confused w/ the term "MTM"

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by mr_fro2000, Sep 28, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    good questions here, but matters little if you think about the across as deliberate
    or that it is a consequence of the swing...that is really the same. You deliberately
    swing so that the racket works across the ball, as a consequence of that swing.

    Your son is being coached wrong imo unless he is only hitting the last of the 3 balls.
    you can swing near straight to the last ball thru 3-5, but hit and
    work across the last one.
    I really don't like that teaching in any way I've seen it though, but just trying
    to make some sense of it.
     
  2. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    No, no more than say what happens after does not matter. None of it is without
    the other. In this case, they are clearly connected by contact.
     
  3. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    glad you love the discussion and I agree, it is a good issue to explore, as so
    many seem to misunderstand it.

    Pretty sure it is not a big danger, as I've never run into that problem.
    I'm thinking the "finding the ball" alignment segment sets things up so
    that does not happen. It is all related as a unit and looking at one part
    separate does not always make the process more clear. We don't teach
    in pieces and I only deal with it this way here due to the questions on here.
     
  4. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I like your vid here, but the angle is not the best. I still think anyone can see
    how the hand is working across if they have an open mind to the concept.
    You can also see he could extend the bend in his elbow or step more into the
    ball if his goal was to extend on the target line past contact; clearly would NOT
    have to stretch his arm as some have suggested.
     
  5. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Not perfect, but a better angle here for seeing the across as well as the open
    stance picked when he has time to get set vs the closed or neutral stance many
    suggest for stepping in on short ball attacks.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xog5U2WAKbI&feature=player_detailpage#t=18s
    and here is one on a recovery Fh I like-
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rIGDNtZ0ac&feature=player_detailpage#t=24s
    see how he works across.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  6. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Still waiting for an answer to this one.
     
  7. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Isn't that just the consequence of Nadal's pronounced racket drag leading to the
    hand covering where the handle goes in the following pics?
     
  8. ga tennis

    ga tennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,710
    All your questions can be answered for free by someone who has trained several pros from 8 to the tour. Its funny reading alot of this nonsense people put on this site. If you need heart surgery do you go to someone who says they know how to do it but has no track record or do you go to someone who has a proven solid track record? Go to www.virtualtennisacademy.com and all your questions will be answered.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  9. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Yep, Oscar fits that description, but actually your avg guy on tour is not usually
    aware of most of these details.
    Your analogy is more like asking the guy details who just got the heart surgery, :)
    It's not him that did the study... it's the doc and he learned it from study, then
    practice in OR...not the other way around.
     
  10. ga tennis

    ga tennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,710
    Too funny!!! If you are just starting tennis im sure Oscar or V.Braden will be very helpful.
     
  11. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Since you are familiar with that site...is Heath still teaching to get the racket
    back facing the back fence as you run to the ball? Maybe that is related to the
    work on WTA?
    Either way, most posters on here are more beginner 3.5-low 4.0 status, even if your comment
    was valid.
     
  12. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    Heath used to teach that? Are you sure? I've seen every vid on his site numerous times and most of the big forehand videos are 4-5 years old and he doesn't teach racquet facing the back fence in those. He's pretty adamant about the racquet facing the side more or less with a neutral wrist in all his vids and articles.
    Was that a long time ago you are referring too?
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  13. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    It's been quite a few years around 2000, and he was/is a pretty good coach, but I mainly
    mention it because that poster (who may be Heath) is poking fun at Oscar & vic.
    2000 has been a few years, but Oscar knew better than that a decade or
    so before 2000. I don't think there is anything in the millennium Fh that the
    modern Fh needs and it also had an overemphasis on extension back in the day.
    Imo virtual academy seemed to borrow heavy from Oscar's system with some their
    own adjustments that were off a bit. Maybe he developed it mostly on his own and
    just got sort of close to what Oscar did 15+ yrs before?? don't know.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  14. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    ok. just checking. i just know it's not there now. no biggie.

    Not sure what you mean by "don't think there is anything in the millennium Fh that the modern Fh needs". That fh is pretty good i think. That vid teaches a good ready position, unit turn, takeback, racquet position, some ssc in there, contact point, swing path, follow through and several finishes. It looks just like fh's of today if you ask me. He coaches his wife who is still on the tour and played in the u.s open this year and she has a henin type swing. swings like a guy.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  15. toly

    toly Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,993
    The following pictures show the initial movements of Nadal forward swing.

    [​IMG]

    He applies arm supination and wrist extension. That’s why tip of the racquet moves backward relative to his left leg, but arm and racquet’s handle travel forward. Compare pic.1 and pic.3.

    Maybe next picture can reduce optical illusion.

    [​IMG]

    You also can check JY tennisplayer.net original video http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/tw/nadal/swing_path.html. :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  16. bhupaes

    bhupaes Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    957
    This is a crucial observation - that the tip of the racquet is actually moving to the left, while the hand is actually pulling the racquet to the right.

    What is happening is that Nadal is rotating his upper arm, as in internal shoulder rotation. This causes the racquet that is pointing downwards to become more horizontal, and the tip moves outwards faster than the hand is moving in. This is the real effect of pulling across - it whips the racquet outwards, forwards and upwards, due to the leverage of the arm structure. This is the purpose of pulling in - it is not for adding sidespin.

    In general, the racquet is pulled in using two movements - internal shoulder rotation, and the biceps. Those with bent arm forehands use the biceps more than those who use straight arms. Nadal clearly is an extreme sort of guy :), and seems to be using only ISR.

    Sidespin can happen, however. If the grip is more western, the pulling in of the racquet causes the head to rise up more vertically, which is what this particular stroke sequence is showing. If the grip is more eastern, I think there will be more forward and sideways movement, as I suspect happens in Federer's stroke.

    One more thing - the pulling in starts a little before contact. It is a deliberate move, and not something that happens because the arm is moving in a circle.

    You can do shadow swings and experience what happens first hand... that's how I came to my conclusions.
     
  17. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    do you see the greater spacing of rackets prior to impact.
    Does that not show accel?
     
  18. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    It is not a crucial observation at all, but a fundamental characteristic of circular motion.

    The hand is not consciously pulling the racket to the right, it is providing the centripetal force which keeps the racket moving in an arc. When you swing a string with the stone at the end, you don't say that you are pulling rightwards when the stone is on the left, leftwards when it is on the right, backwards when it is in the front, and forwards when it is in the back. To maintain the curved path of the stone, you always need to exert a central force, otherwise the stone will fly off at a tangent.

    It has nothing to do with consciously pulling something in a particular direction (which changes every instant). Any claim that that there is an abrupt backwards or sideways pull just before contact is wrong.
     
  19. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I guess I should have said anything the modern Fh is lacking or does not already
    have. I also have not looked at his work in years, so he has likely made adjust-
    ments to it as well.
     
  20. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    The motion before contact is what impacts the contact. It is a build up to contact.

    Your claims about a deliberate across swing have been shown to be wrong when the intention is to hit solidly and not in a grazing fashion. It is due to body rotation into the ball. The claim of an abrupt pull back before contact has been shown to be wrong.
     
  21. boramiNYC

    boramiNYC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,380
    shuresh u got that exactly right. the centripetal force is the basis of swinging of human arm. pulling must be toward the center. determining the center is no simple matter however but fun topic for discussion.
     
  22. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    Bhupaes confused the centripetal force with pulling to the right because he observed the tip of the hand moving to the left when the racket tip was moving to the right (due to wrist bend, etc). Later in the arc, the hand and the racket could both be moving to the right. So, focusing on one part of the arc does not provide the right picture. There needs to be a centrally directed force in any curvilinear motion, and the direction of the force changes from instant to instant.
     
  23. bhupaes

    bhupaes Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    957
    No, I didn't confuse anything. If one were only depending on centripetal force, any muscle not used for gripping the racquet will be passive. Try swinging like that and see where the ball goes.

    I will stick with everything I've said in this thread - let's just agree to disagree.
     
  24. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    Is he hitting the ball solidly when he wants to put pace on it? Is he generating the pace you want to see? Is he generating the spin you want to see? Is he blending pace and spin into his shots at the level of his peers?

    The hitting through 3 balls advice is mostly for beginners and adults, who are tentative with their shots. It becomes a bad reinforcing habit as they become even more tentative in a match. Eventually, people should evolve to learn how to swing the racket for varying amounts of pace and spin, and for different target areas, as all juniors do.

    In the simplest example, I have observed a coach correct the swing in this fashion: the junior was hitting too closed and with too much spin and the ball was landing short. He simply told him that to hit beyond the service line was the goal. The junior achieved that by blending in more linear momentum. In another case, a junior was hitting backhands hard but long. The coach fed him ball after ball with the goal of keeping it in, and the junior learnt how much spin to add in that situation.

    There are many arguments here which are based on strawman examples and pushing some system. Life is much simpler in reality.
     
  25. bhupaes

    bhupaes Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    957
    ^^^ One more thing, sureshs. The pulling in action has an additional side effect - it helps release the wrist forward thus adding more to RHS, assuming the wrist is held loose, and the player has good timing.

    There, we should be in 100% disagreement now! :)
     
  26. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    It is not just centripetal force, there is also linear acceleration that has to be supplied, the path is not perfectly circular, gravity is involved, etc. Obviously twirling a stone on a string is not like hitting the tennis ball. For example, I have explained many times why the two-pendulum model of passive swing is wrong and led to wrong calculations.
     
  27. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    There is definitely conscious action, it is not like Nadal showed up and was swinging his hand loosely for the heck of it. But the major part of the motion is due to maintaining the arc. It is not a matter of pulling the racket to the right. That is not the apt way to describe what is going on. Just like the idea of pulling across has been completely debunked. It would look like that video mentioned earlier with the person almost losing balance.
     
  28. boramiNYC

    boramiNYC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,380
    doesn't that passiveness explain alot of straight arm or whippy crazy rhs for the high level tennis?
     
  29. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    Yes many parts should be laid back and passive not tight.

    Look, there is definitely intent behind a swing in tennis. Nadal definitely does not want the racket to keep moving to the left. In that sense, he is pulling it to the right, but that does not seem the appropriate way to explain this. There are also flick shots where you can see pros deliberately manipulating the racket with the wrist in isolation from the rest of the swing.
     
  30. bhupaes

    bhupaes Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    957
    Well, I guess I should have used the word "dead" instead of "passive" in my earlier post! IMO, you are right in that a lot of the movements are passive in that energy is released rather than created. Thus I would advocate having a loose arm structure in general. However, "passive" does not mean no activity ("dead"). Energy is stored during the eccentric contraction phase in many arm muscles for generating power and spin, and some muscles are very active (especially for control related actions). It is too complex to lend itself to a simplistic analysis or description, IMO. I can imagine and feel what happens, but far be it from me to try to quantify it, or even describe it accurately!
     
  31. toly

    toly Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,993
    The Oscar Wegner in video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUPDHegz98 around 2.50 demonstrates across motion and side spin. In our example Nadal create mostly topspin, see original video. You also can ask JY about sidespin in this particular Nadal FH video.

    Wegner also said, around 6.30, that Federer slowly goes to the ball then all acceleration occurs sideway. IMO there is no correlation among his explanations and videos of Federer and Nadal FH.

    Tell me please, in what frame exactly Nadal begins sideway acceleration.

    When Nadal rotates the arm around shoulder, he creates centrifugal force which has normal component to the racquet string plane. This force normal component (motion dependent torque) automatically rotates the racquet in clockwise direction, see Rod Cross article http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com/articles/2006/07/wrist_snap_in_the_serve.html.
    This normal component is function of angle (ϕ) between arm and racquet. If ϕ=0, this component is zero. This normal component is also function of arm angular acceleration. The more we accelerate angular rotation the less is motion dependent torque.

    On other hand, Nadal applies extremely hard arm pronation/ISR. This is also angular rotation, which also creates its own centrifugal force and motion dependent torque. Rod Cross completely ignored this fact.

    Moreover, this motion dependent torque pushes the hand to rotate the racquet in clockwise direction, opposite to the torque created by arm rotation. So, there is no automatic motion dependent whip effect. I believe, Nadal creates very fast wrist/hand swing, by using extremely actively hand’s (or whatever) muscles.
    I think you still remember the physics, you can get it. :):):)
     
  32. bhupaes

    bhupaes Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    957
    Well, he's talking about Federer - and I would expect Federer to produce more sidespin. Again, remember, you have shown us one example of Nadal. I have seen him hit vicious sidespin on many occasions. But I still maintain the sidespin is a side effect of the technique used, and may or may not always happen.

    I think you've misunderstood. Oscar doesn't say all acceleration is sideways. He only points out that there is a strong sideways pull near the point of contact. Also, "slowly" is relative - all it means is that in the initial phase, RHS is considerably slower than the contact phase, as far as I am concerned.

    In the picture I included in my post, assuming each overlay is a frame, probably around the 18th frame.

    Okay...

    Ah, there you go again, toly! :) We've hit on our fundamental area of disagreement one more time... passive vs. active wrist! Unfortunately, neither you nor I can prove our points from photographs! :(

    Let me also point out that in the video of Oscar you have posted, he shows a combination of upper arm rotation and biceps action when he is pulling the racquet in. I think this is natural for most people, and we have an extreme example in Nadal.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  33. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I don't know where you get "abrupt pull back"; is that your words?
    I don't know where you get "deliberate across" swing; is that yours?

    In MTM we teach to "pull up and across". We don't suggest that it be abrupt or
    deliberate...only that you do it and anyone can see the best players do it.
    It may need to be more deliberate till it becomes natural? can't say.
    That is what is known as well as what has been clearly shown.
    If you can't see it, maybe that accounts for the desperate need of help for your
    Fh that you posted about.
     
  34. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    bhupaes, sorry I don't believe toly was ever a serious engineer and clearly he
    is very much a beginner in tennis. Any good engineer comes to things with an
    open mind, seeing several possible solutions to a challenge, then works to pick
    the best for the intended application. No respected engineer would take the
    comments Oscar made about an I/O out of context to try to twist it and try to
    make a bogus point on related to normal rally Fhs.

    toly clearly has several ideas that he is
    intent on proving, like the using muscles in the wrist (forearm) to get power,
    along with some of his other ideas; BUT to the exclusion of other ideas that
    also work,
    and imo, work much better than his beginner approach. He acts as if he is
    bringing something new to strokes, but with any experience at all, he would
    see that his suggestions are like nearly every beginner shows up with for coaching.
    And the reason they come for coaching is that those rookie ideas don't work for
    hitting with power AND keeping it in the courts.

    As an engineer myself, I realize his ideas can be a source of power, but so
    far, I've never seen any player work them with even a basic level of consistency
    required to do even avg in this game. I'm a good enough sport to acknowledge
    that some player may come along and somehow change that, although I doubt it.
    Notice the difference in yours and my recognition of what they have
    to share concept wise, but just know we have been thru that and not seen it
    successful, whereas they deny our very successful approach and try to somehow
    put a square peg in a round hole to force their ideas into what they see despite the
    vids and evidence.
    Also notice toly never shows the swing "from contact on", which is where my
    claims are demo'd and also avoids admitting the bigger spacing in his pics that
    show accel into contact. And also never understands how the hand working
    across in his pics leads is what the racket face will be doing thru contact and
    beyond, while also talking of some garble about the clear and present side
    aspect to the TS we have seen which is actual proof of side motion at contact.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  35. connico

    connico Rookie

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    277
    So your not teaching anything, you just describing how it should work. I can accept MTM if your not teaching to deliberately pull across the body and only describing a swing path.

    I've always had issues with MTM because my impression from the videos and oscars comments is that that MTM teaches a deliberate pull across motion which I don't agree with.

    In saying this, does MTM recognise that on a advance forehand pronation is key to efficient power and topspin?
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  36. Frank Silbermann

    Frank Silbermann Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,066
    MTM stands for "Mary Tyler Moore."
     
  37. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    To your 1st point, "deliberate" is not a term that I remember hearing or reading
    from Oscar related to the strokes, but I'm not stating that it has not been used.
    I just don't ever remember thinking of it that way. Our teaching does work on
    developing feel for a path and normally little would be said, relying more on demonstration and
    a couple of comments like "try this and see how that feels" coupled with a
    demo of what to try or a simple suggestion. It's about trying to relate to the
    student in a way that works for them. Maybe that is part of why it does not
    translate well for some on this forum, while others get it straight away.

    As to Pronation, again, that is not a term we would normally use, as most students
    would not have a clue what it is. It even comes up as a spelling error on here and
    is way easier to demo than to explain...especially with a Fh imo.
    This is far from an optimal medium to share MTM, but so many have got it thru
    the years from here just like I did, it would be a shame to get bullied off from helping so
    many. My new 70 yr old student heard of MTM from debates much like these (not TT)
    and called me for lessons to see what this uproar was all about, even though he
    had played tennis his whole life. After each lesson he thanks me several times and
    speaks of how he can't believe pros are still teaching the traditional way.
    Thanks for your reasonable approach to things and use what works for you.
    I'm happy that you are playing, traditional or modern and just am here for those looking
    for an edge or to improve.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  38. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    Oh gee, look what I've missed, another obviously planted MTM thread. I'm not going to waste my time reading through all the posts but will answer the OP that MTM is just 1 of many, many, many, modern systems of teaching out there. MTMers will tell you anyone not teaching MTM is teaching traditonal, and anyone teaching modern tennis is using MTM, which is just not true. I'm a modern teacher (and so are the pros who work for me) and I work with current ATP, WTA and ITF players and use none of the MTM tenants I read about here. Don't be sucked into the 'it's either MTM or traditional' because that is nowhere close to the truth. It's just not that black and white.
     
  39. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    It is a bunch of imaginary things. If people over-analyze something to show that they have a new insight, they come up with these kind of things. They look for intent where there isn't any. They try to artificially separate intent from flow to show that there is some value-add to their method. Many of these claims are of the wishy-washy kind and what we end up doing is trying to treat them rationally and then arguing among ourselves. This prolongs the thread and provides publicity. We are the ones who are being fooled.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  40. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    I also suspected a planted thread but did not want to mention it. When a new user pops up with the first question about this methodology, I was very suspicious. But I wanted to give him/her the benefit of the doubt.

    In any case, you are absolutely correct. We are all suckers to constantly fall for this and for assuming that there is any rational basis for their claims.
     
  41. tennis_balla

    tennis_balla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,667
    Location:
    Here and There
    Free publicity, that's all it is. You could smell troll from the first sentence, the ball starts rolling and it's déjà vu all over again.
     
  42. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Interesting you think this is a planted thread, but yet the OP does not seemed
    to be convinced about MTM, but then, you jumped to that conclusion without
    reading as usual. And Balla feels he needs to chime in on this as well, after looking
    to be unbaised. Disappointing, but guess you want to jump in with this unnamed
    fellow who claims high credentials and never has tips for this section? He must be
    better than Oscar for haters even though we Know nothing about him.

    Then JW creates a straw man that a MTM person will say only MTM is modern
    instruction, lol, but I have several post speaking of Dave Smiths modern system,
    the advanced foundation, along with others. More demonstrated mis-info by you
    as usual. I wonder if your instruction is just as mis-informed as your posts?

    Now you finally admit what I suggested many months ago that you likely teach
    modern yourself. Wonder if that is more mis-info though?
    Do you teach to extend thru contact down the target line ball path?
    None of MTM methods and your modern? lol, Ok, you have your own words to
    describe what Oscar described while you were in kindergarten.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  43. tennis_balla

    tennis_balla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,667
    Location:
    Here and There
    I'm not getting involved in the discussion, staying away. We've been over all these things before, it's just not worth it. I do think the OP is sketchy but I'm stating that as only an opinion nothing more.
     
  44. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    I don't see how you can come to any conclusive opinion about the OP's motives. It seems that he wasn't even able to distinguish MTM as a teaching method rather than a hitting method. How is he a troll in your view? Just a subterfuge to keep MTM at the top of the board? Because, he sure wasn't much of an effective advocate.
     
  45. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Doesn't sound like a plant or even too convinced to me, but I won't jump to
    conclusions like JW. I can say if this was a softball tossed in... I'm not aware
    and given his posts, my guess is it's unlikely.

    Looks like your smeller is off to me, balla, but just imo.

    Also, if sureshs or JW want to say "imo" or "it seems to me" with their comments on MTM, I'm
    inclined to leave it as it is...but when they try to post mis-info as facts, like "it has been shown" or, "XX has been debunked", I'm going to often call them on that mis-info.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  46. tennis_balla

    tennis_balla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,667
    Location:
    Here and There
    That's true but he didn't have to be. The people against MTM give it more publicity then MTM'ers themselves. That's what I was getting at. On the one hand you got all these folks foaming at the mouth when they see the term MTM and hate it with a passion yet on the other they discuss it to no end and are actually helping in spreading it around for more to see. So you should be thanking them lol.
     
  47. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Come to think of it, if memory serves me correctly, I first heard of MTM from one of your posts. :razz:
     
  48. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,791
    I have always been curious why some people like MTM (and I don't mean people on the inside). I think I have an insight into this. A couple of us have been trying to teach a guy at the club to hit with topspin (case of the blind leading the blind probably but that is OK). He is my age, and a very tall and large person. He is a regular doubles player in USTA 4.0 leagues but sometimes plays singles 4.0 leagues as well. He has a hard flat first serve which is a product of brute force, and a dinky second serve, horrible backhand (first had 1 hander, then 2 hander, now both screwed).

    He just cannot hit topspin. Then I realized he has always had only a forehand slice. Sometimes it is hit hard with a slight open face and not an obvious slice, but still open face it is. His basic problem is he has never hit with a closed face on the forehand.

    Then the truth dawned on me. The guys who cannot play the modern tennis topspin game could never play the classical game either. They are basically hacks who survive at the 4.0 level with dinky strokes, craftiness, quick reflexes, and excellent court sense and mental strength (not choking).

    I think a person who can play correct classical strokes (E grip, flatter forehand, mostly closed or neutral stance, finish till the left forehead, serve and volley) can easily incorporate more topspin, SW grip, open stance, across finish, baseline grind as he has the fundamentals down.

    But those who never had the fundamentals right but have been hacking away for decades will think that "modern instruction" is great as compared to their "classical" style which was actually "no" style. And they will become fanatical about the improvement of the game due to the teaching.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  49. tennis_balla

    tennis_balla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,667
    Location:
    Here and There
    [​IMG]
     
  50. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Nope, you still don't get it. But, you don't really want to, do you?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page