Defend the contact point/unit turns are the two most common causes of errors

[5263]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

For example, Sureshs uses the term "late" to describe the contact in relation to the ball (where a coach would use on the rise or on the drop) as opposed to a coaches use of "late" to describe the contact in relation to the body (i.e. a contact behind the plane of the body).

Yes, that is the point I was going to make once he confirmed his version of it.
But it is a common misconception & rec players often confuse these terms.

[Ash_Smith]

Edited because it no longer makes any sense after 5263 revised the above

[5263]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

^^^I think this is often where issues on the board occur. Those in the tennis teaching industry tend to use certain terminology to mean certain things and it's okay because all those on the inside understand them. When talking to those outside the industry we have to remember the terminology may not be so well agreed upon and understood. .

Ash, can you share how you see "hitting out front"?

[5263]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

When you say...



Do you mean it is or it isn't common for rec players to confuse the terms?!?!?!

If I read what you have written literally then you're saying we believe rec players confuse the terminology, but actually they don't??? Not sure that makes sense?!?!?!?

I had already fixed that typo, lol.
Man, you are right on it!
thanks though

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

^^^I think this is often where issues on the board occur. Those in the tennis teaching industry tend to use certain terminology to mean certain things and it's okay because all those on the inside understand them. When talking to those outside the industry we have to remember the terminology may not be so well agreed upon and understood.

For example, Sureshs uses the term "late" to describe the contact in relation to the ball (where a coach would use on the rise or on the drop) as opposed to a coaches use of "late" to describe the contact in relation to the body (i.e. a contact behind the plane of the body).

Here is a proven coach who uses "later" as opposite to "on the rise." So your generalization of what terminology coaches use is wrong.

"By hitting the ball on the rise you don't have to be as exacting with your placement as you are when you take it later because you are robbing your opponent of time," says Paul Annacone.

Here is another link:

http://tennis.about.com/b/2006/09/01...ball-early.htm

As you watch Andre Agassi in this, his last professional tournament, observe his unsurpassed mastery of the skill that has been largely responsible for his success: taking the ball early, a.k.a. hitting on the rise.

And finally, from the disciples of the great Oscar himself:

http://www.playmoderntennis.com/Taki...-The-Rise.html

Taking the ball on the Rise Drill

This is also known as ‘taking the ball early’

[Ash_Smith]

Originally Posted by 5263

Ash, can you share how you see "hitting out front"?

I'm with you, it's relative to the plane of the body and the net. If it was just the plane of the body you could argue (like Sureshs is [I think?]) that every ball is hit in front, whilst this may be literally true, it is not what coaches mean in general.

When a coach references hitting out in front, he/she generally means that the contact is between the plane of the body and the net, as opposed to a late contact which would be behind the plane of the body.

[Ash_Smith]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Here is a proven coach who uses "later" as opposite to "on the rise." So your generalization of what terminology coaches use is wrong.

"By hitting the ball on the rise you don't have to be as exacting with your placement as you are when you take it later because you are robbing your opponent of time," says Paul Annacone.

Yes, but can you see than Annacone is using the term "later" in correlation with "taking on the rise"? The earlier statement quantifies the later.

And yes, I am aware that "hitting on the rise" and "taking the ball early(in its flight)" are different ways of describing the same thing.


P.S. In what way is Annacone proven in respect of player development?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

Yes, but can you see than Annacone is using the term "later" in correlation with "taking on the rise"? The earlier statement quantifies the later.

And yes, I am aware that "hitting on the rise" and "taking the ball early(in its flight)" are different ways of describing the same thing.


P.S. In what way is Annacone proven in respect of player development?

I gave you 3 examples to prove that your opinion about terminology is condescending and wrong, and things are not as black and white as you claim. Take it or leave it. I will go with the kind of usage that proven coaches use.

[5263]

Originally Posted by sureshs

You see the ball and hit it because you hit out in front.

That is called taking the ball early. Only a few can do it. It depends on your height too.

But you can stand back, adopt a neutral stance, take the ball very late and yet hit out in front!!!

Taking it early and hitting out in front are orthogonal issues.

I don't see where any of the statements above make sense with the proper
understanding of the terms.
What does height have to do with taking it early??
What does stance have to do with taking it late or hitting out front?

They also don't align well with Annacone's comment, where he used it correctly
about "on the rise" or "taking it early".....which has little to do with "hitting out
front."

[sureshs]

Nick Bollitierri
http://www.tennisnow.com/blogs/nick-...o-beat-hi.aspx

In Japan, Kei, 20, is a superstar. On the court he is as quick as a cat, and superbly balanced. He is a shot maker with great footwork, able to jump off both feet to hammer his backhands. His strokes are so good because of his foundations. He has unorthodox grips and hits his forehand with spin. His serve is fine, he has got a solid basic volley, and he likes to hit the ball early, on the rise, from the baseline.

[Ash_Smith]

Sureshs

If I told you I was currently coaching players ranked 7, 12 and 16 in the world and the number 1 male and female juniors in the world would that make me "proven"

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by 5263

I don't see where any of the statements above make sense with the proper
understanding of the terms.
What does height have to do with taking it early??
What does stance have to do with taking it late or hitting out front?

They also don't align well with Annacone's comment, where he used it correctly
about "on the rise" or "taking it early".....which has little to do with "hitting out
front."

The comments were narrowly focused about the terms early and on the rise, and the claim that coaches never use them together.

It is not relevant to what you are saying. I already posted before and had at least one person agreeing with me that hardly anyone hits on the side, so I do not think hitting out in front is a meaningful advice.

That is the not the same as what was being discussed now, that somehow all coaches never use early and on the rise together.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

Sureshs

If I told you I was currently coaching players ranked 7, 12 and 16 in the world and the number 1 male and female juniors in the world would that make me "proven"

That is great.

[Ash_Smith]

Sureshs - nobody said that coaches don't use the terms "taking it early" and "on the rise" to mean the same or similar. You said hitting out in front is the same as taking it early, which in coach parlance it isn't.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

Sureshs - nobody said that coaches don't use the terms "taking it early" and "on the rise" to mean the same or similar. You said hitting out in front is the same as taking it early, which in coach parlance it isn't.

No, you said it right here:

For example, Sureshs uses the term "late" to describe the contact in relation to the ball (where a coach would use on the rise or on the drop)

The only way to read the sentence is to mean that a coach would use on the rise (instead of early) and on the drop (instead of late), the latter terms being what I supposedly used wrongly. I just proved you wrong.

Don't try to twist what you said by bringing in the hitting out in front issue.

[Ash_Smith]

Actually you didn't prove me wrong - I made no reference to the phrase early at all and was merely pointing out that your understanding of the term "hitting late" is likely not how it would be used by a coach (hence your disagreement with 5263).

oh, and you brought up the hitting in front issue and confused it with taking the ball on the rise/early - which I had already explained to you earlier was not the same thing thing (as one can hit the ball on the drop and still make contact in front)!

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

Actually you didn't prove me wrong - I made no reference to the phrase early at all and was merely pointing out that your understanding of the term "hitting late" is likely not how it would be used by a coach (hence your disagreement with 5263).

oh, and you brought up the hitting in front issue and confused it with taking the ball on the rise/early - which I had already explained to you earlier was not the same thing thing (as one can hit the ball on the drop and still make contact in front)!

Whatever. You equated late with ball drop, which is the same as early with ball rise. Take it to an English teacher and let me know how she reads it.

And what I had said before is that you can stay back and give yourself more time, and yet the ball out in front, which is what you are saying again now. I did not confuse anything - you were just too eager to find some fault. Go back and read what I wrote - someone can stand back (and so let the ball drop) and still hit out in front. You say the same thing now and claim that I said the opposite.

[rkelley]

Just saying that perhaps getting really rigid about a specific definition of a term is probably not the most helpful thing. More important I think is that we communicate and work to understand each other’s meaning, and soak up some of the really good bits that are freely and generously offered here.

Relative to early and late (and I’m just a rec player), with no other context given then I've generally understood the terms be in reference to the contact point. I have also heard the term hitting early to be used in reference to hitting on the rise, but generally there’s context within which to understand that. I have not really heard hitting late to reference hitting a ball after it’s crested and falling. However someone wants to use the terms, the concepts are the important thing for improving our games.

So I’m going to put energy in defending my contact point, because I’ve personally found that mental image very helpful for improving my game.

[sureshs]

Where did this term "defend the contact point" originate? I don't find it with a casual search on google and bing, except references to this forum and the article with the same title which OP seems to have posted on another site.

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

I'm with you, it's relative to the plane of the body and the net. If it was just the plane of the body you could argue (like Sureshs is [I think?]) that every ball is hit in front, whilst this may be literally true, it is not what coaches mean in general.

When a coach references hitting out in front, he/she generally means that the contact is between the plane of the body and the net, as opposed to a late contact which would be behind the plane of the body.

Sounds good. I was taking more into account the leverage you get from a proper hitting structure with arm position and grip and angular momentum more than the leverage you also get from behind physically behind the ball which is why I brought up the running forehand on the dead one situation.