Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Tennis Tips/Instruction (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   wrist snap continued (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=449165)

TheLambsheadrep 12-27-2012 12:23 PM

wrist snap continued
 
This was the last post on the other thread:
"I didn't say anything about flexion or extension. Forgot to mention them.
They are in the mix too.

I didn't say there is 'no order'. The order and degree can be forced intentionally with muscle control or you can force the order with the setup in the takeback and just 'letting it happen in the order you intended ' or you can just let it rip and see what happens however I think most people control what happens with one of the 1st 2 methods.
It depends on the player and the situation.

I'm not a coach and have no experience teaching tennis children but I would suspect there is more of a structured swing plan implemented for them.

You can accomplish the same type of shot many different ways. I can hit a high heavy topspin cc shot several ways. I can use forearm pronation early or late or almost no pronation or utilizing isr for the spin or use a very steep low to high swing with x amount of deviation or a more level swing with y amount of deviation and z amount of pronation or using a pretty locked hitting structure with a ww or with a semi straight arm and wristing it with a whippy type swing etc.
It just depends on how i'm feeling or how i'm hitting that day or how well my legs are moving and how much time i have to set up etc.

I don't think there's a set preferred order. But maybe some coaches on here will tell you otherwise. It's simple and yet complicated which is why many of us spend a lot of time here discussing such things."

I just got back from Christmas vacation, and hope everyone had a Merry Christmas or happy holidays. Since I just got back, I will need to look over the last post again, but I did want to say that when teaching children, there is a structured swing plan but it's broken down into steps. Trying to explain the whole swing in one motion or lecture will get a coach nowhere, so we - take the main points of the swing, give them a catchy name (depending on the age of the student) so they specifically remember to include it in the process, and let the student blend them all together. At first it is robotic since it's a step-by-step process, but it eventually becomes natural because there was an order initially given. If there are pronations and other movements that are certainly always involved in the "correct" way to swing, my mind goes to the step-by-step coaching method that allows a student to understand when they occur.

I am just trying to understand when all of these movements are meant to take place. I understand that unless you are in the same position, time the ball the same, and hit in the same direction all the time, there will be variations in the swing. I know I can't ask someone to break down every type of shot since one can argue that there are infinite shots, but I was just hoping for a generalization.

gregor.b 12-27-2012 12:34 PM

DO NOT try to explain any of that stuff to children. They will soon come to associate tennis with chores or even worse learning and lose interest. As for your dilemma, have you thought about physical training rather than theorizing?

You will find it works much more effectively and the body does automatically compensate after a small period to adjust to what the mind is telling it.

For example, it you are hitting the ball too short with too much spin, make the stroke LONGER for more depth, don't hit it harder as you will create more racquet head speed and spin and it will drop shorter. If you are hitting too long, try coming a LITTLE more low to high.

The body will do what you tell it to. It may take a while to become automatic, but the body is a pretty clever unit. Trust it.

TheLambsheadrep 12-27-2012 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor.b (Post 7081711)
DO NOT try to explain any of that stuff to children. They will soon come to associate tennis with chores or even worse learning and lose interest. As for your dilemma, have you thought about physical training rather than theorizing?

You will find it works much more effectively and the body does automatically compensate after a small period to adjust to what the mind is telling it.

For example, it you are hitting the ball too short with too much spin, make the stroke LONGER for more depth, don't hit it harder as you will create more racquet head speed and spin and it will drop shorter. If you are hitting too long, try coming a LITTLE more low to high.

The body will do what you tell it to. It may take a while to become automatic, but the body is a pretty clever unit. Trust it.


I would not teach this to kids, it would go WAY over their heads haha. This is for me to understand when I should aim to willingly pronate/perform arm movements during the forward acceleration

TheLambsheadrep 01-24-2013 10:21 PM

So, I haven’t given this subject a lot of thought since I started this new thread, but I recorded my strokes last week and watching them has been eye opening. It is something everyone should do, and should pretty much be a requirement to talk on the subject (I know this would have made it easier for me to understand what myself and others were talking about). When I talk about my video I know I am by no means a pro, I am a rusty 4.0 at best, but I am seeing some good stuff here and want to ramble about it :)



Now that I have seen my shots on video, I can say that the pronation in the take back is mostly natural for me (I am training myself to do it on every shot) and the pronation in the follow through is totally natural. I was having a hard time grasping the follow through pronation before, thinking it was a physical step in the swing and wondering when to implement it. But during the filming of the strokes, I didn’t think about doing it even once. One of the reasons I wanted to make the video was to see how my follow through generally ends up, and I got to view that plus see THAT THIS HAS TO BE WHY IT APPEARS THAT THE PROS ARE INTENTIONALLY SNAPPING THEIR WRISTS. Again, I am not a pro by any means but I saw a lot of good and natural tennis motions I didn’t necessarily know I was doing in my video, including the biomechanical signs of the SSC.

On another topic, a post by 1HBH Rocks said (referring to Fed and Nadal) said “The reason they hit with a straight arm is that they perform an arm extension in their take back while they pronate their forearm a bit.” I see truth in this when watching my video, even though it is not always the full case with the pros or me. A lot of slow motion analysis shows that Fed and Nadal don’t have the most radical take back pronations and hit with straight arms, while pros that do have pretty radical take back pronations (Nadal, Wawrinka off the top of my head) have bent arms and pros with little, if any, take back pronations (Murray, Blake, Agassi) have bent arms as well. To try to build on this, I attempted to find a correlation between how parallel the racquet face gets to the court before the forward swing and if it results in a straight/bent arm swing, but found no real pattern. Could grip or footwork have something to do with it, I do not know. As for me, on some of my shots I have a straight arm and on others I don’t, and I’m not seeing a great reason as to why. I thought it could have been about the height of the oncoming ball, but there is not enough consistency to say that is so. The most apparent thing I see (and this should also be common sense) is that when I took the ball early, I almost always had a straight arm as I am reaching for the ball, but the opposite could not be said about late/close to the feet shots. Anyway, I found this interesting and will continue to look into it.

user92626 01-24-2013 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLambsheadrep (Post 7160224)
So, I havenít given this subject a lot of thought since I started this new thread, but I recorded my strokes last week and watching them has been eye opening. It is something everyone should do, and should pretty much be a requirement to talk on the subject (I know this would have made it easier for me to understand what myself and others were talking about). When I talk about my video I know I am by no means a pro, I am a rusty 4.0 at best, but I am seeing some good stuff here and want to ramble about it :)



Now that I have seen my shots on video, I can say that the pronation in the take back is mostly natural for me (I am training myself to do it on every shot) and the pronation in the follow through is totally natural. I was having a hard time grasping the follow through pronation before, thinking it was a physical step in the swing and wondering when to implement it. But during the filming of the strokes, I didnít think about doing it even once.


The pronations being natural were also my experience and observation, too. That's why in another thread I was saying to ignore it. Focusing on pronation or rotation as a physical step to do would likely be detrimental and confusing.

TheCheese 01-24-2013 11:42 PM

All this talk about the forehand and pronation, blah blah blah lately has gotten out of hand.

Someone should just make a video and SHOW what they're talking about.

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCheese (Post 7160345)
All this talk about the forehand and pronation, blah blah blah lately has gotten out of hand.

Someone should just make a video and SHOW what they're talking about.

I will try to get some forehands on youtube today

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 06:31 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdSWq...ature=youtu.be

here is something I had filmed about a week ago while NC was in the 50s-70s, and it's a good thing I did because everything outside is now coated in ice.

the video is mainly forehands, but I have done a lot of good reflection and realization from it. the slow-mo and stop motion break down is at 2:28, but I hope you will look at all the whole video and comment on the strokes.

Even though I didn't make the video for or against the wrist snap argument specifically, I feel that I can now decide for myself. As I stated in post #4 here, if you are swinging anything like the pros (and I'm not claiming to be), there is minimal to no intentional wrist movement. I can honestly say that I was just swinging through the ball, no intentional wrist flicking, radial deviation, or anything of the sort. I do think there are some exceptions (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdNMKAT3k10 at 38 seconds, for example. it's hard to fathom that much forearm speed and the follow through without wrist action), but they are mainly from bad positioning or bad foot work.

I also mentioned that the proper follow through pronation, with no voluntary wrist action, was due to the stretch shortening cycle based on Solat's explanation (post #6 at http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=112708) and other readings. I have really been focusing lately on getting the racquet face that will make contact to face behind me on the take back, as mentioned in talks about the SSC and performed by many top pros (to varying degrees). In many of my shots I see that the racquet is making between a 45 and 90 degree angle with my forearm right before contact, so I just want to make sure this is evidence of the SSC and that's it's helped by the racquet face facing behind me. Also, I noticed that Murray doesn't have much of a racquet face turn back at all, but at the lowest part of his back swing his contact strings are facing down and parallel to the ground. What does this accomplish, and how does it effect SSC?

Without getting too deep into another dividing topic, I did lead up the main racquet of the video to 383 grams, 7.5 pts HL, and SW of 365, so without the calculations in front of me i think the Mgr/I is just under 21. It feels absolutely awesome, and like the video convinced me the wrist is not active, I am also convinced there is something to Mgr/I. By the way, the racquet is a Ti. Carbon 5001, and the strings are the FACTORY SYNTHETIC. That's right, I haven't changed out the strings yet, and I am still getting great results with spin, accuracy, and consistency. Can't wait to get some kevlar in there

Cheetah 01-25-2013 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLambsheadrep (Post 7165411)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdSWq...ature=youtu.be

here is something I had filmed about a week ago while NC was in the 50s-70s, and it's a good thing I did because everything outside is now coated in ice.

the video is mainly forehands, but I have done a lot of good reflection and realization from it. the slow-mo and stop motion break down is at 2:28, but I hope you will look at all the whole video and comment on the strokes.

Even though I didn't make the video for or against the wrist snap argument specifically, I feel that I can now decide for myself. As I stated in post #4 here, if you are swinging anything like the pros (and I'm not claiming to be), there is minimal to no intentional wrist movement. I can honestly say that I was just swinging through the ball, no intentional wrist flicking, radial deviation, or anything of the sort. I do think there are some exceptions (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdNMKAT3k10 at 38 seconds, for example. it's hard to fathom that much forearm speed and the follow through without wrist action), but they are mainly from bad positioning or bad foot work.

I also mentioned that the proper follow through pronation, with no voluntary wrist action, was due to the stretch shortening cycle based on Solat's explanation (post #6 at http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=112708) and other readings. I have really been focusing lately on getting the racquet face that will make contact to face behind me on the take back, as mentioned in talks about the SSC and performed by many top pros (to varying degrees). In many of my shots I see that the racquet is making between a 45 and 90 degree angle with my forearm right before contact, so I just want to make sure this is evidence of the SSC and that's it's helped by the racquet face facing behind me. Also, I noticed that Murray doesn't have much of a racquet face turn back at all, but at the lowest part of his back swing his contact strings are facing down and parallel to the ground. What does this accomplish, and how does it effect SSC?

Without getting too deep into another dividing topic, I did lead up the main racquet of the video to 383 grams, 7.5 pts HL, and SW of 365, so without the calculations in front of me i think the Mgr/I is just under 21. It feels absolutely awesome, and like the video convinced me the wrist is not active, I am also convinced there is something to Mgr/I. By the way, the racquet is a Ti. Carbon 5001, and the strings are the FACTORY SYNTHETIC. That's right, I haven't changed out the strings yet, and I am still getting great results with spin, accuracy, and consistency. Can't wait to get some kevlar in there

i haven't played around with mgr/i yet. everytime i read up on it i give up because of all the banter back and forth and i get confused.
what have you noticed with it?

swing path looks good i guess. you should really work on it though. you're wasting a lot of energy and it's not repeatable due to your stance and footwork. and your stroke won't hold up against a heavy ball from say for example.. me. haha.

what grip is that? looks like a mild eastern.

Cheetah 01-25-2013 07:58 PM

also, your pronation is not because of the ssc. it's because you have a decent swing path and your arm is relatively loose. in that case your arm has no choice but to pronate. You have almost no ssc going on. close to zero because of your takeback and setup just before going forward. couple of issues there. I could explain if you want me to.

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheetah (Post 7165540)
i haven't played around with mgr/i yet. everytime i read up on it i give up because of all the banter back and forth and i get confused.
what have you noticed with it?

swing path looks good i guess. you should really work on it though. you're wasting a lot of energy and it's not repeatable due to your stance and footwork. and your stroke won't hold up against a heavy ball from say for example.. me. haha.

what grip is that? looks like a mild eastern.

after optimizing Mgr/I, I've been able to play more consistently and feel like I still hit with solid contact outside of my strike zone. The optimal number is good and all, but I think people think too much about it, and I believe the reason there's debate is because people don't think there's a magic number. It's really about what gets you to that number - the weight, the balance, and the swing weight. In order to have a relevant optimized number (this is also an argument against it - you can get the/your optimized number with various combinations of weight, balance, and SW using calculus to figure out the individual numbers on a curve. Someone did this and sound they could get Mgr/I to 21 with like a 6oz racquet or something, and while you can, it should be obvious that's not the point), you need a pretty hefty stick - I couldnt get the Mgr/I around 21 without the weight being over 13oz. That weight is going to make the shots feel more solid. Then, you need a pretty HL balance, which makes the racquet swingable. The last thing also turns people off - you'll need a pretty high SW, but that comes with the territory of a high weight to begin with. The high SW is free power and stablizes the racquet against a heavy ball (such as yours :-P ). All in all, it's the combination of racquet characteristics that get that magic optimized number, not the other way around. I def recommend to anyone to try it.

Where am I wasting energy? And during matches and even just hitting for fun when I'm being moved around I def get more of a knee bend and better foot work going. This was a casual session, but yes, foot work is very important to start the kinetic chain, so thanks for lookin' out for me haha. And I've rallied against many a heavy ball, is that a challenge? :twisted:

Oh, and I use a semi western forehand

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheetah (Post 7165605)
also, your pronation is not because of the ssc. it's because you have a decent swing path and your arm is relatively loose. in that case your arm has no choice but to pronate. You have almost no ssc going on. close to zero because of your takeback and setup just before going forward. couple of issues there. I could explain if you want me to.

I would appreciate that, always up for getting better. Was I wrong in understanding Solat's explanation of the SSC? Or was he wrong...?

Cheetah 01-25-2013 08:02 PM

lemme finish my lasagna and i'll get back to you in a bit

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheetah (Post 7165614)
lemme finish my lasagna and i'll get back to you in a bit

No rush, people should have many better things to do then rush to help me haha. Thanks in advance

Cheetah 01-25-2013 08:48 PM

well...

I was going to say a lot about your footwork and stance but you said you were being casual so i'll give you the benefit of the doubt there.

you do a lot of things pretty well actually. swing path is great. you just don't do all the good things together. meaning on some swings your contact point is good but rotation is off. or pronation is good but extension is lacking etc.

your takeback is too far back which is why your not getting good ssc. you take the racquet all the way back and there it becomes disconnected from your rotation so you have to use your arm to do all the work. lots of players have a long takeback like that but they use the arm muscles to move the arm ahead while the torso is rotating and then when it's caught up to the correct spot then the torso and arm is in sync and move together as a unit.

but you do your take back and you rotate but you can see while you are rotating your arm catches up and passes your rotation. they never move together. you can really see it on the side view at the end. your arm goes right past your body. you're loosing a lot of oomph right there.

just to get the feel you might want to try making your takeback much shorter. just for experimenting make it very short like fed's. it will feel uncomfortable but try it for like 20 strokes. once you figure out how to make contact like that you will see you will have much more power. Then you can adjust things to your liking.

If your takeback is shorter then when you rotate your arm will have 'room to breath' and will be pulled by the rotation and there it will stretch and give you the ssc action.

Also the djokovic-like takeback you are doing is not good for your grip style. That kind of takeback is natural for a more extreme grip because that is the natural path it will take while maintaining a 'neutral wrist' position during the takeback and it will lay the racquet flat (pat the dog) at the end of the takeback. With your grip, doing that takeback puts tension (whether u are aware of it or not) in your wrist and it doesn't let you get into a pat the dog position thereby robbing you of ssc and potential topspin. look at the face of your racquet at the end of the takeback. not so good.
You might want to try copying the takeback of a pro that has a semi western grip.

Your topspin. so so haha. you get some good spin sometimes but when you do i can see you really have to work for it. Your topspin is good but it's not biting and there is no sidespin component on it. I'm guessing you hit a lot of balls long. it doesn't have to be that way. In addition to the above mentioned stuff you might want to make contact about 3 or 4 or so more inches out in front. your contact point is good and it's well out in front but if you move it out a little more then it will be at the point just before your racquet starts moving to the side and also where your wrist starts to deviate. currently your racquet is going thru it a little more than i'd like. That way you'll get more natural spin with sidespin and also you'll be able to generate a lot more because your wrist will naturally be turning at that point so you'll be able to give it a bit more manually right there w/o doing funky arm movements. it will be more natural. plus you'll be able to swing harder because the harder you swing the more your wrist will be moving right at that sweet spot. just a couple of inches. it will be hard to make the adjustments but it will work.

... and dump the closed stance lol.

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 08:56 PM

Thanks for all of that. I'm off to bed soon so I will take this in, digest it tonight, and get back to the thread tomorrow. Speaking of which, how was your lasagna?

And just curious, do you do any coaching?

Cheetah 01-25-2013 09:08 PM

it was yummy thanks.
not a coach. just been playing since i was 4. lots of lessons. tennis freak. etc.

TheLambsheadrep 01-25-2013 09:27 PM

Nice. I went to a SUNY college with a D3 program, and the same semester I was offered a spot on the team I got a job as an RA. After dual Bio and Anth degrees plus the gf (that's a major time commitment in itself), I had room essentially for doing one or the other, and D3 tennis doesn't pay the bills. I still hit with friends that were on the team, and that was good enough for me at the time.

But now it really is time for bed, so another thank you for tonight and I will post again tomorrow

TheLambsheadrep 01-26-2013 01:33 PM

I've been watching these videos and used them to base my following post on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Me1tzm1nnWk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLJICtcehCo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp_XHBXGbUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pcNfnWi-bs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnnKt_SeJ6s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2DWZaFcaU0

TheLambsheadrep 01-26-2013 01:34 PM

As the racquet is brought up from the neutral position (for a forehand) for the initial part of the back swing, Nadal, Federer, Novak, Murray, Blake, and Agassi all do have a bend in the elbow. Sometimes it lasts for only a second before straightening out, sometimes it lasts the entire stroke. Even sometimes the elbow bend is initially present, and then the arm becomes straight at some point, then right before contact the elbow bends again (Murray). I see that I also have a bend at first, but the motion to stretch out my arm up and toward the back fence gets rid of it quickly. Sitting here right now, I can feel the difference between keeping my elbow bent for a long time vs a short time on the take back – the long time motion is dictated by the arm/forearm, and I can feel the rotation of the racquet is more compact as it goes around my elbow like an upside down pendulum. The short time motion is dictated by my shoulder, which produces that higher-reaching and loopier back swing, and unless I willingly pull my elbow in to make it bend (which I would think is not good technique, but how does Murray do it?), it doesn’t seem to bend again. So take back dictated by the elbow is good, while by the shoulder is bad…?


I can see from the video that the pro with the closest initial backswing to mine definitely is Novak (I’ll explain why down below), and he has the head of the racquet level with his head most of the time, half way over his head at best, when he brings it up from the neutral position for a forehand. I’m assuming that keeping the racquet head lower forces him to have a prolonged elbow bend or vice versa. I see that I’m getting the whole head of the racquet over my head sometimes if not most times. So I’ll make keeping the racquet head at my head level a habit. I do see, thought, that Novak outstretches his arm back horizontally about the same as I do (sometimes I do more, sometime he does), but so does Murray, Blake, and Agassi (Agassi seems to get the racquet head over his head quite a bit, too). I think I’m seeing Federer to it a fair amount as well, but maybe not as often. Nadal almost appears to do straight down drop of the arm to about 45 degrees, so he’s the outlier in this group. So is having the arm stretched back near horizontal fine, and is having the take back from your elbow, not the shoulder, the way to doing it correctly?


The pronation of the racquet back early in the back swing was something I saw from a Jeff Salzenstein video on youtube about Novak’s take back and thought I’d try it out. I can see what you’re saying about tension because I have to force it - since I would say until I tried the technique from that video I was taking the racquet back more like Murray (the first 13 seconds of my video is more like I used to hit before trying the Novak turn), who looks like he implements very little pronation on the take back (especially early in the take back, but he does get the racquet face parallel to the ground at the lowest point of the back swing which requires pronation). This also occurs with Blake and Agassi, and if I have read correct information, all three of them used the SW grip. It would make sense if that was the case, but in rallies I feel I have been able to generate more topspin pronating back like Novak does. I know Agassi and Blake both could generate good topspin but were more known as flat hitters, is that the case with Murray (I don’t follow him as much)? How are the three of them able to go from flat to topspin without the drastic Novak pronation, is late pronation (like Murray) and not early pronation (like Novak) the key for a SW forehand? Is the tension created with the Novak pronation what’s cutting down on my ssc (even though I am seeing my wrist back before contact, I’m guessing there needs to be more than that and the wrist bend isn’t the only sign of the ssc)?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse