What is wrong with this picture

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by gindyo, Feb 28, 2012.

  1. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    IMO, a closed stance is the best option when running flat out parallel to the baseline. In all other situations, again, IMO, the best option is open stance. I don't think a neutral stance preferable to an open stance under any circumstances, with the exception of when you are moving in quickly, have to run through the shot, and don't have time to stop and set your feet in an open stance. But, if you have time to stop and load up, even on a short ball - high or low - open stance is superior.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #51
  2. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    i'm not arguing. why do you keep using that word? it's a discussion.

    In any case you said pros today will sometime use an open stance when they have enough time. I don't think they do and that they use closed for attack. i stated such. Then you produced a video of rafa claiming it was a closed stance, which was open btw, and then i stated it was 'less open' because he was inside the baseline. And you replied 'no. he intentionally stepped inside the baseline he didnt just happen to be'. And i said 'yes he intentionally stepped in to attack'. I never said anything about him 'just happening to be there.'. that doesnt make sense.

    So I'm not sure why you think i don't understand any point you're trying to make. seems clear to me.
    and i dont see in this thread where you said "But rather when the ball is in the middle and one has time to setup and attack."
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #52
  3. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    this is what I mean you don't read my posts. Show me where I said that and I will paypall you a beer.

    discussion, argument - tomeito tomatto. Sorry english is my second language and words are not my strongest side.

    here we go again you keep confirming that you are not reading my posts. How about post 34
     
    #53
  4. tennishotdog

    tennishotdog Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    115
    from the video i agree with others saying OP should try hitting with a more open stance thus allowing more shoulder&hip rotation producing more RHS, topspin and power. even in those videos showing the pros stepping in and hitting with neutral/closed stance they still have that rotational component to their stroke.
     
    #54
  5. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,403
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    In other words, some of us think if you slightly allow your stance to be more open, and you get on your toes, you will pivot off your backfoot allowing you to replicate a followthru every swing, giving you consistency, so you can swing even faster and harder.
     
    #55
  6. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Ok, we have established what my view on the stances is : I will keep using NEUTRAL (not closed) stance when the ball is in the middle and I have the time to set up
    The point of posting this video was to have people who have a good understanding of the mechanics of the particular shot I was hitting neutral stance forehand to give me their perspective on the mechanics of MY neutral stance forehand. So if you have something to add on improving my NEUTRAL STANCE forehand please do if not this tread is not for you.

    Thank you
     
    #56
  7. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,403
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    OK, get off you flat feet and especially get off your back foot on every swing.
     
    #57
  8. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    ok, now we are talking :)
     
    #58
  9. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #59
  10. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,403
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Notice on rallyball defensive shots, he get's on his backfoot, but lifts his front.
    On more aggressive shots, and shorter balls, he get's off his backfoot onto his front. He's got live footwork, but he's young and trained. Can't expect us older folkes to do the same, unless we are as serious about tennis as he is.
     
    #60
  11. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #61
  12. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    If you think that every forehand in that video is an open stance I would suggest you go and read up on your tennis because you obviously have no clue what open stance means
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #62
  13. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    I'm curious as to why you prefer a neutral stance on a ball up the middle when you have time. what do you see as the benefits to this as opposed to an open stance? or are you choosing neutral because you are comfortable with that form and prefer not to change or because you feel it is the better choice in that situation?

    I'm not trying to argue and i'm not trying to get you to change your style. different strokes for different folks. i just would like to know for sake of discussion.
     
    #63
  14. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    they are all open stance forehands.
     
    #64
  15. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    [​IMG]

    you've just killed your own thread with your last post
     
    #65
  16. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    To answer this question we would first have to agree on what is an open stance and what is neutral stance.

    If you think that all fhs in that last video were open stance than all of the fhs in my video were open stance as well and in that case there is nothing we disagree on.
     
    #66
  17. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    #67
  18. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Dimitrov's fhs are much closer to what he describes as neutral then open stance ( the line drawn between his feet is nowhere near parallel to the bl)
     
    #68
  19. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    if it's not neutral it is open. it's either closed or neutral and EVERYTHING ELSE is open.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #69
  20. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    I don't know where did you dug this image from but it is all wrong. Whatever is shown as a neutral is really a closed stance (left foot is crossing the line drawn between the right foot and the net). And what they are showing as closed stance :confused: - I just cant imagine hitting a ball like that
     
    #70
  21. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    And if you you are using that image for reference then in my video I didn't hit one neutral stance
     
    #71
  22. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    open stance has NOTHING to do with feet being parallel to the baseline. it is determined by feet alignment with respect to the incoming ball as shown in the diagram i provided and is also discussed in the fuzzy yellow ball video you posted.

    All of the fh's in the several videos you've posted in this thread, except yours, are hit with open stance.
     
    #72
  23. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    #73
  24. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    you're hopeless. he says roddick's feet are parallel to the baseline because they are parallel to the baseline. open stance is not defined by relation to the baseline! you're making yourself look pretty silly here. it's defined by feet position relative to the incoming ball.
    And yes i've seen that video. 4 years ago.
    once again i will state that all the videos you have posted are open stances. all of them.

    I suggest you do some reading.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #74
  25. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    I was just about to say the same thing about you :).
    We are obviously speaking different languages and do not understand each other. So lets leave it at that.

    By the way I would love to see a video of you hitting. Or you, like our friend Lee, do not own a camera :). Let us see all that reading you have done put into use.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    #75
  26. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    I would suggest that your stance is defined by its relationship you your target, not the baseline or incoming ball. That's all.
     
    #76
  27. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Yeah, your right but assuming a ball is being hit and received perpendicular to net, he's basically correct. If the toes are perpendicular to net, in the above situation, one would be in a neutral stance. If the front toe is beyond perpendicular quite a bit, to the hitting side, we would consider that the stance would be closed. Conversely, the front toe remains to the opposite side we would consider that an open stance.

    Of course the degree/amount determines how open/closed the stance would be.
     
    #77
  28. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    I would agree with that and if you rotate that image that Cheetah posted so you can see it from target prospective you would get this:
    [​IMG]
     
    #78
  29. Mountain Ghost

    Mountain Ghost Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Tennis Stances

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    MG
     
    #79
  30. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    This is a better graphic. I consider semi open to be an open stance. It's a degree of open. It's not neutral. The fh's in those videos are open and semi open. not neutral.
     
    #80
  31. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,878
    Location:
    San Diego
    Yes this is a better definition i think.
     
    #81
  32. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    can you tell me how this swing path is more modern than traditional.
    I'm not saying there is nothing modern about it, but it seems to be
    far from totally modern.
    Sometimes cutting distinctions is hard, especially if you don't view it
    from a totally modern perspective.
     
    #82
  33. rkelley

    rkelley Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,384
    For my money the thing that fundamentally defines the modern forehand is swinging into the ball and then using a pronounced pronation of the wrist to generate topspin. The stroke finishes with the elbow high and the racquet either low by the hip for strokes with a lot "wiper" action or over the left shoulder for less wiper action. The racquet is generally pointing at the back fence. A traditional stroke emphasizes swinging low to high to generate topspin. The racquet finishes high, in front, pointing at the target.

    A modern stroke is also fundamentally a rotational stroke around the core as opposed to a linear stroke. On the first stroke, though the player is stepping into the ball per a traditional stroke, all the swing really happens as rotation around his core.

    Other modern aspects about the stroke are:
    During the set-up he has his left hand stretched parallel to the baseline (traditional stroke points at the ball)
    Racquet back and up (traditional stroke as the racquet down)

    Don't get me wrong. The second stroke should be preferred. It's exactly the set-up and motion I strive for with the semi-open stance, leg bend, and hips starting the swing and triggering the "pat the dog" position of the racquet, but sometimes you just can't get to the ball in time to set-up for that kind of shot. Sometimes you have to step into lower, shorter balls, hit from neutral, and then swing the back (right) leg around and finish open.

    That's my take anyway.
     
    #83
  34. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    Well I'm curious to what you saw as the culprit.

    I have to admit, I think cheetah's perspective is more on target as regard to stances and not clear on what you saw in the FYB that made him wrong. Part of the confusion is deciding what to relate the stance to.
    Wil showed Roddick in the semi open to show how open stance does not require feet to be parallel to the BL and clearly Semi open is a subset of the Open stance.
    Seems to me that to be more understanding of what is happening in stances is important.
    If a righty is receiving a crosscourt shot to his Bh side and runs around this to hit an insideout Fh with his feet perpendicular to the net....
    many would call his stance neutral based on the relation to the net, but
    I would call it open because he received the ball and returned the ball in a direction that uses his stance as Open.
    Makes no sense to argue on this as there is true fact of stances, but more like guidelines, so for me, it is more important how the body and shot are working.

    The Nadal vid you posted showed something like this on a couple of them. Nadal was close to neutral (maybe still very slightly open) but hit IO for the winner and Forced an Error; which IMO made his stance function as open.
    If Nadal gets a easy short sitter, he will usually take this in Semi Open, which is an Open stance.
    I don't see this shot as really anything like your neutral stance Fhs where you move your wt from back leg to front foot in a very locked in and traditional manner. And you don't use the step forward to improve your contact and lift to open like Fed does in the winner in his vid.

    All this fore and aft transfer affects your timing, which is what you stated was poor. Your more traditional long contact area and out past towards the target is not IMO the best way to time the shot and creates more of a eventual collision than a timed crisp lifting contact.

    I look forward to more on your perspective.
     
    #84
  35. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=gpt_2rSvSS8#t=62s
    Will says:

    "The way you find this stance (open stance) is draw a line between the outside leg and the inside leg and this line is pretty much parallel with the baseline so if you position your feet so that they are parallel with the baseline
    then you are in the open stance again that is what this is..."

    This is word for word from the video. I don't know how else to make it more clear to you guys.
     
    #85
  36. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    see post 11
     
    #86
  37. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    here I have no objection. on this I completely agree with you that for the purposes of stance determination we should use line between the body and the target
     
    #87
  38. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    And what is your advice? Closer POC? Or just scratch that shot and be modern :)
     
    #88
  39. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    but you have to watch all the vid, right?
    and remember, Wil is not the book on this, but is clearly speaking of guidelines.

    later in the vid he shows how the foot can be more forward and still be open.
     
    #89
  40. Timbo's hopeless slice

    Timbo's hopeless slice Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,092
    this is just soooo revealing :shock:
     
    #90
  41. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    Thanks for the point out on this post.

    The hand is exactly where your focus needs to be. This is a Hand/eye sport.
    You are using the eyes to put the ball and hand together and that is how you
    get great timing.

    This is the classic challenge of classic/traditional strokes.
    They are sort of logical, but don't work. Sort of like communism.

    Look at 20sec in on your vid. That timing looks good to me and that is your
    most modern
    swing from what I saw.

    Yes, go modern. I see no advantage to classic and even when feet get caught in neutral or closed, lift up and make the stroke work like open like Fed does in the vid.
    My take.
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2012
    #91
  42. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Naahh I think I will keep practising both because I believe they both have their use especially as I am trying to break away from being a baseliner and become more aggressive with regard to my positioning and try to take a better addvantage of shorter balls. As for the modern here is me hitting modern or at least trying anyway( not to impressive :))
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cbHp4Gt928
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RpDNnJOa48
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2012
    #92
  43. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    I want to be nice and I spoke of how good you looked in the first vid you put in this thread, but looking at these, I can see why you don't want to change : ) ...

    Your stroke fell completely apart and you try to balance on one leg and hit???
     
    #93
  44. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    you see ??? :)
     
    #94
  45. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    It's just coaching or training. You did it well when not trying at 20 secs in the other vid. You just have some mis info about modern that is throwing you off.
     
    #95
  46. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2012
    #96
  47. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    That is not about closed stance!
    That one you hit near perfect modern, which is not stance dependent at all.
    You did not transfer your wt forward to extend your swing out thru contact towards
    the target, but instead moved forward, found your balance, swung out to the ball, then pulled up and across the contact with nice acceleration!
     
    #97
  48. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Sorry I meant the one at 0:35s
     
    #98
  49. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,412
    how is that one different?
     
    #99
  50. gindyo

    gindyo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Messages:
    435
    Wait all that talk about closed and open stance and now stance does not matter :confused:
     

Share This Page