Modern Tennis Tips by Oscar Wegner

[oldschoolrules]

Okay, this may seem to contradict an earlier comment I made regarding Oscar's methods but is it possible his abrupt "yank" across the ball is simply his way of describing (in a needlessly confusing way, mind you) what is nothing more than the way the racquet head appears to travel on a "new normal," western grip, windshield wiper finish forehand when a player hitting it like a Nadal makes a significant weight shift as he accelerates the racquet forward that is more-or-less parallel to the baseline as opposed to being more forward into the court ? If such is the case, then this entire debate seems pointless as the "abrupt" change in direction of the racquet head he sees the pros (particularly the ones he takes credit for influencing) making is not done with the hands, arms, or shoulders as he appears to advocate but by the legs and feet shifting the body from right to left (or left to right for us southpaws ). Maybe?

[Cheetah]

Yes that apas video shows what I'm talking about.

Also there's this xstf vid where he talks about the laid back wrist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHdu...t=HL1357790180

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by oldschoolrules

Okay, this may seem to contradict an earlier comment I made regarding Oscar's methods but is it possible his abrupt "yank" across the ball is simply his way of describing (in a needlessly confusing way, mind you) what is nothing more than the way the racquet head appears to travel on a "new normal," western grip, windshield wiper finish forehand when a player hitting it like a Nadal makes a significant weight shift as he accelerates the racquet forward that is more-or-less parallel to the baseline as opposed to being more forward into the court ? If such is the case, then this entire debate seems pointless as the "abrupt" change in direction of the racquet head he sees the pros (particularly the ones he takes credit for influencing) making is not done with the hands, arms, or shoulders as he appears to advocate but by the legs and feet shifting the body from right to left (or left to right for us southpaws ). Maybe?

Keep in mind that the forward component of the RHS at impact is twice that of the vertical component, so the momentum is still overwhelmingly forward in the Federer analysis.

What I personally learnt from this analysis was that the vertical component of the velocity continues to increase after impact (though the overall speed decreases). This should be an eye-opener for many people. In the Nadal windshield wipers you mention, it will be more so.

The yank is just the term for the overall rotational motion and as you rightly point out, it is not an arm thing and should not be, as that would be arming the ball. It is similar to the claim that DTL and CC shots are just a matter of the hands, when in fact you can see how much the pros use body rotation and body power into their intended direction.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

Also there's this xstf vid where he talks about the laid back wrist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHdu...t=HL1357790180

This vid is awesome for showing how on the inside out Fh, the hand is already
is moving well across to Fed's left, (our rt) before contact.
Hand is clearly moving to Fed's left comparing to the background and ball goes off to
Fed's right.
If someone doesn't get it from this vid, they are just not willing to accept what
the vid clearly shows. No idea how Jy could argue the vid does not confirm
what MTM states about pulling up & across into contact.

The vid also addresses moving back during the stroke.

There is another key aspect in telling which of these in I/O and which is I/I, that
I'm waiting to see who notices.

[5263]

Originally Posted by sureshs

It is similar to the claim that DTL and CC shots are just a matter of the hands, when in fact you can see how much the pros use body rotation and body power into their intended direction.

This guys says different, that it IS mostly the hands-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...FqJ-Diw#t=330s

[TomT]

Originally Posted by 5263

This vid is awesome for showing how on the inside out Fh, the hand is already is moving well across to Fed's left, (our rt) before contact.
Hand is clearly moving to Fed's left comparing to the background and ball goes off to Fed's right.
If someone doesn't get it from this vid, they are just not willing to accept what the vid clearly shows. No idea how Jy could argue the vid does not confirm what MTM states about pulling up & across into contact.

The vid also addresses moving back during the stroke.

There is another key aspect in telling which of these in I/O and which is I/I, that I'm waiting to see who notices.

Yeah, awesome vid. (Thanks Cheetah)

Anxious to hear what "another key aspect" is 5263.

This does seem to support OW's contention that it's primarily, if not exclusively, about racquet head control.

[treblings]

Originally Posted by 5263

This vid is awesome for showing how on the inside out Fh, the hand is already
is moving well across to Fed's left, (our rt) before contact.
Hand is clearly moving to Fed's left comparing to the background and ball goes off to
Fed's right.
If someone doesn't get it from this vid, they are just not willing to accept what
the vid clearly shows. No idea how Jy could argue the vid does not confirm
what MTM states about pulling up & across into contact.

The vid also addresses moving back during the stroke.

There is another key aspect in telling which of these in I/O and which is I/I, that
I'm waiting to see who notices.

i would like to say that the angle of the right foot with Feder and Soderling is a little bit different once they transfer the weight to it. that the toes point a little bit more to the front on the one that goes crosscourt. Nadal, being a southpaw, it would be the left foot.
just my opinion from watching the video

[Wegner]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

Yes that apas video shows what I'm talking about.

Also there's this xstf vid where he talks about the laid back wrist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHdu...t=HL1357790180

Great video montage and great analysis from this coach Christophe Belavant. Thank you, Cheetah, for posting it.

[treblings]

Originally Posted by Wegner

Great video montage and great analysis from this coach Christophe Belavant. Thank you, Cheetah, for posting it.

Oscar, since you´re online, would you care to guess about the key aspect in telling the fh´s apart, that 5263 sees?

[Orion3]

Some interesting points - I know very little about MTM but I think I understand what Oscar means when he uses the term 'yank'.

From a laid back wrist position (butt cap pointing at the ball) I think it is simply an/the initial movement 4-6" before the wrist starts to rotate into the WW motion.

I see some people rotate their body into the shot and hit the WW motion at/just before impact - they have good topspin. I've tried it and it works.

However, if you add a little arm to pull the butt towards the ball (as you rotate) just before impact you get more pace and more spin. I think this is what Oscar means by 'yank'. Pulling the butt forward and up, (as you rotate ) actually moves it up and across. It also seems to add RHS as the WW motion seems faster and more natural.

I could be wrong - maybe Oscar would let me know?

[Wegner]

Originally Posted by chico9166

Bounce the ball up in teh air with your racquet like you're doing "ups". the ball goes "up" because the face of teh racquet is up, not because your arm is moving up. Now, do your "ups" and then turn the racquet towards the side fence. The ball does not go up, even though your arm is moving up.. bottom line, the ball goes where the strings are pointed..It is very easy to swing across and hit down the line or inside out. The racquet head just lags a bit more.

Well expressed.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by 5263

This vid is awesome for showing how on the inside out Fh, the hand is already
is moving well across to Fed's left, (our rt) before contact.
Hand is clearly moving to Fed's left comparing to the background and ball goes off to
Fed's right.
If someone doesn't get it from this vid, they are just not willing to accept what
the vid clearly shows. No idea how Jy could argue the vid does not confirm
what MTM states about pulling up & across into contact.

The vid also addresses moving back during the stroke.

There is another key aspect in telling which of these in I/O and which is I/I, that
I'm waiting to see who notices.

You can show "exhibit A" a thousand videos of how the top pros manipulate racket face angle and amount of wrist lay back to hit different forehands but he will simply not see it.

As far as jy is concerned it is my opinion that mtm and jy are pretty much in agreement about what is happening but are just arguing over the language.

[5263]

Originally Posted by treblings

Oscar, since you´re online, would you care to guess about the key aspect in telling the fh´s apart, that 5263 sees?

Heys trebs, there are several small adjustments as you noted like the feet and
hips to an extent, but the give away for me was something MTM teaches.
Notice when the racket is back and racket butt is facing directly at the ball to
pull for contact?
Notice how the line to the contact is different for each of the shots?
at 1:14 in the vid with it paused.
See how the line from the hand to the ball would extend pretty
close to the shot direction? That line points to I/O for that and I/I for the other.
This is subtle too, but more clear giveaway imo and also tougher for the player
to alter once it's done.
It goes with how MTM describes bringing the hand directly to the contact, dragging
the racket in a sort of straight line as you can see here. Very slight arc till just
before contact where the change of direction takes place much more clearly on
a much sharper arc.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by 5263

This guys says different, that it IS mostly the hands-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...FqJ-Diw#t=330s

It is obvious that the ball goes perpendicular to the face of the strings. No one is saying otherwise.

In addition to this necessary step controlled by the hand, the pros have powerful upper body movement which puts the power behind the shot. Last night, Ashley Harkleroad (the newly minted Tennis Channel commentator) was admiring the body rotation of Li Na as she hit a sharply angled backhand cross-court winner. I know you think you are above watching the WTA (but I am not aware of you working with any ATP player either or anywhere close to that), but the point is the body rotation into the shot was so visible in a replay.

Just using the hands is the characteristic of many low-level club players. It may be good for coaching beginners, as many of the tips here are. Using only the hand is certainly a good first step.

[treblings]

Originally Posted by 5263

Heys trebs, there are several small adjustments as you noted like the feet and
hips to an extent, but the give away for me was something MTM teaches.
Notice when the racket is back and racket butt is facing directly at the ball to
pull for contact?
Notice how the line to the contact is different for each of the shots?
at 1:14 in the vid with it paused.
See how the line from the hand to the ball would extend pretty
close to the shot direction? That line points to I/O for that and I/I for the other.
This is subtle too, but more clear giveaway imo and also tougher for the player
to alter once it's done.
It goes with how MTM describes bringing the hand directly to the contact, dragging
the racket in a sort of straight line as you can see here. Very slight arc till just
before contact where the change of direction takes place much more clearly on
a much sharper arc.

i´ll make sure to study it in detail tonight, thanks

Originally Posted by sureshs

Wrong. The racket head will follow thru with extension towards the target (CC or DTL) before it turns over, maintaining an almost vertical string plane. It is all in the contact. The ball doesn't care if the racket is lagging or not, or how how the racket moves after contact.

A former pro and famous coach, Peter Burwash, explained in a Tennis Mag article last year how eyes are deceiving. High swing speeds make the casual observer think the pros are not extending through the ball, which is debunked with slow motion video. He also cautioned that rec players employing abrupt across motion produce ineffective strokes and injure themselves.

Peter is a (verified) pro from around Oscar's time whose tournament career record is up for all to see, and owns a huge coaching and management chain and has coached thousands of players. Unlike anonymous coaches here, you can see what he puts it writing and stands by it.

Suresh,

Did you do the excercise? Are you saying that the "path" has to match the intended target line? If so, I disagree. That would be an incredible labor intensive way to play.

Here's a question for you. How do you explain a slice? The path is down, and yet the ball leaves up?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by chico9166

Suresh,

Did you do the excercise? Are you saying that the "path" has to match the intended target line? If so, I disagree. That would be an incredible labor intensive way to play.

Here's a question for you. How do you explain a slice? The path is down, and yet the ball leaves up?

What is this "path?" Analyze the videos yourself. There is movement towards the intended target before and a little after contact. That is what generates the velocity towards the target. No other way is possible to get the result of forward velocity twice the upward velocity. There has to be momentum build in the direction of intent, and inertia demands that the extension continue a little longer. Tangential shots cannot achieve such forward speeds.

If you are making up your own images and coming to your own conclusions and asking me to disagree or agree, I cannot help with that. In general, I am tired of people arguing with me instead of focusing on Oscar's tips. This is how threads are derailed.

Regarding the slice, it is interesting you asked. By coincidence, I received Tennis Rag yesterday, and there is John Evert (proven coach) explaining how even in the backhand slice, the racket extends towards the target before moving across. 5263 will have a lot to say about it, and it should be interesting, because I also believe that modern slice has more of an across component and would like to hear about the extension part.

[TCF]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Wrong. The racket head will follow thru with extension towards the target (CC or DTL) before it turns over, maintaining an almost vertical string plane. It is all in the contact. The ball doesn't care if the racket is lagging or not, or how how the racket moves after contact.

A former pro and famous coach, Peter Burwash, explained in a Tennis Mag article last year how eyes are deceiving. High swing speeds make the casual observer think the pros are not extending through the ball, which is debunked with slow motion video. He also cautioned that rec players employing abrupt across motion produce ineffective strokes and injure themselves.

Peter is a (verified) pro from around Oscar's time whose tournament career record is up for all to see, and owns a huge coaching and management chain and has coached thousands of players. Unlike anonymous coaches here, you can see what he puts it writing and stands by it.

Burwash specializes in resort tennis, as do his pros. Not involved with today's top juniors.

Like I said before, the actual path the racquet takes is not important in real life. I teach kids to find the ball, accelerate at contact, pull across. As do other coaches like Sekou Bangoura. We never mention extending out in any way. Yet the results are great forehands. Sekou's son is top 600 in the world being taught that way.

The simple truth is Oscar's imagery and descriptions work in real life, despite what the slo mo video shows.

[sureshs]

I will take your word for it. My interest is academic, not practical.

[user92626]

Suresh,

What do you mean when you said "the racket head will follow thru with extension towards the target"?