confused w/ the term "MTM"

[5263]

Originally Posted by toly

Does next picture clarify something?

Yes, that spin is Bh, counter clockwise from Nadal's view
and is what a righty Fh will normally do on a Fh,
like Nalbanain's in the next post, which is also counter
clockwise.

See how that is just the opposite of your earlier post.....
the one below?

[5263]

Originally Posted by toly

I think this would be efficient way to create clockwise sidespin.

See where toly says this motion is for clockwise?? the same as Nadal's Bh, right?
So should be saying counter clockwise.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by toly

Direction of the sidespin is exclusively defined by direction of horizontal tangential component of the racquet velocity, because the ball is absolutely symmetrical figure about his center. Inside or outside ball have nothing to do with these types of spins.

In practice it is very important. Ball is not a hard sphere and racket is not a hard rod. The contact is distributed over the whole impact area and can never be tangential.

It is interesting that a truly rigid racket/string and a truly rigid ball can never produce topspin. No, tangential contact will not do, so don't try to rotate your head and hands now and imagine how is possible. In theory, a tangential force has no component into the ball.

Failure to understand that there is a zone of impact is responsible for much confusion. There is no true tangential or grazing shot. A tangential movement of the strings actually deforms the ball and the strings and automatically imparts forward momentum. If you have studied the 2-spring model of topspin, you can see that it is the linear forces of the springs that actually impart the angular rotation. They will automatically also impart a forward momentum.

This is true even for table tennis, where the ball is harder, the rubber is thinner, and the coefficient of restitution is higher. Even in that case, there is no such thing as pure tangential grazing. In tennis, the soft ball and the deforming strings make the forward momentum even more pronounced.

[5263]

Originally Posted by toly

Does next picture clarify something?

this pic also clarifies that there is normally an "across aspect" to the swing as I have
maintained during this and other discussions.
The same one you have been denying with your words, you confirm here
with your pic.

[sureshs]

This is Nadal's "windshield wiper backhand"

[toly]

Originally Posted by sureshs

In practice it is very important. Ball is not a hard sphere and racket is not a hard rod. The contact is distributed over the whole impact area and can never be tangential.

It is interesting that a truly rigid racket/string and a truly rigid ball can never produce topspin. No, tangential contact will not do, so don't try to rotate your head and hands now and imagine how is possible. In theory, a tangential force has no component into the ball.

Failure to understand that there is a zone of impact is responsible for much confusion. There is no true tangential or grazing shot. A tangential movement of the strings actually deforms the ball and the strings and automatically imparts forward momentum. If you have studied the 2-spring model of topspin, you can see that it is the linear forces of the springs that actually impart the angular rotation. They will automatically also impart a forward momentum.

This is true even for table tennis, where the ball is harder, the rubber is thinner, and the coefficient of restitution is higher. Even in that case, there is no such thing as pure tangential grazing. In tennis, the soft ball and the deforming strings make the forward momentum even more pronounced.

Agreed, but you are diving too deep here and I’m not going to bate that, too old for this stuff.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

Hey what happened to the Limper? Says banned.

He was always posting negative comments about people without addressing any technical issue

[5263]

Originally Posted by toly

Agreed, but you are diving too deep here and I’m not going to bate that, too old for this stuff.

So are we on the same page now and you see where you were calling the spin
backwards?

[toly]

Originally Posted by 5263

Yes, that spin is Bh, counter clockwise from Nadal's view
and is what a righty Fh will normally do on a Fh,
like Nalbanain's in the next post, which is also counter
clockwise.

See how that is just the opposite of your earlier post.....
the one below?

Originally Posted by 5263

See where toly says this motion is for clockwise?? the same as Nadal's Bh, right?
So should be saying counter clockwise.

Tell me please in what particular post I said something wrong about racquet or ball rotation. If I did I correct it and apologize for misleading post.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by sureshs

He was always posting negative comments about people without addressing any technical issue

I'm sure he will be back shortly. Unless he really flew off the handle.

[tlm]

Originally Posted by sureshs

He was always posting negative comments about people without addressing any technical issue

That is not true, limpin was a excellent poster and added a lot of good information.

[connico]

Originally Posted by 5263

So are we on the same page now and you see where you were calling the spin
backwards?

lol... you are both right.

The spin on the ball is dependent from which axis your reviewing the spin of the ball from...

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by tlm

That is not true, limpin was a excellent poster and added a lot of good information.

I agree with that but his tone was often negative

[arche3]

Originally Posted by tlm

That is not true, limpin was a excellent poster and added a lot of good information.

If you consider name calling and attacking other posters information then sure. I'm sure the ttw mods saw the benefit of all the tennis advice written in code inside all the negative bashing limp did. I'm surprised it took this long for him to be banned. Perhaps when he is allowed to return he will act like a sensible person. Most bans are only for a few days.

[tlm]

Originally Posted by arche3

If you consider name calling and attacking other posters information then sure. I'm sure the ttw mods saw the benefit of all the tennis advice written in code inside all the negative bashing limp did. I'm surprised it took this long for him to be banned. Perhaps when he is allowed to return he will act like a sensible person. Most bans are only for a few days.

I really did not think he was that bad, I am surprised you feel that way. Regardless he did more than just attack, he offered some very good advise.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by tlm

I really did not think he was that bad, I am surprised you feel that way. Regardless he did more than just attack, he offered some very good advise.

He wasn't that bad actually. I usually like his posts. I'm just over exaggerating. He does have a mean streak thought. That's what I felt anyways. He probably got banned because of something unrelated anyways. I predict a 6 day ban.

[5263]

Nice of Stan Smith to share this observation on Fed Fh and confirm the point
about how the stroke works across with Fed-

His follow-through, which is to the side rather than extended out front, shows just how important rotation is in his forehand. In my era, ground strokes were more linear—straight back and straight forward.

and this was dtl as well

[tlm]

Originally Posted by arche3

He wasn't that bad actually. I usually like his posts. I'm just over exaggerating. He does have a mean streak thought. That's what I felt anyways. He probably got banned because of something unrelated anyways. I predict a 6 day ban.

Now that is more the way I thought of limpin, he may have come on a little strong sometimes but seemed to be very knowledgeable about tennis and actually a pretty reasonable guy.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by 5263

Nice of Stan Smith to share this observation on Fed Fh and confirm the point
about how the stroke works across with Fed-



and this was dtl as well

Stan Smith hit cross court going straight forward? That is not possible.

Here is a video of Nastase-Smith. Stan hits very few groundies (mostly serve and volley) and in the few that I counted in the first 11 minutes before I lost patience, his finish was either across the body or at least up near the left of the forehead.

Same with Nasty. Nasty even goes so far as to swing across the body on service returns!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZezxpCqbI4

[sureshs]

A guy has shown up in the Pro Player section. He was in the finals of all the Junior Slams this year, and won the W and USO, and is the #1 ITF junior now. He is inviting questions.

See below. Note use of "through the ball" not once but twice. Note the importance of sideways too (i.e. not standing open stance facing the net).

I am also impressed with his mention of hand and racket manipulation. I have noticed conscious direction control among the pros, which is not just by a different swing path. I notice them "forcing" a direction and am glad that I was correct. It is not about hitting "across the ball" at all.

5263 will be sending me a check for $1000 for revealing the truth to him.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sureshs
Filip, hope you don't mind a technical question.

What tips can you give about hitting a topspin forehand with the right balance of spin and pace (depending on the situation), and the control over the direction (down the line or cross court), even though the swing motion is approximately the same? In other words, what is the difference you consciously make to achieve a particular speed/spin mix and direction compared to another combination?


Technical questions are tough to answer without physically demonstrating it, but I will do my best.

Basically you need to get under the ball with your racket and legs, transferring your weight up and through the ball, in order to keep the pace and depth.

As for changing direction, you need to be turned sideways as preparation, (this applies to every stroke) and use your weight transfer and hand/racket manipulation to direct the ball. Pretty much all you have to do is guide your racket and weight through the ball in that direction.

Again, these are difficult to answer, as it is a lot easier to learn if you actually see somebody demonstrate it in person.