Does Modern Tennis Exist?

[arche3]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

Arche,

You are "yanking" at straws. You asked for a Fed video--it will show the same principles. Ask for Djok it won't matter.

It's physically impossible to hit the ball forward if the racket is moving backwards. And even if you then say, no it's the hand, think about what you are saying for a second.

What is the effect on racket speed? Racket speed in good forehands maxs at contact, so how is reversing the hand direction going to help that? Sitting in your house snapping a towel is really not a convincing way to gather evidence.

But even leave the physics out of it. I've looked at thousands of forehands and I have seen many many things, but I can assure you the hand and the racket are never going backwards at contact. I tried to get you to take me up on that free Tennisplayer trial. Why don't you try to find one "yank" in the thousands of pro forehand clips there?

If you do I will post it for you.

Jy. You have to know its not my instruction. I'm just trying it. And yes i know the racket does not go backwards as the ball comes at you. I just tried the techniqiue. It feels different and i dont think the pros do it or not. You cant tell from video because even when I watch myself in a mirror the swing looks the same but it feels different. Like I said try it and it feels different. The sound is different. If its right or wrong the racket head moved faster. Thats all. Not endorsing anyone. And anyone can perform the experiment for themselves. Go to you racket bag and just do it.

[5263]

Originally Posted by arche3

Jy.. Like I said try it and it feels different. The sound is different. If its right or wrong the racket head moved faster. Thats all. Not endorsing anyone. And anyone can perform the experiment for themselves. Go to you racket bag and just do it.

He's not going to give it an honest try...he's going to just say it's doesn't work
and try to convince others that what you and other players are doing can't be.
If he can't see it in his slow mo, then it's not there.
Always interesting when those who can't or don't, try to convince others they
can't either.
They don't seem to realize how hard it is to convince folks they can't do what
they have done!

[JohnYandell]

5263:

Uh, I just wiffed a few balls on the ball machine trying to make the racket go back at contact. It's probably just me though or I was being dishonest again by actually experimenting or posting hard data. For someone who claims to have a science background you capacity for delusion and denial is extremely impressive. In case you haven't studied psychology as well, the technical diagnosis for your condition is projective disorder.

Arche:

Whatever idea works for you or you think does, go for it. But please don't try to tell me the racket goes backwards at contact unless you have some actual evidence.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

5263:

Uh, I just wiffed a few balls on the ball machine trying to make the racket go back at contact. It's probably just me though or I was being dishonest again by actually experimenting or posting hard data.

Arche:

Whatever idea works for you or you think does, go for it. But please don't try to tell me the racket goes backwards at contact unless you have some actual evidence.

Are you really not getting this? I am not saying the racket goes back. I've said this three times. Again the racket does NOT go back. OK?

[JohnYandell]

Arche,

OK sorry if I got that wrong. We are agreed, the racket does not go back.

[5263]

Originally Posted by arche3

Jy. You have to know its not my instruction. I'm just trying it. And yes i know the racket does not go backwards as the ball comes at you.

Is that what Jy stated? Seems he is trying to twist it to something you or Oscar
never said about the racket going backwards?
Don't you love how those with agendas have to change the wording to fit their
misconceptions. Guess it explains why they don't get it.

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

But please don't try to tell me the racket goes backwards at contact unless you have some actual evidence.

Another clear example of how he can't keep his misinfo straight.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by 5263

Is that what Jy stated? Seems he is trying to twist it to something you or Oscar
never said about the racket going backwards?
Don't you love how those with agendas have to change the wording to fit their
misconceptions. Guess it explains why they don't get it.



Another clear example of how he can't keep his misinfo straight.

Suresh was harassing me about the racket going back. I kept saying it does not. John must of read suresh post claiming I said its in reverse. While not seeing my replies.

It impossible for it to go backwards at contact.

[JohnYandell]

5263:

OK Arche Suresh and I all agree that the racket does not go back. But you say it does is that correct?

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by sureshs

It is basically a small inside-out swiping action starting with a tucked in elbow.

After that action is over, the racket gets to swing around as usual.

So it gives the impression that you are pulling in. Actually, you are pulling in you elbow and then throwing the hand and wrist into the ball before the racket goes across.

Again, let me make it clear: you cannot hit a ball forward when the racket is moving backward at impact. It is the same argument I had with someone who claimed that he was hitting down on the ball on the serve while the racket was moving up. No, it cannot happen. He also made convoluted examples and suggesting holding the palm at an angle and then hitting down on the ball and why that would cause the racket to be going up. I was like, no dude, the angle does not matter. If one part of the racket is moving up, every part of it is moving up, and it cannot exert a downward force on an object it touches.

we are not talking about pulling backwards. why does everyone keep saying this? I'm saying during the swing you call pull to the left either by the whole body, the legs, the hips, the shoulder or even biceps. i don't use biceps. during the forward swing while the racquet is whipping around going forward on it's own (if you have a nice fluid swing w/ ssc etc etc) you can shift your weight slightly to the left during the whip which pulls the racquet slightly to the left and the rhs increases.
I submitted an example of kohlschreiber doing it because he exaggerates it

[JohnYandell]

The alleged yank is pulling the racket sharply up and backwards at contact with the bicep... This exists in the tennis twilight zone only.

In reality the pull with the biceps is one factor sometimes in play and certainly not around contact on many forehands, especially the "modern" straight arm ones.

The wiper is caused not by any "yank" it is caused by the upper arm rotation of the hitting and the rotation of the entire structure...

[5263]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

5263:

OK Arche Suresh and I all agree that the racket does not go back. But you say it does is that correct?

I'm sorry, lol, but can you show anywhere I said that?? or is this just more of
your inability to keep things straight? How could anyone listen to your supposed
insight after watching you flail at this simple conversation?

[5263]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

we are not talking about pulling backwards. why does everyone keep saying this?

Thank you, lol,

But really we know why don't we.

[TomT]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

Tom,

First things first. In the second video where you are actually hitting you can see the slight delay in the start of the turn. Look at Dimtri frame by frame at the turn where the ball is on the court. Model that position physically. Stretch that left arm across hard and feel the pull on your shoulder.

Create that visual image and imagine the feeling as part of it. Now when the other guy hits, just bring up that image in your mind. Start the turn immediately--don't rush, be smooth--but get to the stretch at the bounce. If you do you may surprise yourself how much pace you generate and you may hit a few balls out. That's a good sign and just work into the rhythm. Use the video to see that you are actually making the position.

Thanks JY. Noted.

[JohnYandell]

5263:

OK but do you think the yank moves the racket back at contact?

[5263]

Originally Posted by JohnYandell

5263:

OK but do you think the yank moves the racket back at contact?

I don't think I would word it like that, lol.
I'm not sure Oscar would say it exactly that way.
Too many word games here and I do think you know what he means.
I hope so anyway.

[JohnYandell]

5263:

I understand why you don't want to answer-- you are done with word games now.

[JohnYandell]

But having now sworn off word games how would you put it? What does this mysterious yank really do to the racket at contact?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

we are not talking about pulling backwards. why does everyone keep saying this? I'm saying during the swing you call pull to the left either by the whole body, the legs, the hips, the shoulder or even biceps. i don't use biceps. during the forward swing while the racquet is whipping around going forward on it's own (if you have a nice fluid swing w/ ssc etc etc) you can shift your weight slightly to the left during the whip which pulls the racquet slightly to the left and the rhs increases.
I submitted an example of kohlschreiber doing it because he exaggerates it

I know what you and arche are saying. You are both correct. But I don't think that was what was meant originally. To me, the original statement is not what you or arche are saying. It is your expertise that is revealed, not his.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by 5263

I'm not sure Oscar would say it exactly that way.

Then what exactly would he say, and why didn't he say it instead of this?

His knowledge of English is pretty good - you cannot claim that it is a mis-communication like Nadal's interviews.

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I know what you and arche are saying. You are both correct. But I don't think that was what was meant originally. To me, the original statement is not what you or arche are saying. It is your expertise that is revealed, not his.

ok. i hear ya. my bad for diverting the thread with a different type of 'yank' than what was in discussion.