Jack Broudy coach?

[cluckcluck]

A friend of mine asked me if I had heard of Jack Broudy before, he wanted to take some lessons in the SD area. I did some research, found his website and looked at his stuff. Pretty interesting stuff.

Apparently he teaches a non-traditional method of playing tennis it seems, lots of terms like non-linear, infinity, and 45 degrees.

To me at all makes perfect sense, I just wanted to know if any of you have had any experiences with him or know about anything about his methods?
I don't want to tell my friend to go ahead and spend the money if he's no good. Very much appreciate the insight!

[5263]

Originally Posted by cluckcluck

A friend of mine asked me if I had heard of Jack Broudy before, he wanted to take some lessons in the SD area. I did some research, found his website and looked at his stuff. Pretty interesting stuff.

Apparently he teaches a non-traditional method of playing tennis it seems, lots of terms like non-linear, infinity, and 45 degrees.

To me at all makes perfect sense, I just wanted to know if any of you have had any experiences with him or know about anything about his methods?
I don't want to tell my friend to go ahead and spend the money if he's no good. Very much appreciate the insight!

Nice guy and very good. He told me he just got back from Europe last week
and doing well. I'm not using his system, but would like to check it out more
myself. He does Know his stuff.

[sureshs]

http://www.schooloftennis.net/

[TCF]

================================================== ==

[sureshs]

"The only tennis methodology"

"Non-Linear Tennis System"

Really?

[mightyrick]

Yowch! $900?

I just watched the Federer forehand analysis on that site. I pretty much don't get it. It was like listening to someone apply geometry to a Leonado da Vinci painting. Can you apply geometry to that? Uh, I guess. Can it make you a better painter? Uh, I'm not so sure about that.

[sureshs]

Watched his "tennis serve" free video. Apart from comments about several women players, there was a brief pic of Rick Macci (I think), without mentioning his name, showing the upper body isolation drill for the serve (feet in two ball hoppers) and a mention of how bad information like that is disseminated. As far as the actual content, it basically was to move the hip forward in the serve, which every advanced player on this forum has posted about.

The advertising seems to use jargon like secret science and non-linear mathematics.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mightyrick

It was like listening to someone apply geometry to a Leonado da Vinci painting. .

Isn't that sort of the big idea behind most of his work?
Shape, symmetry and their motions?

[mightyrick]

Originally Posted by 5263

Isn't that sort of the big idea behind most of his work?
Shape, symmetry and their motions?

You're awfully contrarian today.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mightyrick

You're awfully contrarian today.

sorry, just thought that was an odd comment.
I do always compliment your many excellent comments as well, and
I see more and more from you.
Not sure you care what I think, but I just call em how I see them and
I think you are making some nice progress overall.
I think you will over time notice that no player consistently plays his best
when hitting hard for the lines and that sometimes they do get really hot
and get away with it...then it comes back to haunt them if they make
a habit of it.

[sabala]

Originally Posted by mightyrick

Yowch! $900?

I just watched the Federer forehand analysis on that site. I pretty much don't get it. It was like listening to someone apply geometry to a Leonado da Vinci painting. Can you apply geometry to that? Uh, I guess. Can it make you a better painter? Uh, I'm not so sure about that.

You mean like the Golden Ratio or maybe even Informal Subdivision for composition? Yep, it can be helpful but you wouldn't want to use it as a crutch all the time. There are no rules - just tools - as my teacher used to say!

Not so sure if the.... "SCIENCE of INFINITY" is applicable to art though... and I think I'm afraid to ask!

[Mikael]

It's easy to make fun of Jack Broudy and his methods because of the over the top marketing and sometimes exaggerated claims.

I had actually entirely forgotten about this guy and visited his website yesterday night for the first time in something like 12 years. Had a look at the free articles on the serve and Federer's FH, today it made me play better.

Like someone else said, there's nothing new there. Maximizing your kinetic chain, using your hips, coiling/uncoiling, etc. It's all old stuff, but it's true nonetheless and Broudy reminds you of it in a unique way and simple way.

I see his methods as something you could go back to if one day you feel like you've lost your groove.

[sureshs]

As with other coaches, I am sure he teaches very well and has solid results, and the marketing is a business tactic.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by mightyrick

Yowch! $900?

I just watched the Federer forehand analysis on that site. I pretty much don't get it. It was like listening to someone apply geometry to a Leonado da Vinci painting. Can you apply geometry to that? Uh, I guess. Can it make you a better painter? Uh, I'm not so sure about that.

45 degrees is the perfect angle in nature.

The figure 8 is like infinity.

Make a sine wave pattern towards the 45 degrees line.

Ignoring the above, the gist seems to be that:

1. the body should be turned at 45 degrees for the forehand (though he shows only the inside-out stroke)
2. By coming around the ball in the curved line (figure 8 or whatever), the hip movement and rotation takes care of everything - don't focus on RHS and shoulder rotation - they happen naturally.
3. A comment about how open stance is not used (it is all 45 degrees).

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by sureshs

http://www.schooloftennis.net/

Interesting. To me, Broudy's explanation of the Federer forehand, the figure 8, stoping the upper body rotation at 45 degrees to the target (momentarily), and the convex to concave shape of the arm, is talking about the same thing that Oscar Wegnar talks about when he talks about pulling back at contact.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Interesting. To me, Broudy's explanation of the Federer forehand, the figure 8, stoping the upper body rotation at 45 degrees to the target (momentarily), and the convex to concave shape of the arm, is talking about the same thing that Oscar Wegnar talks about when he talks about pulling back at contact.

Actually the opposite. The emphasis on feet (not hands) and the comment of there being no open stance (delivered with a hint of condescension I think) in the stroke point to the very opposite.

As far as pulling back goes, there is no sudden pulling back or sudden change of speed and direction at contact, and cannot be (due to inertia).

[cluckcluck]

Thanks guys (and gals?) for the feedback, it sounds like it's good technique but his personality might be a factor.
I'll tell my friend to give him a go and see what happens.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by cluckcluck

his personality might be a factor.

You think so? Because of "Watch the one and only educated account of Roger Federer’s effortless forehand."?

[cluckcluck]

Originally Posted by sureshs

You think so? Because of "Watch the one and only educated account of Roger Federer’s effortless forehand."?

You guys seem to think his personality is cocky.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by cluckcluck

You guys seem to think his personality is cocky.

I don't think that will be an issue at all. Why? Because the cockiness will not be relevant to juniors (these are usually adult-to-adult ego clashes) and no one will turn down good money.