Modern Tennis Tips by Oscar Wegner

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

It is possible that Wegner is discussing some other forehand, but I think that the video of the fh shown is fairly typical.

In any case, the claim of 17 mph RHS at impact, followed by more acceleration after contact, is absurd. TWU professor has a menu for calculating this kind of stuff, and even the cases when there is heavy reliance on incoming ball speed to achieve a reflection effect by blocking, the speed is at least 40 mph.

[julian]

Originally Posted by sureshs

In any case, the claim of 17 mph RHS at impact, followed by more acceleration after contact, is absurd. TWU professor has a menu for calculating this kind of stuff, and even the cases when there is heavy reliance on incoming ball speed to achieve a reflection effect by blocking, the speed is at least 40 mph.

40 miles per hour is calculated,NOT measured.
APAS results are NOT reliable close to the contact point
The most reliable ones are quoted in my post in the JY's thread.
The link above
There is important difference in behaviour for a component vertical to a court vs a component vertical to a NET
More to come

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by julian

40 miles per hour is calculated,NOT measured.

Isn't that obvious from what I said, that it is from a calculation menu from TWU? What was difficult to understand about it?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by julian

The most reliable ones are quoted in my post in the JY's thread.

Which ones am I supposed to look at in the thread referred from that thread. The post which says "There is also good correlation between Federer FH (APAS) calculated data and above charts."?

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by sureshs

No, you got it wrong as usual.

Vic's analysis (with his colleague) is here. The speed goes from 7 (top of swing) to 25 (lowest point of swing) to 71 near impact (in that analysis, contact was in front of the chest).

Did you really think Federer would swing at 17 mph at impact? I think even casual tennis and golf players know that the number is way too small.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPLmCqGIotM

To me it looks like Federer hits across the ball from all angles. And the results do not say anything about whether he accelerates through impact. I would say though that I do not see much bending of the elbow around impact.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

To me it looks like Federer hits across the ball from all angles. And the results do not say anything about whether he accelerates through impact. I would say though that I do not see much bending of the elbow around impact.

Whatever, man. You want to hit the ball at 17 mph with an abrupt acceleration from a couple of inches from it, go ahead. I really don't know how to respond to stuff like "Federer hits across from all angles."

[JohnYandell]

All,

I think the repeated misrepresentations of data from other researchers and the claims that violate even the most primitive understanding of physics destroy the credibility of any claims that Wegner is making.

It's clear that facts simply don't matter. In one of the nuked threads we actually had the statements from Andy Fitzell about the acceleration of the racket--how it maxs at contact and then decelerates.

When someone can't incorporate and learn from researchers and has no actual data of his own, that does not reflect well on credibility.

What we have here is just blind repetitions of assertions that don't corelate with reality.

Some people say they are getting teaching benefit out of these ideas and if so god bless them. But please let's have some semblance of an attempt at factual accuracy when you claim to be dealing in facts.

Bascially Wegner is refuting himself. If it's all metaphor just admit that.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Whatever, man. You want to hit the ball at 17 mph with an abrupt acceleration from a couple of inches from it, go ahead. I really don't know how to respond to stuff like "Federer hits across from all angles."

I've had a great few days of tennis. And tried pulling across. Yanking the racket. Extending 5 balls thru ala Yandelz. Stepping into it. Lockn n Rolling it. I Salzied the reverse fh all day. I dont yellow ball because i dont really know what he is saying he has no definite point of view. All of it.
Result? I still pwn everyone however I hit it. And the stroke barely varied from my regular wrapper no matter what I did. They all worked.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by arche3

I've had a great few days of tennis. And tried pulling across. Yanking the racket. Extending 5 balls thru ala Yandelz. Stepping into it. Lockn n Rolling it. I Salzied the reverse fh all day. I dont yellow ball because i dont really know what he is saying he has no definite point of view. All of it.
Result? I still pwn everyone however I hit it. And the stroke barely varied from my regular wrapper no matter what I did. They all worked.

I am focusing on my serve these days. Better forehands are wasted on the old farts. At least they appreciate good serves.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I am focusing on my serve these days. Better forehands are wasted on the old farts. At least they appreciate good serves.

I agree. I'm all about the serve this past year. But during my fh experiments past few days I even fell back as I hit a lot. That works too. Just loopier when you fall back for me.I tried everything. I have decided as long as you have a good tennis base you can pretty much do anything against the typical club hack.

And it adds variety. I hit fh slices w side spin. Conti grip grand pa fhs. All of it.

[tennisfan69]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

All,

I think the repeated misrepresentations of data from other researchers and the claims that violate even the most primitive understanding of physics destroy the credibility of any claims that Wegner is making.

It's clear that facts simply don't matter. In one of the nuked threads we actually had the statements from Andy Fitzell about the acceleration of the racket--how it maxs at contact and then decelerates.

When someone can't incorporate and learn from researchers and has no actual data of his own, that does not reflect well on credibility.

What we have here is just blind repetitions of assertions that don't corelate with reality.

Some people say they are getting teaching benefit out of these ideas and if so god bless them. But please let's have some semblance of an attempt at factual accuracy when you claim to be dealing in facts.

Bascially Wegner is refuting himself. If it's all metaphor just admit that.

John, this is how simple tennis is see the video link below.. you are kidding me with all your HD slow motion videos. Man anyone can be a multiple GS winner, if they can sit like that and do a DTL/CC forehand. Look he can even raise his legs up in the air and do a DTL/CC. i never realized tennis was this easy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOIBiPjgIW8

[arche3]

Originally Posted by tennisfan69

John, this is how simple tennis is see the video link below.. you are kidding me with all your HD slow motion videos. Man anyone can be a multiple GS winner, if they can sit like that and do a DTL/CC forehand. Look he can even raise his legs up in the air and do a DTL/CC. i never realized tennis was this easy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOIBiPjgIW8

Please post video of your hitting. A lot of coaches teach angle of contact.

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Whatever, man. You want to hit the ball at 17 mph with an abrupt acceleration from a couple of inches from it, go ahead. I really don't know how to respond to stuff like "Federer hits across from all angles."

I have not said he hits with 17 mph with an abrupt acceleration from a couple of inches from it, or that I want to do it.
Sorry if I was not clear. In all the angles of the video, it looks to me like he hits across the ball. Okay, man?

[arche3]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

I have not said he hits with 17 mph with an abrupt acceleration from a couple of inches from it, or that I want to do it.
Sorry if I was not clear. In all the angles of the video, it looks to me like he hits across the ball. Okay, man?

Dont worry man. It looks like its across to me as well.

[julian]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Isn't that obvious from what I said, that it is from a calculation menu from TWU? What was difficult to understand about it?

TWU uses a model which operates under some assumptions
Fitzell et al used some observations limited by METHODOLOGY.
Bringing BOTH of them at the same post is more or less comparing apples
and oranges.
I advice very strongly NOT to use NUMERICAL DATA of Fitzell.
I advise very strongly to understand the assumptions of the model of TWU-for example
how much spin is "ALLOWED" with those 40 miles for hour DATA.
Ps See as well the third sentence of post#98 of
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=5513700
Regards,
Julian

[Dedans Penthouse]

Originally Posted by Wegner

The Finish

There is a good drill that works marvelously on shaping groundstrokes.

If you are a right-hander, on the forehand finish, touch the left cheek with the back of your right hand.

Great tip.

And in mixed doubles, touch the left cheek (of your partner) with the palm of your right hand. This too will immediately improve your stroke.

[julian]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Which ones am I supposed to look at in the thread referred from that thread. The post which says "There is also good correlation between Federer FH (APAS) calculated data and above charts."?

I meant the figure shown in
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=6537769
post #198

[JohnYandell]

T Fan,

Yeah what was I thinking trying to understand the modern forehand when it was all there right in front of me...

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by julian

I meant the figure shown in
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=6537769
post #198

Thanks.

The forward RHS speed at impact comes out to be 76 mph, consistent with Vic's study. It decreases after impact to about 2 mph at the end of the swing (consistent with JY's numbers).

The upward speed at impact comes out at 27 mph, and increases after impact, reaching 38 mph at the end of the swing.

The resultant speed (by Pythagoras theorem), is 81 mph at impact and decreases to 38 mph at the end of the swing, showing net deceleration after impact, as pointed out by many people.

I hope 5263 seizes on my bolded italic word and uses it as ammunition, otherwise the thread will get boring.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Dedans Penthouse

Great tip.

And in mixed doubles, touch the left cheek (of your partner) with the palm of your right hand. This too will immediately improve your stroke.

We are talking about the face, right?