variety into their game like Nadal and Djokovic. Power players hit the exact same shot over and over again, and it's easy to get used to. And from there you just start cruising with your strokes against them. That's why it's easy to get drawn into power tennis. You only hit one shot and only deal with one shot.

I can get into power contests with people, and sometimes I'll win and that's all I need to do for the day. But sometimes they'll have the bigger gun(s) and I'll need to start thinking of what should I do to rebalance things in my favor. The answer, heavy spins, lots of very low slices, and occasionally attacking the net. Don't give them pace, and make them hit a variety of shots so they can't use that power of theirs. Personally thinking in matches is far more enjoyable than baseline bashing, though I must admit caveman tennis is very comfortable and calming. :)

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:11 PM
You also mentioned that we can't teach anyone that posts a video unless we are on court. I disagree with that also. And if that were true, why are you here? Shouldnt you be on the court? ;)


I think it's possible to help other when they post a video, so you can tell them what you think they are doing wrong. I never said that was not possible. But your whole instruction on how to hit a slice backhand using super slo mo shots of pro's like federer and thinking every little thing he does is the holy grail of correct technique is pretty disturbing. What's your goal here, to help others or try to glorify or justify your thinking process?

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:17 PM
I think it's possible to help other when they post a video, so you can tell them what you think they are doing wrong.

Really? That is not what you indicated above???

But my question is, how can you provide advice unless you have criteria to evaluate against and give your advice. Where is the criteria and what is it based on?


I never said that was not possible. But your whole instruction on how to hit a slice backhand using super slo mo shots of pro's like federer and thinking every little thing he does is the holy grail of correct technique is pretty disturbing. What's your goal here, to help others or try to glorify or justify your thinking process?

Again, that is not true. Federer is a clip, an example of a stroke that is commonly used today. I could have used Haas, Blake, or anyone else that was in the same angle for my note taking. Also, he isn't the only one I have seen or analyzed.

Why dont you just drop it. I know you are just spinning things out there that aren't true. Anyone with common sense knows that I only used this clip for an analysis. I am not endorsing Federer or Haas, or any other pro player. I am simply looking at the common arm movement in all of them and using Federer's clip because I can't post 100 of them.

Do yourself a favor, give it up.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:19 PM
So enough of this nonsense.

I want to get back to these notes that I took. I will get the pictures and videos to help.


Looking at Federer's "current style" slice backhand.

Purpose: I am studying this a bit because I do not hit slice backhand this way. So, I want to learn how to do it this way for whatever reason (bored, getting old and just want to show off, etc....).

FIRST PICTURE REVIEW:
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger2.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger3.jpg

Okay, so what I see here is we are looking at some photos slightly after the uncoiliing has begun. So, we can assume based on the shoulder position that the front shoulder was tighter to the chin at the end of the racquet preparation phase. So sequencially I see:

1. Weight being transferred to the front foot before contact.

2. Hitting arm is bent to allow for it to extend as the racquet hits the ball at contact.

3. Verified my previous finding that the swing is definetly from the shoulder with that element of arm extension most likely to really spin the crap out of the ball for wicked slice. So he has the stability of the shoulder dominating the stroke as the major hinge in the stroke with a minor hinge (the elbow) used to accelerate the racquet head through the ball. This is very much the same thing the wrist release does in the forehand. Except we are spinning the ball faster rather than putting more power through the ball as the wrist release does in the forehand. Now, for those that understand air flow for topspun and underspun balls, you will understand that Federer is using physics to send the ball over a cushion of air towards his target.

4. A lateral position is established and the back arm is beginning to exert itself to maintain that position.

5. Head is in the proper position and the racquet face from this point of view looks near square.

6. The other thing I see is Federer is establishing a different kind of swing motion. Much like the Windshield wiper motion goes from left to right, this swing is following a clock face going down clockwise (3 o'clock, 4 o'clock, 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock, and so on as you will see in the next frames.

SECOND PICTURE REVIEW
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger4.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger5.jpg

And there it is. The racquet face and hand (always watch the hand pattern which is most important) is following a clock face in front of Federers body using a near perpendicular racquet face.

In this picture:

1. The wrist has slightly broken, however, it isn't allowing the racquet to dangle or get out of control. It will move the racquet back into the "L" shape position as the followthrough matures.

2. Front foot hitting - check.

3. Body is lateral maintaining classic form - check.

4. Head is still, well after the ball is struck - check. Remember the ball is only on the strings for 4 milliseconds, so Federer has maintained his head position well into the stroke and well after he hit the ball. In other words, a long time.

5. There is very little effort here from Federer. It is an effortless swing. Federer truly understands the art side of the slice backhand.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:20 PM
I'm a former power player. Now I use more spin and thought in my game.

And they regret hitting a slice because they hit a poor one. I've never seen anyone do more with my slice than they would with my hardest hit backhands into the corner. Granted that backhand into the corner is more likely to get an obvious short ball, but the slice draws out the slow ball without applying any effort.

And yes I have a one hander. It came more naturally to me but I'm experimenting with a two hander (for fun) and the difference in power is clear. I can easily generate power with a two hander while my one hander usually requires me to feed off of someone else's pace. That's why I've developed the ability to easily handle pace and become more aggressive in my placement instead of power. Though I've done it for so long, my backhand became predictable. (EVERY shot went into the corner if I aimed crosscourt, which makes it easy to set up for if you're sitting crosscourt)

And a power player using a slice isn't being 50/50 in your game plan. Granted some people are 5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5 in their game plan because they have that many options and it prevents the opponent from getting into any kind of groove. It works as long as you can pull it off.

Power players are very one dimensional. That's why there have been so many one handers that have become #1 in the world. They aren't one dimensional. They have options to do different things and think. They aren't robots who hit the same shot over and over again (unless they served and volleyed). They hit a few shots with heavy spin, then throw in the change up. Then they'll throw in the flat bomber and go back to heavy spin. Then they'll rush the net. Being a power player means your limited in your ability to win. Against other power players, the one who wins is the one who can fire the bigger ball. Against smart players, the power player has to think, which he's never done in his life, and it tears him apart. Smart players against smart players, the winner is the one who overall performs their tactics better. You can have smart players who can bang insanely powerful shots like Federer as well as big bangers who try to add variety into their game like Nadal and Djokovic. Power players hit the exact same shot over and over again, and it's easy to get used to. And from there you just start cruising with your strokes against them. That's why it's easy to get drawn into power tennis. You only hit one shot and only deal with one shot.

I can get into power contests with people, and sometimes I'll win and that's all I need to do for the day. But sometimes they'll have the bigger gun(s) and I'll need to start thinking of what should I do to rebalance things in my favor. The answer, heavy spins, lots of very low slices, and occasionally attacking the net. Don't give them pace, and make them hit a variety of shots so they can't use that power of theirs. Personally thinking in matches is far more enjoyable than baseline bashing, though I must admit caveman tennis is very comfortable and calming. :)


lol, i don't disagree with your style of play. I agree that power baseline play tends to be to robotic, one dimensional, lack of strategy etc. I've played baseline and serve and volley and actually love serve and volley more than baseline game. Because of the attack factor. But in todays game against all these power racquets even federer retorts to just pretty much being a baseliner. All this all court play usually only works at club league level. Which is fine by me.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:21 PM
lol, i don't disagree with your style of play. I agree that power baseline play tends to be to robotic, one dimensional, lack of strategy etc. I've played baseline and serve and volley and actually love serve and volley more than baseline game. Because of the attack factor. But in todays game against all these power racquets even federer retorts to just pretty much being a baseliner. All this all court play usually only works at club league level. Which is fine by me.

Federer is referred to as an all-court player. Meaning he can play baseline or go to net when he needs too. lol

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:23 PM
SECOND PICTURE REVIEW
http://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger4.jpghttp://www.tenniscruz.com/images/roger/Roger5.jpg


This is where i have a problem. Not that rogers is bad, obviously not, but you can also go through the ball more instead and have a great slice. So which to teach?

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:26 PM
Federer is referred to as an all-court player. Meaning he can play baseline or go to net when he needs too. lol


Most good players can finish points off at the net, it does not make them a all court player. When you attack the net a large majority of the time then i would say you are all court. Not just comming in to finish off a point.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 01:33 PM
lol, i don't disagree with your style of play. I agree that power baseline play tends to be to robotic, one dimensional, lack of strategy etc. I've played baseline and serve and volley and actually love serve and volley more than baseline game. Because of the attack factor. But in todays game against all these power racquets even federer retorts to just pretty much being a baseliner. All this all court play usually only works at club league level. Which is fine by me.

In finals, when the pressure is on Federer takes advantage of it and attacks the net.

And you disagree with the slice's ability to be an offensive shot, which is a big part of any all court player's repertoire, especially Federer's (and mine, since I learn most of my tactics from watching Federer and Sampras). And shown perfectly in that video of Brian Gottfried, a slice can force errors or break open the point in your favor just as well as a big groundstroke.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:35 PM
Most good players can finish points off at the net, it does not make them a all court player. When you attack the net a large majority of the time then i would say you are all court. Not just comming in to finish off a point.

Really? Well, who says? You? There are players that finish the points at net and then there are players that PLAY net. They just dont come in a finish a point there. So there is no such thing now as an all-court player? Only a baseline player?

I am learning every minute from you. lol

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 01:37 PM
In finals, when the pressure is on Federer takes advantage of it and attacks the net.

And you disagree with the slice's ability to be an offensive shot, which is a big part of any all court player's repertoire, especially Federer's (and mine, since I learn most of my tactics from watching Federer and Sampras). And shown perfectly in that video of Brian Gottfried, a slice can force errors or break open the point in your favor just as well as a big groundstroke.

There is no such thing as an offensive slice and an all-court player. hahaha ;)

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 01:38 PM
There is no such thing as an offensive slice and an all-court player. hahaha ;)

Approach shot. Enough said.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:42 PM
In finals, when the pressure is on Federer takes advantage of it and attacks the net.

And you disagree with the slice's ability to be an offensive shot, which is a big part of any all court player's repertoire, especially Federer's (and mine, since I learn most of my tactics from watching Federer and Sampras). And shown perfectly in that video of Brian Gottfried, a slice can force errors or break open the point in your favor just as well as a big groundstroke.


Try to hit a slice for a passing shot and tell me it's a offensive shot. Only a really good angle would work. Please don't tell me i don't know what a all court or serve and volley plays like and how to use the slice effectively. Yes the slice is very important to play serve and volley and attack tennis. It's a requirement. My point is two handers that play power tennis probably want to avoid the slice as much as possible.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 01:45 PM
Really? Well, who says? You? There are players that finish the points at net and then there are players that PLAY net. They just dont come in a finish a point there. So there is no such thing now as an all-court player? Only a baseline player?

I am learning every minute from you. lol


Federer plays a baseline game, bottom line.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 02:15 PM
Federer plays a baseline game, bottom line.

So, let's turn the table on you. Basically, you have said that I can not say what is definitive and that players have different strokes. Nothing is in common nor can be derived from these strokes because every one is different.

Can your take on life apply to this? If it does, then there is no bottom-line because I can be right too.

Federer's game is considered all-court. Are you saying everyone is wrong?

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 02:17 PM
Approach shot. Enough said.

I figured you might have taken my post wrong. I was actually exaggerating and agreeing with you and disagreeing with Ultra. Of course, a slice backhand can be offensively and that is a fact. Nothing to argue there unless we go into la-la land.

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 02:19 PM
Geez, man, look at the thread again. Read the first post and then the next four posts. Am I looking at footwork? How about the "perfect" stroke? No, all I am doing is analyzing the arm movement.

Also, I am not a tennis teaching professional hence the word former.

Do you have notes to add to the swing paths or not?


You just don't get it, do you? I know that you're "analyzing the arm movement," but I posted what I posted because I wanted to add MY opinion on the matter. Tennis is about more than just swinging your racket a certain way and you should know that, you're a "teaching professional." :oops: If you were someone like Higueras, lansdorp, Bollettieri, Cahill, etc. then I wouldn't really care if you flipped out when someone adds some insight into your "study", but you're NONE of them, nor do you have any students to back up your opnions.

FYI, I came here just to say my first two posts, but you've dragged me along so you can feel better about yourself, and none of your responses make any sense. I can say what I want, I don't have to "add notes to swing paths."

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 02:29 PM
You just don't get it, do you? I know that you're "analyzing the arm movement," but I posted what I posted because I wanted to add MY opinion on the matter.

Nope I don't. I am still stuck on the original purpose of the thread.

Post is on arm swing path, not footwork.

Tennis is about more than just swinging your racket a certain way and you should know that, you're a "teaching professional."

Yeah, no kidding, too bad we arent dicussing that here. Do a search.

FYI, I came here just to say my first two posts, but you've dragged me along so you can feel better about yourself, and none of your responses make any sense. I can say what I want, I don't have to "add notes to swing paths."

Really and what about my first two posts? They dont count? Where are your notes? Since you pointed out that I dont know a whole lot, then what about my notes on the first four posts?

None of them talked about footwork. Sorry for missing the mark there. However, concerning the information as-is, wrong or right? Help me understand?

Explain the difference between the three swing paths so a simpleton like me can understand it. Thanks.

Two players want to learn from you this weekend that asked me for help Cody and JackB1. I will review your response this weekend., Obviously, I just dont get it and you do.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 02:32 PM
Federer's game is considered all-court. Are you saying everyone is wrong?


Do you go with what everyone say's about everything? People say federer is all court because they know he has the capeability and the game to play all court. BUT HE DOES NOT PLAY IT. What's so hard to understand? He does not come into the net enough to be considered 'playing' a all court game. But he certainly has the capeability. He plays a baseline game period.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-23-2009, 02:40 PM
Really and what about my first two posts? They dont count? Where are your notes? Since you pointed out that I dont know a whole lot, then what about my notes on the first four posts?


What about them. I responded to your notes on post 4 and you avoided the question on the slice followthrough. Is all your advice watching super slow-mo vids of pro's like federer. Should we thank you for your analysis on what he is doing? Even if someone elses slice looks vastly different? Are you going to teach somebody that hits through the slice more the 'federer' slice?

AlpineCadet
10-23-2009, 02:46 PM
I should start a thread called "Topspin Forehand Study" and ONLY talk about the swing motion which imparts the topspin on the ball. (Please ignore the misleading thread title :oops:)

I'll also avoid the rest of the junk that we don't need to talk about... like stance, weight distribution, balance, contact point, backswing/follow through, etc. because I'll be the President of that thread and can demand what I want. And if you have any information that doesn't include "swing path" then don't post any outside opinions in my thread (though I might have asked for them in the OP? Oops.)

Don't be confused, I'm following your BB posting rules.

Bungalo Bill
10-23-2009, 04:25 PM
Alpine Cadet,All I can say is with regards to footwork and movement and other things like balance, etc...you are right. A stroke falls apart or is hard to execute without these things.We agree on that. I would never disagree on that.And if I misunderstood your intent with your first post, the let me apoligize. I read your post wrong and I apoligize for that. I really want to understand the swing path and this I think is the first time I have opened my notes and offered them up wrong or right good or bad. I was expecting healthy discussion around this area rather then debate. I am already satisfied with my initial analysis and simply am looking to expand on them.So for real. I don't want to argue with you and I hope you will accept my apoligy.

bad_call
10-23-2009, 07:42 PM
I should start a thread called "Topspin Forehand Study" and ONLY talk about the swing motion which imparts the topspin on the ball. (Please ignore the misleading thread title :oops:)

I'll also avoid the rest of the junk that we don't need to talk about... like stance, weight distribution, balance, contact point, backswing/follow through, etc. because I'll be the President of that thread and can demand what I want. And if you have any information that doesn't include "swing path" then don't post any outside opinions in my thread (though I might have asked for them in the OP? Oops.)

Don't be confused, I'm following your BB posting rules.

Alpine Cadet,All I can say is with regards to footwork and movement and other things like balance, etc...you are right. A stroke falls apart or is hard to execute without these things.We agree on that. I would never disagree on that.And if I misunderstood your intent with your first post, the let me apoligize. I read your post wrong and I apoligize for that. I really want to understand the swing path and this I think is the first time I have opened my notes and offered them up wrong or right good or bad. I was expecting healthy discussion around this area rather then debate. I am already satisfied with my initial analysis and simply am looking to expand on them.So for real. I don't want to argue with you and I hope you will accept my apoligy.

a little late for that.

ttbrowne
10-23-2009, 09:09 PM
Well, its offensive only if you approach the net behind that slice.

So, A shot cannot be called offensive unless you come into the net behind it?
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-23-2009, 11:00 PM
I figured you might have taken my post wrong. I was actually exaggerating and agreeing with you and disagreeing with Ultra. Of course, a slice backhand can be offensively and that is a fact. Nothing to argue there unless we go into la-la land.

Oh yeah... Haha. Forgot about what you said earlier too... ><

Spur of the moment intensity! XD

Jay_The_Nomad
10-24-2009, 01:46 AM
So, A shot cannot be called offensive unless you come into the net behind it?
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Yes.

You have to approach the net after the knifing slice.

You're not going to slice a winner past anyone & the offensive slice isn't going to get you much short replies because the the more astute intermediate players will start bunting back moon balls if they are really struggling with a low skidding ball.

It's not difficult for most people to reach a sliced shot and hit a well weighted lob back.

You need to move in and be prepared to hit the smash or the volley.

Otherwise the point just resets.

ttbrowne
10-24-2009, 07:41 AM
Yes.

You have to approach the net after the knifing slice.

You're not going to slice a winner past anyone & the offensive slice isn't going to get you much short replies because the the more astute intermediate players will start bunting back moon balls if they are really struggling with a low skidding ball.

It's not difficult for most people to reach a sliced shot and hit a well weighted lob back.

You need to move in and be prepared to hit the smash or the volley.

Otherwise the point just resets.


This is the 2nd most ridiculous thing I've heard.
Keep going.

Jay_The_Nomad
10-24-2009, 08:51 AM
This is the 2nd most ridiculous thing I've heard.
Keep going.

If you disagree with something, say what it is exactly and move on.

no need to try to incite a silly back and forth.

bad_call
10-24-2009, 09:14 AM
So, A shot cannot be called offensive unless you come into the net behind it?
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Yes.

You have to approach the net after the knifing slice.

You're not going to slice a winner past anyone & the offensive slice isn't going to get you much short replies because the the more astute intermediate players will start bunting back moon balls if they are really struggling with a low skidding ball.

It's not difficult for most people to reach a sliced shot and hit a well weighted lob back.

You need to move in and be prepared to hit the smash or the volley.

Otherwise the point just resets.

no... the slice can be hit offensively without coming to net.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-24-2009, 12:09 PM
I guess you can say any shot can be hit offensvely. From the baseline it's usually just a defensive shot for a player to get into better position, or simply a more consistent shot to hit to try to force a error. But rarely a slice is used to hit a winner. Notice how you don't see many use a forehand slice on a groundstroke anymore? Unless they are on the full run like roddick or the new fad of slicing a forehand return. Even on approach shots it's usually just effective because it gives you time to get to net.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-24-2009, 12:41 PM
This is pretty funny with sampras and federer hitting slices. Does it look like a offensive stroke? :) Sampras clearly hits's through the slice more and federer has that clock motion BB seems very found of.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_e6ibJr1Q

chess9
10-24-2009, 12:44 PM
BB is doing this as a favor to the tennis community. This isn't politics, religion, or racquets, so I see no reason to get ugly.

Please try to keep it civil. At least in this forum. If you have an alternate idea that is ON TOPIC, then offer it HUMBLY, and not as though it was just handed to you by Moses fresh off the presses!

-Robert

AlpineCadet
10-24-2009, 12:53 PM
Alpine Cadet,All I can say is with regards to footwork and movement and other things like balance, etc...you are right. A stroke falls apart or is hard to execute without these things.We agree on that. I would never disagree on that.And if I misunderstood your intent with your first post, the let me apoligize. I read your post wrong and I apoligize for that. I really want to understand the swing path and this I think is the first time I have opened my notes and offered them up wrong or right good or bad. I was expecting healthy discussion around this area rather then debate. I am already satisfied with my initial analysis and simply am looking to expand on them.So for real. I don't want to argue with you and I hope you will accept my apoligy.

No worries!

bad_call
10-24-2009, 02:36 PM
BB is doing this as a favor to the tennis community. This isn't politics, religion, or racquets, so I see no reason to get ugly.

Please try to keep it civil. At least in this forum. If you have an alternate idea that is ON TOPIC, then offer it HUMBLY, and not as though it was just handed to you by Moses fresh off the presses!

-Robert

my vid posts were an effort to inform the OP and no where was there any bashing, etc on my part. apparently it wasn't taken as such...despite the obvious. if in doubt read "L shaped arm" (not hand but arm) in post #2 and watch the vids.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-24-2009, 04:42 PM
Try to hit a slice for a passing shot and tell me it's a offensive shot. Only a really good angle would work. Please don't tell me i don't know what a all court or serve and volley plays like and how to use the slice effectively. Yes the slice is very important to play serve and volley and attack tennis. It's a requirement. My point is two handers that play power tennis probably want to avoid the slice as much as possible.

Funny you should mention that. I've pulled it off multiple times. :)

Funnier part is Federer does it often!

All you need is placement and pace. The lack of height and the heavy spin will add to the difficulty of volleying it.

And trying to hit a passing shot in general requires a good angle to get a clean winner anyways!

Your arguments really aren't that good...

Two handers playing power tennis only have 3 shots: serve, big forehand, big backhand. They're mindless bangers and their lack of intelligence requires them to stick to whatever their brain can keep them to. Is that what you're saying? In that case I won't argue that too much, but I'll keep my overall position on that opinion to myself.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-24-2009, 07:36 PM
Two handers playing power tennis only have 3 shots: serve, big forehand, big backhand. They're mindless bangers and their lack of intelligence requires them to stick to whatever their brain can keep them to. Is that what you're saying? In that case I won't argue that too much, but I'll keep my overall position on that opinion to myself.



Like it or not that's how the game is played today. Most good two handers can hit a good one handed slice. And can usually volley and finish off points at the net. That's just the benifet of having a consistent two hander. You don't have to rely on a slice as much as a one hander who usually lacks consistentcy with their one hander from groundstrokes, passing shots, and returns. . If the slice is such a great weapon why don't pro's hit a forehand slice often? Are they just mindless forehand bashers? The reason is there is no need and everybodys forehand is consistent enough not to even think about using a forehand slice or even learning how to hit one. You can have the greatest all court serve and volley game ever and lose to a baseliner who hit's nothing but forehands and two handed backhands. The one hander just can't pull it off due to consistentcy.

ubermeyer
10-24-2009, 08:52 PM
This is pretty funny with sampras and federer hitting slices. Does it look like a offensive stroke?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG7_7cNkxG0
1:10 - 1:30

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-25-2009, 01:33 AM
Like it or not that's how the game is played today. Most good two handers can hit a good one handed slice. And can usually volley and finish off points at the net. That's just the benifet of having a consistent two hander. You don't have to rely on a slice as much as a one hander who usually lacks consistentcy with their one hander from groundstrokes, passing shots, and returns. . If the slice is such a great weapon why don't pro's hit a forehand slice often? Are they just mindless forehand bashers? The reason is there is no need and everybodys forehand is consistent enough not to even think about using a forehand slice or even learning how to hit one. You can have the greatest all court serve and volley game ever and lose to a baseliner who hit's nothing but forehands and two handed backhands. The one hander just can't pull it off due to consistentcy.

It has NOTHING to do with consistency. It's POWER! Two handers can hit the ball incredibly flat. Do you realize how much more power can be generated if you're allowed to rotate your shoulders through a shot?! The back muscles required to hit a one handed backhand are very undeveloped compared to the chest muscles used in a forehand and two handed backhand.

And you do realize how hard it is to knife a forehand slice as well as a backhand slice right? Even so, Federer would (and sometimes still does) throw in the occasional forehand slice. And he has what's widely considered the best forehand in the history of the game! I'm not even talking about squash shots either. And Santoro hit 90% of his forehands as slices!

The greatest all court player should not lose to the greatest basher in the game unless the basher is playing the best of his life and that elevates him to playing a level of tennis higher than the all court player is playing. Safin vs. Federer displays this well enough. Agassi vs. Sampras is another great example. Safin and Agassi can blast the ball all day long and still lose to Federer and Sampras. Safin and Agassi only win when they're playing out of their minds (or when Sampras is on clay or when either Sampras or Federer are playing poorly).

Two handers aren't more consistent unless you're a 5 year old and REALLY don't have the muscles to pull off a one hander. Consistency varies from player to player. If anything, a one hander is MORE consistent than a two hander because it generates more spin. But in terms of power, a one hander can never beat a two hander because of the anatomical advantages of using a two hander. A one hander has very little to derive it's power from while a two hander has nearly the entire body! And that would be another reason a one hander is more consistent, because of its simplicity. If you're only relying on one muscle/joint to hit the shot, very little can go wrong in swinging the racket. But when you use the entire body, if one thing is off it can throw off the whole swing. Granted it'll be less susceptible to fatigue and it grants far more power potential, but the simplest two hander is nowhere near as simple as the simplest one hander. Anything simple will always be more consistent.

Two handers are the fast track to winning matches. That's why you see two handers dominating the junior divisions. But when you look at the pro level, you see far more one handers. Why? Because the one hander actually THINKS on the court on how to win instead of just playing shots mindlessly. It could also be the consistency factor... Maybe as juniors with two handers try to go pro, they don't have the consistency required to win points.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-25-2009, 02:13 AM
And you do realize how hard it is to knife a forehand slice as well as a backhand slice right? Even so, Federer would (and sometimes still does) throw in the occasional forehand slice. And he has what's widely considered the best forehand in the history of the game! I'm not even talking about squash shots either. And Santoro hit 90% of his forehands as slices!

I've been watching federer for years and he never hits a forehand slice as a groundstroke unless he is on the run and can barley reach the ball and uses it as a desperation shot like roddick does. But he does use the forehand slice on the return, also like roddick does. But a groundstroke? Heck no. And santoro? I was going to mention him as one a of the few to hit a forehand slice, i should of knew he would be used as a example but let's be honest, no pro's hit a forehand slice on a regular groundstrokes anymore.

The greatest all court player should not lose to the greatest basher in the game unless the basher is playing the best of his life and that elevates him to playing a level of tennis higher than the all court player is playing. Safin vs. Federer displays this well enough. Agassi vs. Sampras is another great example. Safin and Agassi can blast the ball all day long and still lose to Federer and Sampras. Safin and Agassi only win when they're playing out of their minds (or when Sampras is on clay or when either Sampras or Federer are playing poorly).

For one thing sampras beats agassi because of one important thing, his serve. From the baseline agassi crushes sampras. It's not even compareable. Safin vs federer? When safin was on his game he could beat roger. Same with nalbandian, djokovic, delpotro. Roger is a great baseliner but i don't think he is THAT great. Nadal, federers main rival, proves time after time especially the beatdowns on clay, the grail of baseline tournaments, who the better baseliner is. Federers overall game from his serve-footwork-and great forehand wins him matches. Many just can't overcome that even if ther backhand is better, which most players he face they usually are.




Two handers aren't more consistent unless you're a 5 year old and REALLY don't have the muscles to pull off a one hander. Consistency varies from player to player. If anything, a one hander is MORE consistent than a two hander because it generates more spin. But in terms of power, a one hander can never beat a two hander because of the anatomical advantages of using a two hander. A one hander has very little to derive it's power from while a two hander has nearly the entire body! And that would be another reason a one hander is more consistent, because of its simplicity. If you're only relying on one muscle/joint to hit the shot, very little can go wrong in swinging the racket. But when you use the entire body, if one thing is off it can throw off the whole swing. Granted it'll be less susceptible to fatigue and it grants far more power potential, but the simplest two hander is nowhere near as simple as the simplest one hander. Anything simple will always be more consistent.

Two handers are the fast track to winning matches. That's why you see two handers dominating the junior divisions. But when you look at the pro level, you see far more one handers. Why? Because the one hander actually THINKS on the court on how to win instead of just playing shots mindlessly. It could also be the consistency factor... Maybe as juniors with two handers try to go pro, they don't have the consistency required to win points.

Talk about arguments not being very good, i don't think you will convince anybody a one handed backhand is more consistent than a two hander. You are smoking crack and riding the sampras-federer dream of because they use a one hander it must be better than a two hander if you really believe that. Only begginers think that. History has proven two handers are the better baseliners. Borg, nadal,connors. More consistent groundstrokes, and returns. Even martina navratilova has said she would rather teach the two hander. Did you ever see how ruthless evert exposed her backhand? Let's try to stay on subject of the slice. We can start a one handed vs two thread if you want.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-25-2009, 02:47 AM
. If anything, a one hander is MORE consistent than a two hander because it generates more spin. But in terms of power, a one hander can never beat a two hander because of the anatomical advantages of using a two hander. A one hander has very little to derive it's power from while a two hander has nearly the entire body! And that would be another reason a one hander is more consistent, because of its simplicity. If you're only relying on one muscle/joint to hit the shot, very little can go wrong in swinging the racket


Sorry but this is all way off. In terms of power on a groundstrokes the one hander is far more powerful. I admire the pace of a good one hander when it's struck well. And it by chance goes in instead of a shank or a flyer into the wall-fence or way off into the next courts. Gasquet can hit a harder one hander than any two hander. My 4.0 friend can hit a harder one hander than i can hit a two by far. But he always loses and does not get those in too much. But when he does it's his best shot. Better than his forehand also. Two handers prefer pace to help them with power. That's why they have such great returns. Pace from the serve and the stability of the the two hander.

xFullCourtTenniSx
10-25-2009, 04:01 AM
I've been watching federer for years and he never hits a forehand slice as a groundstroke unless he is on the run and can barley reach the ball and uses it as a desperation shot like roddick does. But he does use the forehand slice on the return, also like roddick does. But a groundstroke? Heck no. And santoro? I was going to mention him as one a of the few to hit a forehand slice, i should of knew he would be used as a example but let's be honest, no pro's hit a forehand slice on a regular groundstrokes anymore.



For one thing sampras beats agassi because of one important thing, his serve. From the baseline agassi crushes sampras. It's not even compareable. Safin vs federer? When safin was on his game he could beat roger. Same with nalbandian, djokovic, delpotro. Roger is a great baseliner but i don't think he is THAT great. Nadal, federers main rival, proves time after time especially the beatdowns on clay, the grail of baseline tournaments, who the better baseliner is. Federers overall game from his serve-footwork-and great forehand wins him matches. Many just can't overcome that even if ther backhand is better, which most players he face they usually are.






Talk about arguments not being very good, i don't think you will convince anybody a one handed backhand is more consistent than a two hander. You are smoking crack and riding the sampras-federer dream of because they use a one hander it must be better than a two hander if you really believe that. Only begginers think that. History has proven two handers are the better baseliners. Borg, nadal,connors. More consistent groundstrokes, and returns. Even martina navratilova has said she would rather teach the two hander. Did you ever see how ruthless evert exposed her backhand? Let's try to stay on subject of the slice. We can start a one handed vs two thread if you want.

And Federer does occasionally use the slice out of the blue. It's rare, which is why when it happens everyone is stunned and he wins points with it. Nobody sees it coming, and they aren't prepared for the drastic change of pace.

And why shouldn't Santoro be mentioned? He was one of the greatest change up players ever. He could mess your rhythm up as well as he could pull tricks from between his legs. Few people have the balls to play this kind of tennis. Few people will admit that this kind of tennis works better for them. Few people are willing to admit that their opponents will LOOK better cause they can bomb big ones all day, but in the end results are what matter.

And we're comparing overall games. All court tennis means using EVERY OPTION AVAILABLE TO YOU! Sampras had a big serve like Agassi had a big return. And Sampras could still hang in a few baseline rallies like Agassi could rip return winners. Bottom line is Sampras had more options and used them to beat Agassi. Otherwise Sampras would never break Agassi and Agassi would win cause Sampras wouldn't win points off the return and everyone would wait until Agassi gets a few good returns together to take the whole set. But that's clearly not the case.

And in Federer versus Safin, you're proving my exact point! People can only beat Federer when they're playing the best tennis of their lives! Nalbandian doesn't count for your argument because he's an all court player. He will go to the net more than Federer does! He'll mix things up far more than most other baseliners on the tour. But bottom line, to beat Federer you need some big firepower to beat him while ALSO playing your best and/or him playing below his.

Nadal is different. He's like Federer in the way that he's a talent that will never be replicated with a style that is totally unique. He hits the heaviest topspin ball known to man AND he's a lefty. This mean he essentially trashes every right hander who's backhand isn't better than their forehand, which is easily 60-70% of the people on the tour. And like I said, with only the shoulder muscles working the backhand, you can't put much on the ball, especially one that bounces that high. A two hander can use their body to get a little more on it, an anatomical advantage like I stated earlier. It still affects both of them greatly, but the two hander can alleviate some of the fatigue on the shoulder muscles while also getting more on the ball by sharing the load on the rest of their body.

Two handers are generally seen as the better baseliners because that's all they do! They HAVE to be better from the baseline or else they wouldn't be where they are. From the baseline at that high of a level, the guy with the bigger guns wins. Period. If your shots aren't bigger than your opponent, you're done.

It's the same idea as rallying fast and slow forehands. At the same speeds as what they can hit, both of them can have the exact same levels of consistency, hell the slower forehand can even be way more consistent. But when they hit against each other, the one with the bigger shot is perceived to be more consistent because the power he generates reduces the consistency of the other player. Try this out yourself. Play someone well above your level and ask them to bomb shots that they can get in no more than 10 consecutively. Even if you can normally hit 20 balls without making an error, you'll make errors before 5 because if you want to keep up, you have to go above what you can generate, dropping your consistency levels. If you just play consistently, you'll be overpowered by the pace they generate, and you will get killed anyway even if you're just blocking balls back. This same concept can be applied to the different backhands.

And you're the one who started this.

Sorry but this is all way off. In terms of power on a groundstrokes the one hander is far more powerful. I admire the pace of a good one hander when it's struck well. And it by chance goes in instead of a shank or a flyer into the wall-fence or way off into the next courts. Gasquet can hit a harder one hander than any two hander. My 4.0 friend can hit a harder one hander than i can hit a two by far. But he always loses and does not get those in too much. But when he does it's his best shot. Better than his forehand also. Two handers prefer pace to help them with power. That's why they have such great returns. Pace from the serve and the stability of the the two hander.

People have done slow motion testing of the one handed backhand versus the two handed backhand and have found out that the one handed backhand actually generates more spin.

And at a 4.0 level, you're not consistent players anyway. His rally backhand will be weaker than a majority of two handed rally backhands. Not only that, 4.0s will rarely see the kind of offensive slice we're talking about because you don't have the ability to produce it. So how the hell can you post your opinion as it is when you've never even experienced this shot?!

And a player's best shot is always their more consistent one, day in and day out regardless of the speed it's hit at. The total consistency of the stroke will also include the shot's ability to handle a wider variety of shots. This is why the forehand is most people's better shot. It can handle higher levels of pace and higher bouncing balls and still get a lot of them in. Very few backhands can exceed the forehand in these respects. The biggest problem is usually the ability to generate and handle pace. So there's no way your friend's backhand should even come anywhere near consideration for being his best shot. People say my forehand is clearly my better shot, but the fact is my backhand can more comfortably handle a wider variety of shots at higher levels of pace. My forehand can still handle it, but my backhand will be the shot that can get a few more shots in. In terms of pace and what I can do with it, my forehand is the better shot, but in terms of consistency it's the backhand. It's not just "IF" you get it in. It's can you get it in no matter what. AFTER that it's what can you do with the shot.

And while Gasquet can hit a very big backhand, I'm sure there are a handful of two handers who can generate more pace than he can.

Also, EVERYONE prefers pace to help them generate power. My biggest backhands are hit off my opponent's bigger shots. When people hit insanely huge passing shots off my approach shots, it's because they used the pace of my shot. I'll rip a big one and they'll get it back even harder just by accelerating the racket through contact. They don't even hit that big of a stroke, they just redirected my pace.

And two handers are better returners because they are more adept with dealing with power and can produce more power with far less movement. They just have to turn their shoulders then uncoil into the ball whereas one handers have to turn their shoulders and swing through the ball!

At the 4.0 level, you shouldn't talk about the differences between two handers and one handers. At your level, one handers are still well into the developing stages. It takes years of technical and physical development to truly tap the potential of the one hander. But even after all that, two handers who undergo the same training will still hit the ball harder. So one handers must think of how to bridge the gap with tactics. At a 4.0 level, you're worried about just getting the ball in. Once you hit at least 5.5+, you're not worried about getting it in at all (cause you can do it as well as, if not better than, everyone else), you're worried about generating power and dealing with power.

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:28 AM
Oh yeah... Haha. Forgot about what you said earlier too... ><

Spur of the moment intensity! XD

No problem.

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:34 AM
I should start a thread called "Topspin Forehand Study" and ONLY talk about the swing motion which imparts the topspin on the ball. (Please ignore the misleading thread title :oops:)

I'll also avoid the rest of the junk that we don't need to talk about... like stance, weight distribution, balance, contact point, backswing/follow through, etc. because I'll be the President of that thread and can demand what I want. And if you have any information that doesn't include "swing path" then don't post any outside opinions in my thread (though I might have asked for them in the OP? Oops.)

Don't be confused, I'm following your BB posting rules.

Well, Alpine I have had many posts that promote good footwork and movement. I understand this. However, this post was simply trying to understand the swing paths of the backhand slice.

You are not wrong at all and I guess I misread your intent on your post.

I am not trying to say what is right or wrong in this post but simply to analyze how the arm works in this particular stroke. I am not analyzig footwork, footwork patterns, balance, kinetic chain, or anything else like that.

And because I am analzying this mainly for me does not mean I am discounting anything else. If you really think I am ignoring anything else about the slice backhand, then you probably should do a search on the posts that I have had through out the years on the slice backhand. I hope you would take that into context and realize this is simply a small isolated study on a section of the slice backhand.

I thought about it and I did jump the gun on your post. I dont know what else to say and you certainly dont have to accept my apoligy. However, it is there and I need to move on with what I want to do with this post.

chess9
10-25-2009, 09:36 AM
I lost to a 5.0 this morning with a very strong slice backhand. We were playing on Har-tru courts and the ball was skidding very fast. He would hit the service return right down the middle and I would have to step around it so I could miss my forehand. ;) I tried hitting my slice back to his backhand, but I couldn't hit it as hard, and every time I chipped it down the line he was standing there ready to blast a 100 mph topspin forehand. Twas a deadly mother.....

-Robert

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:36 AM
So, anyone want to talke about post #4????? Do we still need the pictures?

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:44 AM
here's one of Henin who finishes fully extended and not L shaped.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GzW401yri4

obviously the slice can be varied to produce different shot types.

The finish (when the stroke ends) is not what we are talking about all the time with the L shape, although a player can finish with an L shape and rotate at the forearm which Henin is pretty close to doing by seeing the wrist still layed back.

The L shape is primarly for the contact point with the ball and through much of the followthrough which Henin is clearly demonstrating. Of course, the arm is going to relax and various things happening.

The L shape is clearly maintain through contact and much through the followtrough. From about .09 go .19 Henin is clearly maintaining an L shape arm through the ball. And because it is in slo-mo, it makes it even more significant.

L shape is most important through CONTACT, this has been discussed before.

Roy125
10-25-2009, 09:48 AM
Is a slice backhand really that effortless?!

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:49 AM
Is a slice backhand really that effortless?!

What do you mean Roy? Are you referring to something you saw?

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 09:51 AM
I lost to a 5.0 this morning with a very strong slice backhand. We were playing on Har-tru courts and the ball was skidding very fast. He would hit the service return right down the middle and I would have to step around it so I could miss my forehand. ;) I tried hitting my slice back to his backhand, but I couldn't hit it as hard, and every time I chipped it down the line he was standing there ready to blast a 100 mph topspin forehand. Twas a deadly mother.....

-Robert

Hmmmm, perhaps it was more about knowing where you were going to hit the ball and he was simply in goof position to nail what you were giving him. Added sting was a good slice backhand on his part.

For those that have a good slice backhand, it can play havoc on an opponents game.

chess9
10-25-2009, 11:57 AM
Hmmmm, perhaps it was more about knowing where you were going to hit the ball and he was simply in goof position to nail what you were giving him. Added sting was a good slice backhand on his part.

For those that have a good slice backhand, it can play havoc on an opponents game.

Yes, and gives this thread special importance. At least for me. It's hard enough playing with one foot in the coffin, let alone having to deal with a 40 mph backhand slice that gets eaten like chocolate covered raisins. ;)

-Robert

Bungalo Bill
10-25-2009, 01:11 PM
Yes, and gives this thread special importance. At least for me. It's hard enough playing with one foot in the coffin, let alone having to deal with a 40 mph backhand slice that gets eaten like chocolate covered raisins. ;)

-Robert

Those players that somehow know where you are going to hit your next ball are a pain in the rump to play aren't they? You line up the shot, you move into position, and hit a cleanly. You even attempt to move that ball around so that your opponent doesn't hit to an opening and as soon as you look forward after you hit your shot, you are surprised the guy is already there to hit his shot. :)

So, Robert, what about post #4, have you had a chance to read it? I am still trying to get the photos posted because it will really help.

chess9
10-25-2009, 05:15 PM
Hmmmm, perhaps it was more about knowing where you were going to hit the ball and he was simply in goof position to nail what you were giving him. Added sting was a good slice backhand on his part.

For those that have a good slice backhand, it can play havoc on an opponents game.

I've read post 4, yes. It's very clear to me. No pictures are up yet. I understand it all. Brilliant stuff, BB, as usual. Your posts are like a textbook on tennis.

I actually HAD one of the best backhand slices around in college, 45 years ago. I still have a fairly sweet backhand slice, however, it isn't as punchy as it once was, and when I'm hitting against that low very hard skidding slice, I tend to go a bit careful on the shot. It's my most reliable shot, as my forehand is a shot I will lose in a heartbeat.

I tried dropshotting the guy off that shot today, and it worked three times, but about 10 times he scarfed it up like a Quarter Pounder getting eaten by a starving Sudanese. ;)

I'm just getting old and slow, but I'm having fun staying fit, and I can still run, so who am I to complain? Lots of my Marine buddies are living in wheelchairs. I've had a charmed existence....

-Robert

AlpineCadet
10-25-2009, 10:09 PM
I've read post 4, yes. It's very clear to me. No pictures are up yet. I understand it all. Brilliant stuff, BB, as usual. Your posts are like a textbook on tennis.

I actually HAD one of the best backhand slices around in college, 45 years ago. I still have a fairly sweet backhand slice, however, it isn't as punchy as it once was, and when I'm hitting against that low very hard skidding slice, I tend to go a bit careful on the shot. It's my most reliable shot, as my forehand is a shot I will lose in a heartbeat.

I tried dropshotting the guy off that shot today, and it worked three times, but about 10 times he scarfed it up like a Quarter Pounder getting eaten by a starving Sudanese. ;)

I'm just getting old and slow, but I'm having fun staying fit, and I can still run, so who am I to complain? Lots of my Marine buddies are living in wheelchairs. I've had a charmed existence....

-Robert

I'm sure your slice stroke is fine, but it's the timing/contact point/position that's keeping you 45 years back.

Ultra2HolyGrail
10-25-2009, 11:18 PM
Two handers are generally seen as the better baseliners because that's all they do! They HAVE to be better from the baseline or else they wouldn't be where they are.

That's funny, but the same is true with the majority of one handers in the past. They HAVE to serve and volley and attack the net. If they don't they lose. Sure a handful like lendl, guga, federer, can play with a one hander from the baseline. But you have to admit it's RARE for a one hander to be a great baseliner and have their backhand noted to being a great shot. This is why you are probably forced to play a 'full court' game.


People have done slow motion testing of the one handed backhand versus the two handed backhand and have found out that the one handed backhand actually generates more spin.

Maybe. But pace there is no way. the one hander has too much racquet head speed.


And while Gasquet can hit a very big backhand, I'm sure there are a handful of two handers who can generate more pace than he can.

Nope.

And at a 4.0 level, you're not consistent players anyway. His rally backhand will be weaker than a majority of two handed rally backhands. Not only that, 4.0s will rarely see the kind of offensive slice we're talking about because you don't have the ability to produce it. So how the hell can you post your opinion as it is when you've never even experienced this shot?

?. I play my friend because i grew up and played high school with him. That does not make me a 4.0 player. He was ranked 1 in 4.5's one year. Out of about 25 times i played him in the last 10 years he has never beaten me.

And a player's best shot is always their more consistent one, day in and day out regardless of the speed it's hit at. The total consistency of the stroke will also include the shot's ability to handle a wider variety of shots. This is why the forehand is most people's better shot. It can handle higher levels of pace and higher bouncing balls and still get a lot of them in. Very few backhands can exceed the forehand in these respects. The biggest problem is usually the ability to generate and handle pace. So there's no way your friend's backhand should even come anywhere near consideration for being his best shot. People say my forehand is clearly my better shot, but the fact is my backhand can more comfortably handle a wider variety of shots at higher levels of pace. My forehand can still handle it, but my backhand will be the shot that can get a few more shots in. In terms of pace and what I can do with it, my forehand is the better shot, but in terms of consistency it's the backhand. It's not just "IF" you get it in. It's can you get it in no matter what. AFTER that it's what can you do with the shot.

And while Gasquet can hit a very big backhand, I'm sure there are a handful of two handers who can generate more pace than he can.

Also, EVERYONE prefers pace to help them generate power. My biggest backhands are hit off my opponent's bigger shots. When people hit insanely huge passing shots off my approach shots, it's because they used the pace of my shot. I'll rip a big one and they'll get it back even harder just by accelerating the racket through contact. They don't even hit that big of a stroke, they just redirected my pace.

And two handers are better returners because they are more adept with dealing with power and can produce more power with far less movement. They just have to turn their shoulders then uncoil into the ball whereas one handers have to turn their shoulders and swing through the ball!

At the 4.0 level, you shouldn't talk about the differences between two handers and one handers. At your level, one handers are still well into the developing stages. It takes years of technical and physical development to truly tap the potential of the one hander. But even after all that, two handers who undergo the same training will still hit the ball harder. So one handers must think of how to bridge the gap with tactics. At a 4.0 level, you're worried about just getting the ball in. Once you hit at least 5.5+, you're not worried about getting it in at all (cause you can do it as well as, if not better than, everyone else), you're worried about generating power and dealing with power.


This is really going no where. You can defend your one hander and i will the two hander. I myself never played a one hander and had a great baseline match. They just are never consistent enough. That does not mean i havent lost to one handers because i have. I'm sure there are some out there but i have never played one. All my memorable baseline matches have been against two handers.

Bungalo Bill
10-26-2009, 08:00 AM
I've read post 4, yes. It's very clear to me. No pictures are up yet. I understand it all. Brilliant stuff, BB, as usual. Your posts are like a textbook on tennis.

Okay, that is good. I got to get those pictures going. Just having a hard time doing it. They just wont post, so I am looking for others that are fitting.

I actually HAD one of the best backhand slices around in college, 45 years ago. I still have a fairly sweet backhand slice, however, it isn't as punchy as it once was, and when I'm hitting against that low very hard skidding slice, I tend to go a bit careful on the shot. It's my most reliable shot, as my forehand is a shot I will lose in a heartbeat.

Yup, my backhand slice used to be my go to shot as well. Now, it is more mixed in.

I tried dropshotting the guy off that shot today, and it worked three times, but about 10 times he scarfed it up like a Quarter Pounder getting eaten by a starving Sudanese. ;)

Hahaha, sounds like he just had your number a bit. It happens. Maybe you were telegraphing a bit.

I'm just getting old and slow, but I'm having fun staying fit, and I can still run, so who am I to complain? Lots of my Marine buddies are living in wheelchairs. I've had a charmed existence....

-Robert

Yes, old and slow. I like to think it as aging and getting a little slower. :)