Modern Tennis Tips by Oscar Wegner

[5263]

Originally Posted by dominikk1985

that's what I was saying. there is no "across" in a Tennis shot. it is just a natural continuation of the arc around the Body. of course you could actually fight against the arc by extending. and you could also cut the off by actively pulling the arm in (active pull across).

but to me it Looks like neither is Happening- there is just one arc around the Body.

It's fine if you decide not to take advantage of pulling across, but for those
who have learned to add it, there is quite a gain to be realized. For you to tell
those who know how to use it that it doesn't work is like telling someone with
a 6 speed, that they only have 5....It won't fly. You can continue to sell it to
those who also think there are only 5 speeds in some cases though...at least
till the give it a fair chance and see that the 6th gear is actually there.
I realize if you are satisfied with your Fh, there is little reason to push for more.

[CCH4TENNIS]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

Can people please be civilized and can TT not delete these types of threads?
Let the discussion grow, let people debate. The more different types of coaching philosophies we have on here the better, even if you don't agree with anything mentioned. This is getting beyond ridiculous.

Agreed

[arche3]

The cue to pull across (and to a certain extent to also actively pull back at impact) works. But does it actually go across only? No of course not. As the swing is circular the swing can be manipulated with a lot of nuance. If you see how djokovic hits when he finishes his fh over his shoulder there seems to be active use of his bicep to pull back the stroke as well as the across aspect. Does the racket pull back and slow down? No. The racket seems to accelerate faster in the arc across. One advantage I've found in focusing on the across aspect of a fh stroke is your shoulders are always centered over your hips. I've tried numerous cues when coaching my 11 year old son and focusing on the across aspect of the stroke and with an emphasis on starting the swing slower then accelerating through impact really helps with pace and spin. One thing I add that Oscar does not really touch on much is the use of the legs. I found that by using the knee bend and lifting into the stroke it adds more racket head speed with out the need to swing any faster.

I am still not certain the active pull back advice by Oscar is right for every occasion. As I taught my son a straight arm forehand when he hits with a normal wiper motion he hits harder than when he actively pulls back. The finish is different as well as spin. My son gets more top spin if he uses the cue to pull back. But the ball is heavier with a normal wiper motion using the straight arm. And the ball has enough clearance over the net regardless. And on wide balls on the run to the fh he is hitting a reverse fh. Perhaps the active pull back cue can be used more effectively to affect the wide fhs on the run? To add more height and spin without resorting to a reverse fh?

Regardless my son prefers to not use the pull back cue as he hits well with a normal wiper straight arm fh. The ball is moving fast and with a lot of spin. And I'm not about to change things at this point after 6 years of working on his fh.

[dominikk1985]

Originally Posted by 5263

It's fine if you decide not to take advantage of pulling across, but for those
who have learned to add it, there is quite a gain to be realized. For you to tell
those who know how to use it that it doesn't work is like telling someone with
a 6 speed, that they only have 5....It won't fly. You can continue to sell it to
those who also think there are only 5 speeds in some cases though...at least
till the give it a fair chance and see that the 6th gear is actually there.
I realize if you are satisfied with your Fh, there is little reason to push for more.

I'm not even sure if I disagree with you.

I certainly do hit "across". I just don't know if across means active use of the arm to pull across or letting the rotational nature of the stroke carry the racket across.

I'm also against trying to extend the arm through the ball as this means disconnection from Rotation.

[corbind]

Tracking input here...

[Wegner]

Originally Posted by dominikk1985

I'm not even sure if I disagree with you.

I certainly do hit "across". I just don't know if across means active use of the arm to pull across or letting the rotational nature of the stroke carry the racket across.

I'm also against trying to extend the arm through the ball as this means disconnection from Rotation.

Dominikk, try it both ways, pushing away for disconnection (as you explain) at or near the impact and through it, more linear towards the other player's court, and other times pulling in, across and towards the fence behind you, accelerating through the impact in a major change of direction, and tell us which one works best for you in terms of power, control, spin, amount of effort, etc.

I'd love to hear from your experience with such.

[Wegner]

Originally Posted by arche3

The cue to pull across (and to a certain extent to also actively pull back at impact) works. But does it actually go across only? No of course not. As the swing is circular the swing can be manipulated with a lot of nuance. If you see how djokovic hits when he finishes his fh over his shoulder there seems to be active use of his bicep to pull back the stroke as well as the across aspect. Does the racket pull back and slow down? No. The racket seems to accelerate faster in the arc across. One advantage I've found in focusing on the across aspect of a fh stroke is your shoulders are always centered over your hips. I've tried numerous cues when coaching my 11 year old son and focusing on the across aspect of the stroke and with an emphasis on starting the swing slower then accelerating through impact really helps with pace and spin. One thing I add that Oscar does not really touch on much is the use of the legs. I found that by using the knee bend and lifting into the stroke it adds more racket head speed with out the need to swing any faster.

I am still not certain the active pull back advice by Oscar is right for every occasion. As I taught my son a straight arm forehand when he hits with a normal wiper motion he hits harder than when he actively pulls back. The finish is different as well as spin. My son gets more top spin if he uses the cue to pull back. But the ball is heavier with a normal wiper motion using the straight arm. And the ball has enough clearance over the net regardless. And on wide balls on the run to the fh he is hitting a reverse fh. Perhaps the active pull back cue can be used more effectively to affect the wide fhs on the run? To add more height and spin without resorting to a reverse fh?

Regardless my son prefers to not use the pull back cue as he hits well with a normal wiper straight arm fh. The ball is moving fast and with a lot of spin. And I'm not about to change things at this point after 6 years of working on his fh.

Arche, you are right in present time. But, let's say your son grows to be a tall, powerful hitter, and hits forehands close to or above 100 MPH (normal in today's tour, even in college). Would he be able to pound the ball without any rotation and get it consistently in the court? Would he be able, at those speeds, to have a safe net clearance and not restrain his power in a tight situation? Would he be confident on pounding and attacking the ball no matter what?

The modern racquets, with so much available response and power, have changed the equation quite a bit.

Those are the considerations that make me teach topspin from a young age. It is always easier, as a variation, to resort to hit flatter, forward and harder. Your swing is quite coincidental with the flight of your ball. What is more difficult is to tell the usual flat player TO POUND the ball with topspin and hitting across. It takes new training and countless hours of practice to instill in a player with a forward tendency to exert his effort in a completely new direction than that of the ball trajectory he intends.

[treblings]

Oscar,
in the video interview you posted you were critical of fyb´s modern footwork videos.
i actually liked them a lot and feel like they helped me in my game
what is it you don´t like about them?

[dominikk1985]

Originally Posted by Wegner

Dominikk, try it both ways, pushing away for disconnection (as you explain) at or near the impact and through it, more linear towards the other player's court, and other times pulling in, across and towards the fence behind you, accelerating through the impact in a major change of direction, and tell us which one works best for you in terms of power, control, spin, amount of effort, etc.

I'd love to hear from your experience with such.

thanks mr wegner. I will try that and Report back.

I'm definitely against Extension of the arm but do you actually mean active pulling in by bending the arm (biceps). or do you mean just follow the natural arc around the Body?

[arche3]

Originally Posted by Wegner

Arche, you are right in present time. But, let's say your son grows to be a tall, powerful hitter, and hits forehands close to or above 100 MPH (normal in today's tour, even in college). Would he be able to pound the ball without any rotation and get it consistently in the court? Would he be able, at those speeds, to have a safe net clearance and not retrain his power in a tight situation? Would he be confident on pounding and attacking the ball no matter what?

The modern racquets, with so much available response and power, have changed the equation quite a bit.

Those are the considerations that make me teach topspin from a young age. It is always easier, as a variation, to resort to hit flatter, forward and harder. Your swing is quite coincidental with the flight of your ball. What is more difficult is to tell the usual flat player TO POUND the ball with topspin and hitting across. It takes new training and countless hours of practice to instill in a player with a forward tendency to exert his effort in a completely new direction than that of the ball trajectory he intends.

I actually used your across approach to teach his fh. Along with leading with the hip rotation in the modern style. I just question the pull back part of your instruction. As that does not seem to add more pace to a straight arm fh.
I found the cue to pull across the ball worked wonders for my son. He is a big and strong 11 year olds. Almost 5 ft 6i nches tall now. He has enough spin to keep the ball in at this point.

[Raul_SJ]

TCF,

In an earlier thread, that has since been deleted, you mentioned that your students improved when presented with the "pulling across" image.

Congratulations on this.

But what do you believe is physically changing with their stroke?

[5263]

Originally Posted by dominikk1985

I'm not even sure if I disagree with you.

I certainly do hit "across". I just don't know if across means active use of the arm to pull across or letting the rotational nature of the stroke carry the racket across.

I'm also against trying to extend the arm through the ball as this means disconnection from Rotation.

Looks like we are connecting some dots here on this.
If you add the pull across right prior to contact, that will accel the racket
out into the ball with a controlled power that also enhances your ability to
control net clearance better.
It does incorporate your rotational nature of the stroke prior to the pull, with
the pull across enhancing the arc.

[Mick3391]

Originally Posted by tlm

I agree 100%, who are the complainers that keep getting these threads deleted. This is supposed to be a tennis site for tennis discussion, it amazes me that on a tennis site a long time tennis instructor is giving free advise and the threads keep getting nuked.

It makes you wonder if some of the haters are worried that the same instruction that they claim is so wrong could be found to be helpful and ruin their non stop Oscar bashing.

I think most players looking for help take a little something from many different teaching methods, some they will like and some they will think are no good. But it would be nice if we would at least get to make that choice.

And if Oscar is so wrong I do not understand why the same few haters have to jump in and start the trouble. If they know it is wrong just stay out of these threads and stay with what they think is the right way. Isn't that what most normal people would do?

So if you disagree you are labeled a "Hater"?

Aren't others entitled to opinions, or do we just sit back like mindless robots and say "Yes teacher"?

I agree many get very nasty, but a difference of opinion helps people grow. I do a thread and I don't care if others disagree.

[tlm]

Originally Posted by Mick3391

So if you disagree you are labeled a "Hater"?

Aren't others entitled to opinions, or do we just sit back like mindless robots and say "Yes teacher"?

I agree many get very nasty, but a difference of opinion helps people grow. I do a thread and I don't care if others disagree.

Well you must have missed most of these Oscar threads obviously. There have been a few posters that have to jump in every thread that involves Oscar and start useless bickering that leads to the the thread being deleted.

The difference of opinion is fine with me, I agree that it helps to hear different sides and opinions. Even though a lot of it was just obnoxious trouble making that didn't bother me that much, but what did is the thread would just be getting going and becoming interesting and it would be nuked because of the haters starting so much crap.

[Maui19]

Instruction threads get very heated in golf forums too. A lot of personal insults and flame wars among the same group of posters leading to locked or deleted threads. I'm not sure why instruction discussions bring out the worst in people, but it seems to do so.

[Mick3391]

Originally Posted by tlm

Well you must have missed most of these Oscar threads obviously. There have been a few posters that have to jump in every thread that involves Oscar and start useless bickering that leads to the the thread being deleted.

The difference of opinion is fine with me, I agree that it helps to hear different sides and opinions. Even though a lot of it was just obnoxious trouble making that didn't bother me that much, but what did is the thread would just be getting going and becoming interesting and it would be nuked because of the haters starting so much crap.

Yea hear you, it's amazing some of these threads, guy posts "Here's why I think X is better than Y", and dudes are vicious! "This shows why you are such a ..............." It's like "Cool it it's just tennis".

I've fallen for this myself, but yea we should all be friendly, we say something stupid, so what. I mean I have a stalker on this forum, some guy can't stand me, I just ignore it because I really enjoy this forum.

[luvforty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a6WWX5AWUA

notice that in this video EA just talks about options, not valid/invalid options.. also check out his work titled 'power of 3', which is a masterpiece on open-minded golf instruction suited to individual players.

why can't tennis coaches be more open minded.

seems these debates about individual ques are quite pointless.... they are all valid, to the extent that they work for somebody.... they are all invalid, to the extent that they don't work for everybody !

[luvforty]

i agree with dominikk1985.... it's just a rotation.. whatever que used to achieve that doesn't matter, pulling to the left, backwards etc.... this may work for some people, but maybe an overkill for others.

rotation thru impact... that's all the que the brain needs.

[Mick3391]

Originally Posted by luvforty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a6WWX5AWUA

notice that in this video EA just talks about options, not valid/invalid options.. also check out his work titled 'power of 3', which is a masterpiece on open-minded golf instruction suited to individual players.

why can't tennis coaches be more open minded.

seems these debates about individual ques are quite pointless.... they are all valid, to the extent that they work for somebody.... they are all invalid, to the extent that they don't work for everybody !

I don't know if tennis coaches are necessarily closed minded, but what I don't like is that it seems almost universal they want to teach the "New way", like I said before people out on the courts LOVE to give unsolicited advice, "Well your son needs to get behind the baseline and.......". Maybe I'm just old school, but I can't find one flaw in teaching baseline, net play, all court. I'm telling you these kids are taught one thing, and that is how to dictate from the baseline.

I tell my son to once in awhile to do a shot just over the net to make them nervous, and to take the ball mid court in the air and finish it, and of course the net. I mean even Sampras said if he played today he'd still serve and volley, and while I'm not teaching him pure S&V, he needs to know how to do it all, what if they speed courts back up? What's wrong with knowing how to play all court? He's only 12, I want him to be able to do it all.

[JohnYandell]

Disagreement is not "hating." Calling people out on their credibility problems by citing evidence is not "hating."

Expalining why certain claims are falacious when presented as monolithic truth is not "hating." Suggesting how these claims may be detrimental to the tennis of players here is not "hating."

But there is a reaction pattern we have seen here over and over again when these criticisms are raised that leads to thread oblivion. It's self inflicted.

On with the love fest!