confused w/ the term "MTM"

[mr_fro2000]

Hi everyone... 1st time poster here. So i've gotten back into tennis in the past few months from over a 12 year hiatus, and obviously a lot has changed.

So reading forums, internet postings, etc. I realize that people are now doing this thing called MTM... and I find the term confusing. My understanding is that it has a lot to do how forehands are hit but still it seems to relate to how the overall game of tennis is approached.

So my question is where is the line drawn on MTM and who are some examples of old school vs MTM? and do I play MTM?

Is agassi MTM? Jim courier? I feel that they do play MTM, so is the term now even outdated? Is Sampras MTM? Federer? Is there anyone on the tour who is NOT MTM?

Do I play MTM (I used to play competitively… does it even matter?)? I deploy an eastern forehand… hit wide shots w/ open stance, but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!). I have a 1 handed backhand and play an all-round game. Frequently deploy slice approach shots. I love hitting shots on the rise and taking the net whenever possible.

Can someone explain all this? I frequently find people here arguing about this topic and I get the sense that they don’t all have the same definition of MTM to begin with which leads to pointless arguments. Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks!

[WildVolley]

Assuming that your first post isn't trolling, I'll give you a brief answer.

MTM I believe stands for Oscar Wegner's Modern Tennis Methodology. It is the way Wegner teaches tennis and supposedly is based on his observations of how pros play.

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know. If anything, you'll need to ask Wegner if he is basing the technique he is teaching on the model of some pro player.

There are plenty of other tennis professionals who teach what they'll claim to be "modern" pro technique and many of these same people disagree with Wegner. So, unless you are just looking to start a fight, it is best to look at what Wegner teaches and then compare it to what you do. If you really want to know for certain, I advise taking some classes from Wegner or one of his coaches and ask them.

[mr_fro2000]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

Assuming that your first post isn't trolling, I'll give you a brief answer.

MTM I believe stands for Oscar Wegner's Modern Tennis Methodology. It is the way Wegner teaches tennis and supposedly is based on his observations of how pros play.

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know. If anything, you'll need to ask Wegner if he is basing the technique he is teaching on the model of some pro player.

There are plenty of other tennis professionals who teach what they'll claim to be "modern" pro technique and many of these same people disagree with Wegner. So, unless you are just looking to start a fight, it is best to look at what Wegner teaches and then compare it to what you do. If you really want to know for certain, I advise taking some classes from Wegner or one of his coaches and ask them.

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

Neither have the pros it seems as I have not come across one mentioning it

[WildVolley]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

OK, I believe you. It is just that people here like to fight about it.

I'm sure Wegner can speak for himself if he sees this thread, as he sometimes posts here, but my understanding is that he claims MTM is a way to quickly learn how to play like the modern pros. Take that as you will. I don't think he's claiming that he's developed a new way to play tennis, but I don't know his stuff so I won't speak for him.

[mr_fro2000]

thx wildvolley... its just that when i read some postings, im wondering if I missed something in the past 10 years that would cause me to become less competitive (if i choose to go down that path).

For example, this is one quote from another thread:

"You don't have to take it on faith. In addition to World class "elite" players, there are tens of thousands of non elite pros, college players, high school players, and tournament juniors, all over the World, none of whom are being taught old school methods, except for those unfortunate few whose coaches don't know how to teach modern technique, just as there are numerous levels of skiing skill between you and Bode Miller. And for those few, a bad beating or two in match play will usually encourage them to seek competent modern coaching as well.

The rationale behind my point has been expressed at least a half dozen times on this thread if you had read it. Modern technique works better with modern racquets, and you will be a better player if you learn modern technique rather than obsolete technique."

[5263]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

The rationale behind my point has been expressed at least a half dozen times on this thread if you had read it. Modern technique works better with modern racquets, and you will be a better player if you learn modern technique rather than obsolete technique."

This above is somewhat of a flawed logic that confuses many on the subject, but
is still a true statement overall.

Actually pretty much anything works better with modern rackets and MTM
instruction was developed when players where using wood rackets....so there
is not quite the connection that is implied, although I'm happy to agree that
modern rackets make the need greater to use more modern strokes and modern
rackets tend to highlight the weaknesses of traditional instruction.

[5263]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

OK, I believe you. It is just that people here like to fight about it.

I'm sure Wegner can speak for himself if he sees this thread, as he sometimes posts here, but my understanding is that he claims MTM is a way to quickly learn how to play like the modern pros. Take that as you will. I don't think he's claiming that he's developed a new way to play tennis, but I don't know his stuff so I won't speak for him.

WildVolley has done a nice job of answering the question and I'll just add that
MTM is an "Instructional Method" designed to help players learn to swing the
racket more like most of the top players do.

As you can see where sureshs is already made several attempts to get his trolling
2 cents in (and likely to continue trying to push some unknown agenda),
but really there is little need for controversy.
MTM is a name of a teaching system more than a type of play, although it
would make sense that a type of play will result to some extent. THe intent
is that students of MTM will have strokes that work more like the pros than
the old classic method of teaching provides.
Even the instructors and proponents of Classic admit the strokes must morph
over or be relearned for transition to high performance, tournament tennis.

MTM intends to avoid the steps of learning classic and morphing by beginning
with instruction intended
to work more like the best Pro players, right from the start. Even if one needs
to claim they are not exactly like the pros, most would have to honestly admit
that any adjustment would be small.
The idea before was that classic/traditional strokes were easier, but MTM
instructors find that tournament strokes are even easier than classic, so no
reason not to start with the high performance based technique from the start.

[tlm]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

I think you are getting some great advise on what mtm represents from many here and if you give it a chance I think you will find it very useful. The only good advise I can give you is to not pay any attention to sureshs, this guy is stuck at 3.5 level for life and does nothing but bash mtm teaching.

He actually had a chance to take a lesson with Oscar but was to stupid to follow through with it. I think he would have had to eat his words then so that is why he did not take the lesson. He lives to knock mtm or anything about Oscar Wegner.

[sureshs]

^^^ Still upset that the hero-worship thread was deleted by the mods?

Why don't you make some constructive suggestions about the game instead of being angry all the time?

[tlm]

Originally Posted by sureshs

^^^ Still upset that the hero-worship thread was deleted by the mods?

Why don't you make some constructive suggestions about the game instead of being angry all the time?

Not angry at all just giving the op some good advise.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know.

That would be right. Once we nail down one student, things will be clear.

[Larrysümmers]

its all about getting the most top spin and power. MTM is Oscars approach to coaching

[5263]

Originally Posted by Larrysümmers

its all about getting the most top spin and power. MTM is Oscars approach to coaching

Not quite....it is also about slices, volleys, and serves, along with many good
techniques for relating info to the students.

[Hi I'm Ray]

Originally Posted by 5263

Not quite....it is also about slices, volleys, and serves, along with many good
techniques for relating info to the students.

Can you say a bit more about these modern slices, volleys, and serves? I wasn't aware that there was a "modern" version of those.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Hi I'm Ray

Can you say a bit more about these modern slices, volleys, and serves? I wasn't aware that there was a "modern" version of those.

You are not alone on this
Most just focus on the Fh and the TS Bh to a lesser extent. I thought my slice
and volley needed no help and was amazed at how much they improved with
modern technique. Volley is just the middle portion of the slice imo.

It is pretty much the same idea though, as it is still about using the hand to
align with the ball, leading with the handle.... from above for the slice...
then near contact, starting to work down and across the shot line, opposed to
classic, which has you attempt to extend thru contact along the target line.
As the hand works across the shot line, centrifugal force and to a greater extent,
the hand position brings the racket face to bear for contact.
The hand dragging the racket is key, as you can't just work across the ball, and you
need the alignment phase of the swing to make the across part work right!

There will often be a side aspect to the underspin and just like with TS has, you
can have a lot or a little spin on the shot depending on your intent.
We do get sideways and often can used closed or neutral for slices as well,
leading with the hitting shoulder on the Bh slice,
and it can help to move thru the slice, using momentum to adjust power for the
shot. When approaching net, I mostly use a modern slice if my approach forces
me to continue strongly thru the shot, but if contact point is higher and I can
pause, I will likely use TS for the approach to net.

[Hi I'm Ray]

Originally Posted by 5263

You are not alone on this
Most just focus on the Fh and the TS Bh to a lesser extent. I thought my slice
and volley needed no help and was amazed at how much they improved with
modern technique. Volley is just the middle portion of the slice imo.

It is pretty much the same idea though, as it is still about using the hand to
align with the ball, leading with the handle.... from above for the slice...
then near contact, starting to work down and across the shot line, opposed to
classic, which has you attempt to extend thru contact along the target line.
As the hand works across the shot line, centrifugal force and to a greater extent,
the hand position brings the racket face to bear for contact.
The hand dragging the racket is key, as you can't just work across the ball, and you
need the alignment phase of the swing to make the across part work right!

There will often be a side aspect to the underspin and just like with TS has, you
can have a lot or a little spin on the shot depending on your intent.
We do get sideways and often can used closed or neutral for slices as well,
leading with the hitting shoulder on the Bh slice,
and it can help to move thru the slice, using momentum to adjust power for the
shot. When approaching net, I mostly use a modern slice if my approach forces
me to continue strongly thru the shot, but if contact point is higher and I can
pause, I will likely use TS for the approach to net.

Would you have any links to vids illustrating this? Not sure if I am picturing the shot differently.

I just recently started slicing "offensively" as opposed to slicing only on defense. It has been pretty effective for preventing an attack and soliciting a weak return. I'm not sure if I'm hitting it in a classic or modern way, but my main priority is driving the ball and keeping it low with a flat trajectory, I'm still putting aggressive spin on it but maximizing spin hasn't been the main priority, and there is some sidespin. I get the feeling that it is skidding a bit on the bounce.

Before, I tried hitting slices a lot of spin, both underspin and sidespin. The shot was fairly slow, travelled in a arc (up/down) and also with a sidespin arc. However, this shot sat up too much after the bounce, the sidespin didn't bother the better players much, and they could hit a pretty good shot off of it. Which is why I previously stopped slicing from the baseline if I could avoid it.

[dominikk1985]

Originally Posted by 5263

You are not alone on this
Most just focus on the Fh and the TS Bh to a lesser extent. I thought my slice
and volley needed no help and was amazed at how much they improved with
modern technique. Volley is just the middle portion of the slice imo.

It is pretty much the same idea though, as it is still about using the hand to
align with the ball, leading with the handle.... from above for the slice...
then near contact, starting to work down and across the shot line, opposed to
classic, which has you attempt to extend thru contact along the target line.
As the hand works across the shot line, centrifugal force and to a greater extent,
the hand position brings the racket face to bear for contact.
The hand dragging the racket is key, as you can't just work across the ball, and you
need the alignment phase of the swing to make the across part work right!

There will often be a side aspect to the underspin and just like with TS has, you
can have a lot or a little spin on the shot depending on your intent.
We do get sideways and often can used closed or neutral for slices as well,
leading with the hitting shoulder on the Bh slice,
and it can help to move thru the slice, using momentum to adjust power for the
shot. When approaching net, I mostly use a modern slice if my approach forces
me to continue strongly thru the shot, but if contact point is higher and I can
pause, I will likely use TS for the approach to net.

I believe the across part is incredibly incorrect. wegner is not a biomechanics guy at all, I would not call him a modern coach. although his movements at least mimic the modern style (I never heard him talking about the kinetic chain though).

the across comes from the rotational swing path and the pronation but there is no point in trying to hit across the ball.

wegner seems to believe that what happens with the racket during contact greatly influences the ball (he states that you swing to the ball slowly and then accelerate to "push" the ball. he even calls this double hit).

biomechanical studies have shown that this is wrong. the contact time is actually so short that nothing matters after the strings first touch the ball since the vibrations reach the hand after the ball has left the strings. you could actually release the racket before impact and have the same result (won't work in practice of course).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUPDHegz98

[WildVolley]

I have my own understanding of "modern" technique and that mostly just means things like more "western" grips (semi-western probably being the most common), heavy topspin, open stances on the forehand, 2hbh, etc.

I think that Wegner wants to distinguish himself from those who teach hitting "through" the ball, eastern forehand grips, closed stance, etc, for beginners.

Wegner does a good job of marketing and you'll find his defenders and detractors both posting here. A lot of people teach based on what they see today's pros do (I consider myself someone heavily influenced by video), and they never took a lesson from Wegner.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

Is there anyone on the tour who is NOT MTM?

but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!).

Can someone explain all this? I frequently find people here arguing about this topic and I get the sense that they don’t all have the same definition of MTM to begin with which leads to pointless arguments. Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks!

Last question above first. I'm glad to explain,... and my background was playing/instructing
over 20yrs of traditional, before moving on to MTM instruction, so you might
want to consider that when looking for answers. Posters like sureshs have a
limited experience even in classic, but don't even have a beginners grasp of
MTM. Not sure how he feels that makes him helpful to anyone with questions
on this subject.

MTM players on tour-
Most players on tour are good examples of what MTM teaches, but each player
may have an area or 2 that is out of line with most of the rest of the best players.
Several tour players parents have reported that they used Oscar's
books to coach their kids.

"but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!)."
Well that is something you could learn about with MTM. Yes, many players
must take a step at times to create a good contact point, but the best players
normally lift more than move forward into the shot for TS (modern slice you do
continue forward) shots.

Hope this helps.