Modern Tennis Tips by Oscar Wegner

[arche3]

Originally Posted by sureshs

That is the point.

The point is not to laugh at those who try to split step. Like someone laughing at your son when he was 7. Like the previous poster said he does.

Get it?

The other point is not to derail Oscar's threads by posting stuff like what you and the other poster are doing.

You guys are giving him a bad name. When he says footwork is natural, he probably means not overdoing it like the detailed USTA diagrams from the 1920s. You guys are giving him a bad name by confusing people about split-stepping and then admitting you are yourself teaching that. This derails the thread.

I dont read oscars stuff too closely. So sorry. I think a split step is good to teach. But then after it is taught it kinda becomes just a part of the movement.

Remember the kid on here who posted a video of his hitting where his split step was so exagerated he probably jumped a foot into the air and his heels hit his butt cheeks? Now that is funny. I'm going to try that and see if I move faster. No offence to kid w/goat split step if your reading this.

[Wegner]

There is no point arguing who is right and who is wrong. You both Suresh and Archie presented each of you viewpoints clearly. I am not acting as a judge between posters. We are all presenting viewpoints. Let's move on.

Have either of you tested the yanking, i.e. the drastic change of direction of effort at impact time?

Thank you.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by Wegner

There is no point arguing who is right and who is wrong. You both Suresh and Archie presented each of you viewpoints clearly. I am not acting as a judge between posters. We are all presenting viewpoints. Let's move on.

Have either of you tested the yanking, i.e. the drastic change of direction of effort at impact time?

Thank you.

It works for me. I have a slight double bend fh.

Doesnt work well for my son. He hits straight arm.

I dont have the timing down or muscle memory to do it all the time. And maybe its too advanced for my 11 year old son. Not sure. And I dont want to miss because I'm hitting a new fh.

[luvforty]

Originally Posted by arche3

It works for me. I have a slight double bend fh.

Doesnt work well for my son. He hits straight arm.

I am now convinced that the 'yank' does NOT add any power, but is a mere necessity of a bent FH.

for a straight FH, the arm can't extent, so the centrifugal force will not change the rotation radius, i.e. the MOI Moment of Inertia stays constant, which is necessary to avoid arm stuck behind the body.

but for a bent FH, with the core rotation picking up angular speed, the centrifugal force increases and is pulling the racket and the forearm outward. if the bicep does not contract, the arm will extend, MOI changes, and the rotation is ruined.. player probably end up in an awkward position with arm stuck behind the body as it cannot keep up with the rotation of the core.

[5263]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Yeah and it doesn't happen by itself at first. That is the point. It happens by instruction,

Just not the case. I remember how I'd been playing for yrs before I ever heard
the term. I wondered what it meant, then once it was explained I realized I
had always done that instinctively. I think most sports involve moves that
work much like the split step in tennis, but folks who didn't play other sports
may need more help with that.

[Avles]

Originally Posted by guitarplayer

People who worry about footwork or those who try to do split steps etc crack me up. Do you focus on your footwork when you walk to a specific point? Do you think about starting with the left foot or right foot???? NO NO NO..you just freaking run to where the ball is!

That's a pretty bad analogy. When I'm walking to the fridge to get a sandwich it doesn't really matter if I get to the sandwich a fraction of a second sooner or later, so I don't have to worry whether or not I'm in balance at the moment I decide to get that sandwich. But fractions of a second do matter in tennis. So tennis footwork isn't quite like "walking to a specific point" because economy of motion and time matter much more in tennis.

Maybe some players do just naturally start split stepping once they've played a bit. But that's far from universal, as evidenced by the fact that there are tons of rec players who play tennis all the time and don't do it.

Not overthinking is all well and good, and I agree that it's easy to get mired in unhelpful detail. But it's wacky to think that good footwork will just magically happen if everybody obeys their instincts. There's a place for instruction as well.

[5263]

Originally Posted by TCF

He does not say everything is natural and nothing must be taught. Far from the truth. He says tennis movement is mostly natural, run like you run.

Not sure why he struggles under this misunderstanding of how MTM uses "natural".
It has been explained to him before that it does not mean instinctive or what
you might do without instruction, but it means what is a natural way for the
body to function without being awkward or adding negative types of stress.
In some cases things may actually be instinctive as well, but the main point of
natural in MTM is about doing things that are "suitable" to how the body works.

[CCH4TENNIS]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

Absolut,

A closer look into your alleged facts would result in different conclusions regarding impact and results. You are taking the marketing claims at face value.

Rhythm and Timing: Oscar Wegner Got It Right


Stalk the ball. Find the ball. Rip the ball. Oscar Wegner is absolutely correct about the rhythm and timing of top hitters and I think his insight is still not well understood. Hopefully my site can confirm what Oscar brilliantly discovered, perhaps 30 years ago.

Watch how Coria and Hewitt don't "take the racket back" right away. Instead they are "stalking" the ball. Getting a feel for the incoming ball. And delaying so that they can meet the ball at just the right time - not too late...or too early.



Instead of "swinging fast" into the ball, these players work first on alignmnet - or what Oscar calls "finding the ball". They get hand, arm, body and racket properly positioned behind the ball first. Then they accelerate with the force of the hand and shoulder in a windshield wiper motion.

More at http://www.hi-techtennis.com/oscar_w...and_timing.php

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by arche3

I dont read oscars stuff too closely. So sorry. I think a split step is good to teach. But then after it is taught it kinda becomes just a part of the movement.

Remember the kid on here who posted a video of his hitting where his split step was so exagerated he probably jumped a foot into the air and his heels hit his butt cheeks? Now that is funny. I'm going to try that and see if I move faster. No offence to kid w/goat split step if your reading this.

See what always happens is we end up fighting with one another and the thread gets deleted. I think it is best to direct all comments only at Oscar and towards those who comment directly on what he says. Like Oscar never said anything about not split stepping or for that matter about the Williams, but that is what generated more arguments than what he actually said.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by 5263

Just not the case. I remember how I'd been playing for yrs before I ever heard
the term. I wondered what it meant, then once it was explained I realized I
had always done that instinctively. I think most sports involve moves that
work much like the split step in tennis, but folks who didn't play other sports
may need more help with that.

Maybe, but it is not borne out by the thousands of bonafide USTA 4.5s who don't split step. Also, you are not a typical example of the adult with a desk job.

I met many veteran 4.0s last week (all strangers). The only person who was split stepping was the assistant coach of the clinic (a member of the women's team at the local university). It was so obvious.

[JW10S]

Originally Posted by sureshs

That is the point.

The point is not to laugh at those who try to split step. Like someone laughing at your son when he was 7. Like the previous poster said he does.

Get it?

The other point is not to derail Oscar's threads by posting stuff like what you and the other poster are doing.

You guys are giving him a bad name. When he says footwork is natural, he probably means not overdoing it like the detailed USTA diagrams from the 1920s. You guys are giving him a bad name by confusing people about split-stepping and then admitting you are yourself teaching that. This derails the thread.

Yes, it's kind of funny, and a little weird, when others attempt to speak for Wegner. In another thread 5263 said there is no abrupt change of direction in MTM--in this thread Wegner said there is indeed an abrupt change of direction, a 'yank'. 5263 has said the word 'modern' in MTM does not mean current, it is just a noun, a name--in this thread Wegner said the word is meant to be descriptive, therefore an adjective. Now we're hearing from arche3 and others what he means by natural, footwork, etc. Maybe Wegner should speak for himself, instead of those who clearly don't know near as much as they think they do, so everyone can honestly judge his work for what it is, and for what it isn't, without the unnecessary (and frankly creepy) fanboyism.

[luvforty]

what's a split step?

[5263]

Originally Posted by JW10S

In another thread 5263 said there is no abrupt change of direction in MTM--in this thread Wegner said there is indeed an abrupt change of direction, a 'yank'. 5263 has said the word 'modern' in MTM does not mean current, it is just a noun, a name--in this thread Wegner said the word is meant to be descriptive, therefore an adjective.

Well, the big difference between you and I is that I'll man up and admit to
those mistakes or differences, posted by me and contradicted by Oscar.
I admit my mistake while you continue your lack of class with your name
calling and making creepy fanboy comments.
As to the "yank", this lately is the first I've heard of him use it and am caught
off guard by that idea.
Honestly at this point, I'm not seeing it. Maybe it is a language thing and it is
not in the book I'm pretty sure.

As to the Modern noun comment, well I'm thinking Oscar was just trying to be
accommodating with you and not stir up more fighting. He and I have talked on
that topic before and I thought I understood his position more clearly.
Either way, You are right, I have been contradicted in these areas.
Of course I defer to Oscar to clear up any misconceptions on the MTM system he
developed, but given his comment on modern, must admit that as a descriptor,
it falls a bit short imo as well.
As always, if someone makes a good point as you have in this case, I'm always
ready to accept the superior position or comments.
I can only do my best as always

[sureshs]

It just occurred to me that there is a simple model for the forehand - a door. It neglects the relative motions of the upper arm, forearm and wrist, but in the end, it is a door. Place a ball before a door which is fully open, and swing it. Then do the same (for the same distance from the hinge) when the door is half closed. The ball paths are totally different.

The ball path is perpendicular to the door at contact - along the tangent. For the same contact point, if the hinge is in a place such that the door meets it in a more open position, it is a DTL shot. If the hinge position is such that the door meets it more closed, it is a CC shot.

The same hinge position with the same contact point will not allow both types of shot to be hit (unless there is jerky wrist motion which is seen in some club players).

Another way to look at it is to imagine drawing two circular arcs passing through the same point (the contact point) and with the same radius, but with different centers.

The complication is with players like Fed and Nadal who can swipe the ball sideways for side spin, which a door cannot do.

[5263]

Originally Posted by sureshs

The same hinge position with the same contact point will not allow both types of shot to be hit (unless there is jerky wrist motion which is seen in some club players).

Another way to look at it is to imagine drawing two circular arcs passing through the same point (the contact point) and with the same radius, but with different centers.

The complication is with players like Fed and Nadal who can swipe the ball sideways for side spin, which a door cannot do.

Imo you are seeing this in a pretty good way, and if you could avoid the
friction of the floor, I think you would also get the sidespin.

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by luvforty

I am now convinced that the 'yank' does NOT add any power, but is a mere necessity of a bent FH.

for a straight FH, the arm can't extent, so the centrifugal force will not change the rotation radius, i.e. the MOI Moment of Inertia stays constant, which is necessary to avoid arm stuck behind the body.

but for a bent FH, with the core rotation picking up angular speed, the centrifugal force increases and is pulling the racket and the forearm outward. if the bicep does not contract, the arm will extend, MOI changes, and the rotation is ruined.. player probably end up in an awkward position with arm stuck behind the body as it cannot keep up with the rotation of the core.

Incorrect.
You can pull across with any type of forehand. Oscar talks about bicep usage but there are other ways to do it. You can pull across with a minute change in torso rotation or a slight adjustment in tension in some part of the body such as the shoulder or hip or by a change in the amount of bend in your knees. You can even do it using the tilt of your shoulders or any combination of the above. Any such change during the swing no matter how small increases rhs considerably.

Many people don't get this because they've never tried, or they won't try because they don't believe it or they don't want to change or because it challenges the method's they were taught since the beginning or because they can't see it because it's usually not a big move.

The fact is it works. Not everyone does it and not everyone who does do it does it on every stroke. Pro's need every ounce of advantage they can get. A one inch tug here or there give or take that will increase rhs and spin will be utililized.

Here's one player who does it on a larger scale that is easier to see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4ssvjz1Sg&t=2m05s

watch it for a few mins

[arche3]

Originally Posted by JW10S

Yes, it's kind of funny, and a little weird, when others attempt to speak for Wegner. In another thread 5263 said there is no abrupt change of direction in MTM--in this thread Wegner said there is indeed an abrupt change of direction, a 'yank'. 5263 has said the word 'modern' in MTM does not mean current, it is just a noun, a name--in this thread Wegner said the word is meant to be descriptive, therefore an adjective. Now we're hearing from arche3 and others what he means by natural, footwork, etc. Maybe Wegner should speak for himself, instead of those who clearly don't know near as much as they think they do, so everyone can honestly judge his work for what it is, and for what it isn't, without the unnecessary (and frankly creepy) fanboyism.

I was not speaking about Oscar. Or for Oscar. But simply pointing out advanced tennis players do not think about split stepping. They just do it. It has nothing to do with what Oscar has said or not said. If any of the great players I've played with ever thought about doing it I'd be surprised. The point is great players move to the ball without much thought. They just get there.
If anyone is still worried about not doing a split step they have not spent enough time on court or took up the game too late in life.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

Incorrect.
You can pull across with any type of forehand. Oscar talks about bicep usage but there are other ways to do it. You can pull across with a minute change in torso rotation or a slight adjustment in tension in some part of the body such as the shoulder or hip or by a change in the amount of bend in your knees. You can even do it using the tilt of your shoulders or any combination of the above. Any such change during the swing no matter how small increases rhs considerably.

Many people don't get this because they've never tried, or they won't try because they don't believe it or they don't want to change or because it challenges the method's they were taught since the beginning or because they can't see it because it's usually not a big move.

The fact is it works. Not everyone does it and not everyone who does do it does it on every stroke. Pro's need every ounce of advantage they can get. A one inch tug here or there give or take that will increase rhs and spin will be utililized.

Here's one player who does it on a larger scale that is easier to see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4ssvjz1Sg&t=2m05s

watch it for a few mins

If this is what Oscar means then I do this to an extent all the time. I was under another assumption. Oscar has a video of a junior trying this and he was pulling his bicep back way more forcefully. It changes the timing of the stroke because your activating your bicep muscle to pull back prior to contact as opposed to at the wrap. I think this is something new. Beyond the wiper. And frankly I've never heard anyone but Oscar say this.

[luvforty]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

Here's one player who does it on a larger scale that is easier to see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4ssvjz1Sg&t=2m05s

watch it for a few mins

eh - you call it yanking to the left, i call it counterclockwise rotation.

to-may-to
to-maa-to

[Relinquis]

Originally Posted by luvforty

eh - you call it yanking to the left, i call it counterclockwise rotation.

to-may-to
to-maa-to

in this clip he elaborates that it isn't just the rotation, but also a pull back type motion. my interpretation is that this means to actively pull across immediately before contact rather than to continue rotating through the ball. i haven't tried it yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYYc-bn5vz4