Running Forehands

[toly]

Originally Posted by boramiNYC

toly thanks for the nice images. and thanks for discussion. it seems the forward swing is most of the times initiated with weight on right foot while running and contact in between the steps or closer to the left foot landing and above the head follow thru. I think this allows contact point to be as late as possible for more time. and it seems there is weight transfer that propels the forward swing big time.

and I swear I've seen Djok swing straight across the body while executing one of these.

maybe there also is some torso rotation which is abruptly stopped by left leg extending forward.

You are welcome. Here are two more.





Fernando Gonzales swings straight across the body http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I8g4...eature=related

[Cheetah]

That's awesome.
Do you use photoshop for those images? If so how do get such great selections? (meaning the method/tool for selecting the part of the image you want to cut/copy/paste). Mine are never that good.

[toly]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

That's awesome.
Do you use photoshop for those images? If so how do get such great selections? (meaning the method/tool for selecting the part of the image you want to cut/copy/paste). Mine are never that good.

Yes, I use Photoshop.
Mostly I apply Rectangular Marquee and Lasso.

1. First I use Rectangular to make approximate selections from original JPEG (or whatever) file.
2. Create new PSD file.
3. Paste previous copied selection into PSD file. Photoshop automatically creates layer. I select this layer.
4. Then I work as sculptor and cut everything useless. I apply mostly Lasso tool with Feather=1px to select first group unwanted pixels and hit “delete”. Hit "ctrl D" to deselect. Repeat this step for next group of unwanted pixel and so on.
5. I often change Zoom: “ctrl +” (zoom in) and “ctrl –“ (zoom out).

This is time consuming process, but I learn this stuff by trial and error and don’t know anything better.

[Ash_Smith]

^^^Probably quicker to use the Path tool to create a path around the outline of what you want to cut out and then use the make path selection button on the layer toolbox, hit ctrl+i to invert the selection and then hit delete - all done in one go!

[boramiNYC]

On a second thought I'm not sure it's the weight transfer. Because biomechanics on walking or running involves arms and upper body counter-rotating to counter the rotational force created by leg movement and keep the center of the body stable. It seems for this shot the forward swing and contact always involves huge step creating a great lower body rotational force and the upper body is counter-rotated fast to match that lower body rotational force. This seems to be source of arm acceleration?

[Ash_Smith]

is this closer to what you had in mind then...

http://jezgreen.com/the-powerstep

cheers

[boramiNYC]

Yes Ash, that's more like it. They call that powerstep huh? It seems the big step is the key in generating the force.

[Cheetah]

Thanks. I'll those methods.

[corners]

Originally Posted by tricky

Downside with a pendulum takeback is that you have less power on high bouncing shots and less spin variation.

Tricky, can the pendulum forehand (OHBH on other side, like Sampras) be hit with a straight arm? And would that provide more power and spin variation on high bouncing shots, like it does with Fed and Nadal, who have very different takebacks?

Sampras would go straight on really wide balls, where his wrist clearly was more "slappy", but I'm wondering if could have used the straight arm in other situations to give his forehand more versatility and spin. His forehand always looked a little "cramped" to me.

[tricky]

Tricky, can the pendulum forehand (OHBH on other side, like Sampras) be hit with a straight arm?

Technically, yes. When you need to hit extreme CC shots on the run, lower your swing plane so that the finish is below the shoulder (i.e. "WW-style".) You'll end up with a reverse finish due to the torque, but your swing will be straight. It will look like you're slapping the ball wide.

[NLBwell]

Keep your head still and focus on the ball as you run. Don't try to look up as you hit the ball, it is probably going to be the last shot you hit anyway. Decide on a point that you are going to hit toward as you are running and go for it.

[corners]

Originally Posted by tricky

Technically, yes. When you need to hit extreme CC shots on the run, lower your swing plane so that the finish is below the shoulder (i.e. "WW-style".) You'll end up with a reverse finish due to the torque, but your swing will be straight. It will look like you're slapping the ball wide.

Thanks. How about for shots from the center of the court? Can the pendulum style takeback be combined with a straight arm and WW finish to expand the hitting zone and provide more spin variation as a "base" forehand style?

[tricky]

Can the pendulum style takeback be combined with a straight arm and WW finish to expand the hitting zone and provide more spin variation as a "base" forehand style?

Technically, no. A straight arm configuration is really a reflection of the extension through the shot. When you use a pendulum-style takeback from a static position, you get the best extension when you use a down-to-up forward swing, finishing over the shoulder. If you swing in an across, WW-style, you'll have a bent-arm configuration. (Again, we're strictly talking static position.) Sampras used both kinds of swings, but I think he wasn't especially conscious of this.

There's ways to add more spin variation, though. Federer's rotation on his takeback was also done by Laver, and it gives you a more lasso-like motion while still retaining the basic pendulum shape.

[corners]

Originally Posted by tricky

Technically, no. A straight arm configuration is really a reflection of the extension through the shot. When you use a pendulum-style takeback from a static position, you get the best extension when you use a down-to-up forward swing, finishing over the shoulder. If you swing in an across, WW-style, you'll have a bent-arm configuration. (Again, we're strictly talking static position.) Sampras used both kinds of swings, but I think he wasn't especially conscious of this.

There's ways to add more spin variation, though. Federer's rotation on his takeback was also done by Laver, and it gives you a more lasso-like motion while still retaining the basic pendulum shape.

OK, are you saying that Laver used a pendulum takeback like Pete, but with Fed's pronated takeback? I can see that on video. But it appears to me that Rod used the pull kinetic chain while Pete uses the push. And Rod did go straight-arm on most forehands. So I'm a bit confused - it appears to me that Laver did use pendulum with straight-arm. Did it work because he was using pull rather than push mechanics?

Could you break down the Sampras forehand vs. the Laver forehand in terms of the mechanical differences (and maybe throw in some visualizations too ?

[FrisbeeFool]

Originally Posted by tricky

Technically, yes. When you need to hit extreme CC shots on the run, lower your swing plane so that the finish is below the shoulder (i.e. "WW-style".) You'll end up with a reverse finish due to the torque, but your swing will be straight. It will look like you're slapping the ball wide.

Originally Posted by tricky

Technically, no. A straight arm configuration is really a reflection of the extension through the shot. When you use a pendulum-style takeback from a static position, you get the best extension when you use a down-to-up forward swing, finishing over the shoulder. If you swing in an across, WW-style, you'll have a bent-arm configuration. (Again, we're strictly talking static position.) Sampras used both kinds of swings, but I think he wasn't especially conscious of this.

There's ways to add more spin variation, though. Federer's rotation on his takeback was also done by Laver, and it gives you a more lasso-like motion while still retaining the basic pendulum shape.

What??? Are you trying to fit as many buzz words as you can in each post? Of course Sampras wasn't conscious of any of this. It's made up gobbledygook.

[corners]

Originally Posted by FrisbeeFool

What??? Are you trying to fit as many buzz words as you can in each post? Of course Sampras wasn't conscious of any of this. It's made up gobbledygook.

FYI, tricky is the probably the most useful poster in this section of the message board. Do an advanced search for his posts and you'll find that his knowledge of stroke mechanics is unmatched around here, and he has helped many, many people on this board improve their strokes. When he turns up to post, people listen. He's using a lot of "buzzwords" because he knows I'm familiar with the terminology he uses to describe forehand stroke mechanics.

[FrisbeeFool]

Originally Posted by corners

FYI, tricky is the probably the most useful poster in this section of the message board. Do an advanced search for his posts and you'll find that his knowledge of stroke mechanics is unmatched around here, and he has helped many, many people on this board improve their strokes. When he turns up to post, people listen. He's using a lot of "buzzwords" because he knows I'm familiar with the terminology he uses to describe forehand stroke mechanics.

If by unmatched knowledge of stroke mechanics, you mean he made up the whole fake distinction between push vs pull strokes, that is still preoccupying and confusing people on these message boards, then yes I'd have to agree with you.

Those sections I quoted are about the worst, most nonsensical description of a running forehand I've ever seen. I guarantee you, no top level player, Sampras or otherwise, thinks of their running forehand that way, consciously or subconsciously. It's just needlessly confusing and contradictory.

When people discuss stroke mechanics in real life, they don't necessarily use all the buzz words that are popular on these forums. I'd never seen anyone occupied with push vs pull strokes until I came onto these forums.

[3fees]

Originally Posted by boramiNYC

With all the excitement about open stance and modern topspin stroke notwithstanding usual running forehands are out of that mold. Invariably they are very closed stance (which is a necessity) but still they can be hit very powerfully with pretty good control if executed well. Maybe not as spinny as regular topspin fh and more flat.

Can you share your ideas on this shot about the technique and/or biomechanics? I don't know if a true western grip can execute this shot but for SW and E grips this is a very important shot. I'm trying to better understand its mechanics.

If your running in on the shot, hitting the ball with wrong foot forward, lessens power, and is used to go to the net..As to the grip this is not critical,its the finish that counts.

[FrisbeeFool]

Originally Posted by 3fees

If your running in on the shot, hitting the ball with wrong foot forward, lessens power, and is used to go to the net..As to the grip this is not critical,its the finish that counts.

yeah I've seen people hit this shot with about every groundstroke grip in the book.

[boramiNYC]

Originally Posted by 3fees

If your running in on the shot, hitting the ball with wrong foot forward, lessens power, and is used to go to the net..As to the grip this is not critical,its the finish that counts.

hopefully you understand what a running fh being discussed is. once you do and watch a lot of pros past and present executing this shot, you'll realize invariably their opposite foot of the racquet arm steps forward not toward the net but toward the ball most often toward the side fence as the contact is made. this shot is not too difficult for E grip, not easy for SW grip, and almost impossible for W grip. one of the few current top pros using SW who executes this shot reliably is djokovic.

one of the effective tactics playing against SW and W players is to pull them wide on their fh precisely because this shot is difficult for them.