Lansdorp and Bollettieri

H

heycal

Hall of Fame
I hear Robert Lansdorp and Nick Bollettieri's name mentioned a lot. I believe Lansdorp coached Sampras, Davenport and Austin, among others, while Bolletieri I think coached Agassi, Sharapova, and Haas, among many others.

But what kinds of techiniques and theories and grips and trends are each of these two men known for pioneering? I believe Bollettieri promoted such things as the swinging volley and inside-out forehand, but what else?

Can someone who knows plenty about this topic give us all a nice summary of each coach's basic philosophies and approaches to tennis and how they might be similar or different from each other?
 
TonLars

TonLars

Professional
From what I know, Mr Nick B's academy is an advocate of the attacking, aggressive power modern game. Im interested in this too actually, as I am going to train there for a while before I start the heavy tournament schedule this summer. I guess after I return I can post on here what the experience was like at the academy and what they do there. Wont be until May though
 
G

grizzly4life

Professional
just from reading here, bolletieri seems to be a very strong proponent of big forehand following up your serve... and yes lansdorp seems to be more a proponent of "towards traditional" grips and flatter strokes.

just what i've taken from reading forums and elsewhere.
 
1

10ispro

Rookie
Landsdorp is considered by many to be the father of the modern forehand. His name is primarily mentioned in the context of how great someones forehand is, or how someone should enlist him for help with the forehand.
Sharapova trained with Landsdorp for many years.
Many people have enlisted him for technical help, but few credit him for doing so much for their games and the game of tennis in general.

Bolletieri has a long history of producing champions. It was one of the 1st really well known (by general public) and publicized Tennis Academies or Tennis factories. Players like Arias, Krickstein, Agassi, Courrier, Seles, Haas are all products of Bolletieris. All share the common trait of having a huge weapon and using their weapon as much as possible.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
TonLars said:
From what I know, Mr Nick B's academy is an advocate of the attacking, aggressive power modern game. Im interested in this too actually, as I am going to train there for a while before I start the heavy tournament schedule this summer. I guess after I return I can post on here what the experience was like at the academy and what they do there. Wont be until May though
Click to expand...

How does that work, you pay to spend some time at Bolletierri's or something? You call them up and say "How much to come down and spend two weeks training with you guys?" or something along those lines? Can anyone go, or must one try out first?

And then you will go play tournaments? What kind? It is your dream to go pro someday, right?
 
G

grizzly4life

Professional
bolletieri's has many different program's for players... i'd assume you can even go down there if you're a beginner. they of course charge fees for this........ and you won't be hitting with the next maria S, although you might be able to watch.
 
G

grizzly4life

Professional
10ispro said:
Landsdorp is considered by many to be the father of the modern forehand.
Click to expand...

isn't modern more topspin-oriented and landsdorp preaches more flatness? or is that wrong??

FYI, i think landsdorp is out of california (L.A.?) and bolletieri's is bradenton, fl (south of tampa)
 
The Gorilla

The Gorilla

Banned
grizzly4life said:
isn't modern more topspin-oriented and landsdorp preaches more flatness? or is that wrong??

FYI, i think landsdorp is out of california (L.A.?) and bolletieri's is bradenton, fl (south of tampa)
Click to expand...

For a lansdorp forehand think Sampras.

For a bolletieri forehand think Courier.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
grizzly4life said:
isn't modern more topspin-oriented and landsdorp preaches more flatness?
Click to expand...

Yes, and I'm asking WHY does Lansdorp teach flatter shots and more traditional grips? Presumably, he has a reason for doing so, so I'm curious what his thoughts and theories are.
 
TonLars

TonLars

Professional
grizzly4life said:
bolletieri's has many different program's for players... i'd assume you can even go down there if you're a beginner. they of course charge fees for this........ and you won't be hitting with the next maria S, although you might be able to watch.
Click to expand...

Yeah heycal, basically its a humongous facility from my understanding, and they have many instructors and players for programs of all different levels. Its not cheap either, so yeah basically Im paying a boarding fee for everything to be with them for a while. Itll be cool though and im looking forward to it.

Im just going to spend some time there though right away in May, before I return home and then go to different areas for tournaments. To answer your question- Im competitive at the Futures level but I cant say my goal is to be a pro exactly, because theres so many tough players and its tough to consistently do well at every event. Also, as you may know, lower pro tennis players make a pretty shabby living in prize money; you pretty much can only support the ability to keep playing and traveling around. Heres the picture: even if you win the entire event at these things, for a Futures win youd make $1500 or something, and even at the next higher Challenger level youd make about $7000 something. Kinda bleak unless youre a top 100 pro. But again Im realistiuc and understand its too late in the game for me to get there and how hard it is; Im just going to do my best and see how well I do for a while before getting a job in the "real world"... lol

Like I said, Ill let you all know how it was down there at the academy after I go there, then Ill be able to say exactly how they do things and such, so that should be more interesting for you to read.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
TonLars said:
Yeah heycal, basically its a humongous facility from my understanding, and they have many instructors and players for programs of all different levels. Its not cheap either, so yeah basically Im paying a boarding fee for everything to be with them for a while. Itll be cool though and im looking forward to it.

Im just going to spend some time there though right away in May, before I return home and then go to different areas for tournaments. To answer your question- Im competitive at the Futures level but I cant say my goal is to be a pro exactly, because theres so many tough players and its tough to consistently do well at every event. Also, as you may know, lower pro tennis players make a pretty shabby living in prize money; you pretty much can only support the ability to keep playing and traveling around. Heres the picture: even if you win the entire event at these things, for a Futures win youd make $1500 or something, and even at the next higher Challenger level youd make about $7000 something. Kinda bleak unless youre a top 100 pro. But again Im realistiuc and understand its too late in the game for me to get there and how hard it is; Im just going to do my best and see how well I do for a while before getting a job in the "real world"... lol

Like I said, Ill let you all know how it was down there at the academy after I go there, then Ill be able to say exactly how they do things and such, so that should be more interesting for you to read.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff, Tonlars. And I'm glad to hear you understand the realities of the pro game and how it's nearly impossible to make a living at it. So enjoy yourself at those tournaments, and let us know about Bolletierri's Academy.
 
Mountain Ghost

Mountain Ghost

Professional
Robert Lansdorp

Here are links to a series of articles about Robert Lansdorp:

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029368&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029371&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029374&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029376&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029377&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

For privates . . . Lansdorp charges $200 an hour and Bollettieri charges $800 an hour. They both have what it takes to shape champions, but one has a custom “little shop” and the other is the CEO of a mega “production line”.

MG
 
Last edited:
L

LarougeNY

Professional
Mountain Ghost said:
For privates . . . Lansdorp charges $200 and hour and Bollettieri charges $800 and hour. They both have what it takes to shape champions, but one has a custom “little shop” and the other is the CEO of a mega “production line”.

MG
Click to expand...

Damn. I thought 95$ an hour was expensive. Wonder if its worh it, hopefully I can save up some Bday money for when we go to florida over spring break (hopefully).
 
N

ne1410is

Guest
my friend took lessons from lansdorp. he apparently is good because my friend is phenomenal at tennis. doesn't matter how long he hasn't played for. its kinda eery actually. he was no. 1 on our hs team of course but didn't really like tennis.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
Mountain Ghost said:
Here are links to a series of articles about Robert Lansdorp:

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029368&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029371&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029374&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029376&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

http://easyreader.hermosawave.net/news2002/storypage.asp?StoryID=20029377&IssuePath=news2006/0706/

For privates . . . Lansdorp charges $200 and hour and Bollettieri charges $800 and hour. They both have what it takes to shape champions, but one has a custom “little shop” and the other is the CEO of a mega “production line”.
Click to expand...

Thanks, interesting articles. Curious though -- How and why was that Sharapova came to the US for Bolletierri, as I understand it, but then worked with Lansdorp?
 
N

ne1410is

Guest
lansdorp is still in southern cali as far as i know. around the palos verdes area but i guess that article says hermosa beach area. hermosa beach, redondo beach, palos verdes, torrance are all very close together so its all basically the same.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
Still curious as to Lansdorp's thoughts why flat shots and classic grips are preferable. (If that's what he believes.)
 
TonLars

TonLars

Professional
heycal said:
Still curious as to Lansdorp's thoughts why flat shots and classic grips are preferable. (If that's what he believes.)
Click to expand...

Heres an article I quick found for you:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/famouscoach/lansdorp_forehand_samplearticle.html

He thinks one cant handle pace and low balls with extreme grips. I do agree that the very extreme grips are probably not the best thing to use or to be taught, but I also would definitely not say that a good player cant have a topspin or regular western grip. Or even semi-western. Maybe he just means the full extreme western grips. But obviously theres many great players that use regular western grips, and I myself use a western grip and so I know firsthand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it and there arent any balls that cant be handled or types of shots that cant be hit.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
TonLars said:
Heres an article I quick found for you:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/famouscoach/lansdorp_forehand_samplearticle.html

He thinks one cant handle pace and low balls with extreme grips. I do agree that the very extreme grips are probably not the best thing to use or to be taught, but I also would definitely not say that a good player cant have a topspin or regular western grip. Or even semi-western. Maybe he just means the full extreme western grips. But obviously theres many great players that use regular western grips, and I myself use a western grip and so I know firsthand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it and there arent any balls that cant be handled or types of shots that cant be hit.
Click to expand...

When Lansdorp refers to a "classic" forehand grip, he presumably means Eastern?

Also, his other protege Sharapova doesn't use an Eastern grip, does she? Seems more western to me, but I'm not sure.
 
GRANITECHIEF

GRANITECHIEF

Hall of Fame
Landsdorp is teaching my boy to be able to do anything and everything with a tennis racket. He teaches him to do the forehand slice, a forehand and backhand underspin that 50 ft in the air and bounces back over the net, to throw in a slice and moon ball drive in a fast rally. Of course, he teaches lazer balls as the main strokes to own but insists that one must be able to incorporate variety in one's game. And he is fine with eastern or southwestern grips. He has a great sense of humor, albeit in a stern manner.
 
bluegrasser

bluegrasser

Hall of Fame
heycal said:
Yes, and I'm asking WHY does Lansdorp teach flatter shots and more traditional grips? Presumably, he has a reason for doing so, so I'm curious what his thoughts and theories are.
Click to expand...

Look at Safin, he has a flatter shot with a little top and can hit winners from anywhere on the court - on the flip side he'll hit the ball long quite ofter too. Like anything in life there's pros and cons - flat = more penetration, more winners, higher margin for error. Topspin = better consistency, less errors.
 
onehandbh

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
Lansdorp definitely gets results. Used to play at these public courts next to
where he used to teach. I noticed the juniors he taught were always very
balanced when they hit their groundstrokes and hit very penetrating shots.
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
bluegrasser said:
Look at Safin, he has a flatter shot with a little top and can hit winners from anywhere on the court - on the flip side he'll hit the ball long quite ofter too. Like anything in life there's pros and cons - flat = more penetration, more winners, higher margin for error. Topspin = better consistency, less errors.
Click to expand...

What are the "cons" of topspin in your example here?
 
onehandbh

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
GRANITECHIEF said:
Landsdorp has a little bit of a cold and cancelled my boys lesson for today. I actually never get to take him, my wife does, as i have to work. But i want to take him so badly so i can meet the guy and watch him work. Hopefully soon, i'll get the chance.
Click to expand...

Definitely worth it to watch him work. I used to go to a drill session/workout
right next to his court. Used to watch before or after my sessions.
At first I didn't know who he was. Just thought he
was a big giant old guy whacking balls at the juniors during their lessions.
He *really* worked them hard sometimes. A bit gruff & old school at times
but man did he get results when you looked at this students. I liked that he
broke it down into very easy to understand, simplistic terms.

Then one day, I asked my friend "Who's that old guy that's always teaching
here?" and my friend said "That's Sampras and Sharapova's coach."
 
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
Dedans Penthouse said:
Whoa, what is that all about? A "generally applied" smart-aleck play on words and you suddenly get personal?

What's up?
Click to expand...

I'm Joking, neighbor. It had nothing to do with you personally. I was merely linking the concept of "penetration" with your username initials... "DP"... Tu comprende?

I can't really explain much more with the cops around...
 
Last edited:
H

heycal

Hall of Fame
Good. I don't want SFrazeur to put either of us on Double secret probation.:-o

Which reminds me, whatever happened to that poster, DPfrazier? Haven't seen him around lately...
 
M

metsjets

Rookie
my coach met bollettieri and he never praises him. he actually thinks very little about him. my coach claims that bollettieri only takes good players, and doesn't really make them better. i guess it's true. look at federer. for a while he didn't even have a coach.
 
bluegrasser

bluegrasser

Hall of Fame
heycal said:
What are the "cons" of topspin in your example here?
Click to expand...

I guess you have to work the point longer to set up a winning shot, more short balls that are attackable. I'm not saying one is better than another, actually the way the game is played today it's better to have all the shots ala Federer.
 
T

tricky

Hall of Fame
As I see it, learning to hit flat and on the rise teaches you how to play tennis. Learning to topspin everything teaches you how to become a great customer of racquets. ;)

Basically, if you start out emphasizing topspin over striking through the ball, it kinda moves you to a more defensive, physical game. Your legs become a means to get you from Point A to Point B back to Point A, rather than a source of power. You inherently play a more pusher-style game rather than work toward dictating your own points. And so on.

Plus, it's just easier to go from flat to spinny, rather than spinny to flat. Starting out with a Agassi-style SW grip is plenty fine because you can still hit flat and play different shots. That is, as long as you still learn to strike through the ball and early, and to keep the loop under control.
 
ubel

ubel

Professional
tricky said:
As I see it, learning to hit flat and on the rise teaches you how to play tennis. Learning to topspin everything teaches you how to become a great customer of racquets. ;)
Click to expand...
That is partially true, but I think you're taking too extreme a stance against topspin; learning how to flatten out your shots and hit balls on the rise are merely one aspect of the game, just like being able to put topspin on all your shots. Topspin is an invaluable tool for anyone who wants to learn how to play tennis:
  • you get more margin for error over the net which means you're less likely to create errors
  • less errors also means you're more likely to stay in a rally longer and be able to work yourself into an offensive position
  • it tests if your opponents strokes & timing are good enough to hang with you in rallies; if not, they will basically hand you free points from unforced errors
  • allows you to find even more angles on the court because it pulls the ball down

Basically, if you start out emphasizing topspin over striking through the ball, it kinda moves you to a more defensive, physical game. Your legs become a means to get you from Point A to Point B back to Point A, rather than a source of power. You inherently play a more pusher-style game rather than work toward dictating your own points. And so on.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what happened to me in the beginning; I had an over-emphasis on topspin and I played more of a defensive game. I think it helped me a lot, though. Once I got comfortable with topspin and was confident in my ability to use it, I taught myself how to hit a flatter ball. I am try to go from a semi-western to an extreme eastern, and am slowly finding the equilibrium between topspin and flatness on my shots. Sure, I can flatten out my shots, hit high net-clearance shots, low net-clearance dipping topspin shots, and even occasionally find the touch on topspin lobs, but I don't think I would have developed the ability to do this if I hadn't spent a lot of time figuring out how to consistently hit with topspin. I feel as though over-emphasizing topspin in the beginning added a huge facet to my game. Also, I got a great workout with all the running I did and am rarely fatigued whenever I play nowadays, so I can't complain about the conditioning it gave me hehe :)
 
Last edited:
T

tricky

Hall of Fame
That is partially true, but I think you're taking too extreme a stance against topspin; learning how to flatten out your shots and hit balls on the rise are merely one aspect of the game, just like being able to put topspin on all your shots. Topspin is an invaluable tool for anyone who wants to learn how to play tennis:
Click to expand...

I tend to think of it as philosophical. I agree with all your reasons cited for using topspin. Basically, I see that the foundation should be to hit deep, penetrating shots, and then to use topspin to improve defense and open up the shots. A Babolat friend of mine (big time Nadal guy too) is the total opposite; he built his game on topspin, but he has great fitness. He pushes you to draw an error, and hunts for the short ball to take you out.

That's exactly what happened to me in the beginning; I had an over-emphasis on topspin and I played more of a defensive game. I think it helped me a lot, though.
Click to expand...

I think with the supernew racquets, it encourages bad habits because you can just brush/flick on the ball to generate topspin. And so when people think topspin, they don't start the down-to-up movement, which would involve actually coordinating the body as a unit to generate the stroke.
I think, either if you start with flat, "classical" strokes, or start out spinning shots and moving around the cort, the key is to use the legs and core into as many aspects of your form. Moving toward the shot, "aiming" with the lower half of your body, loading with the legs (which in turn will load up the hips), and above all, reacting toward the ball with your feet.
 
ubel

ubel

Professional
Oh yea, I definitely believe that in order to maintain control or, at the very least, stay on even terms in a point, you need to hit deep, penetrating shots. Whether the shot is flat or heavily spun, you can definitely achieve that. That actually segways very nicely into the idea of the modern game as a real-estate battle, and how one should try to move or force their opponent to hit a shot that opens up court area for them to end the point, whether that be slicing it short and luring the opponent into the net or consistently hitting deep and moving in to angle off winners once a ball is hit short. That's for another time though :p

tricky said:
I think with the supernew racquets, it encourages bad habits because you can just brush/flick on the ball to generate topspin. And so when people think topspin, they don't start the down-to-up movement, which would involve actually coordinating the body as a unit to generate the stroke.
I think, either if you start with flat, "classical" strokes, or start out spinning shots and moving around the court, the key is to use the legs and core into as many aspects of your form. Moving toward the shot, "aiming" with the lower half of your body, loading with the legs (which in turn will load up the hips), and above all, reacting toward the ball with your feet.
Click to expand...
I don't know about all leg/core use, but I agree about crappy strokes which I believe has a lot to do with the lazy nature of people.. It's so much easier to let the focus on your footwork go and just wrist or bunt back shots. There was a thread a while ago about how the modern/pro game and stroke production just isn't for the average joe; it was dead on in that, the average joe doesn't care enough to hit the modern/pro stroke. Casual, non-competitive players go out there all the time to just hit around and don't really care to learn how to develop a smooth, efficient stroke, they just want to play. The strokes are just too meticulous and time-consuming to learn, and thus you get such a wide variety of play styles and strokes whenever you watch occasional hitters.

As for using your legs and core as much as you can, I believe in keeping it simple in order to maximize effectiveness. I use my legs to get me to where I can time my shot on the ball best and be as balanced as possible by keeping my center of gravity low and body stable. My core is there to keep me balanced and allow me to rotate my upper body through each shot. As for aiming with your stance, I always found it easiest to aim by using different angles in my wrist on contact (laid back, across the back of ball for inside out/down the line; contact outside of the ball and roll across the top for a sharply angled crosscourt forehand;; reverse for backhand). What exactly do you mean when you say loading the legs/hips? Do you mean putting your weight behind each shot by slightly moving forward?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phil
Article on Robert Lansdorp (and Maria Sharapova)
Replies
21
Views
6K
imakeplan007
I
I
Who should be rated as both the greater and better player- Mandlikova, Sanchez Vicario, or Austin
2
Replies
52
Views
1K
EvonneFedererBorgster
E
gino
Pro's (Past and Present) That Have Swung a Wilson 6.1 [Includes major winners]
12 13 14
Replies
672
Views
80K
gino
gino
Top