acintya
Legend
I have been playing tennis for some years but I always learned this modern forehand - this is the first time I tried the classic forehand and I was just shocked how easy it was to hit - and I was also consistent. I just dragged the racquet back like McEnroe without all of this new methods that people teach. I really liked this classic stroke. The only difference is, I was holding my racquet in a semi-western grip - but that also means i could hit harder and the shots went in.
Anyone still using this kind of forehand? Its so simple. I will try to mix it in whenever I can. The reaction time is faster and I have even more time to prepare - also higher bouncing balls I find easy to strike with this simple motion.
What do you think guys? Do we - rec. players (good or bad) really need the so called modern forehand?
I am very good at table tennis and this straight drag back without all this **** you got to learn (elbow up, racquet up, extend the arm, elbow down, do the federer whip motion on forehand etc. etc) makes everything so simple to me.
If you just compare this takeback and the modern forehand takeback and all that **** - this mcenroe forehand really looks so simple , and is a lot easier to master, or let me put it this way - with the mcenro method you can not do so much wrong......as with a modern forehand. or am I wrong?
Also look at his non dominant hand.......all this lessons on how you need to have it straight and in shoulder height --- really? do you really need it? McEnroe keeps it really low - its straight but not over extended ----- its more in a 45° angle. prove me wrong. I just want to simplify things as tennis can be a very confusing sport. OH man. in my opinion it is one of the harder sports to master - to master means --- that you can hit every stroke at least "semi-well"
well it may not be so aesthetically pleasing as some modern forehands but it could be maybe more efficient for somebody.
Anyone still using this kind of forehand? Its so simple. I will try to mix it in whenever I can. The reaction time is faster and I have even more time to prepare - also higher bouncing balls I find easy to strike with this simple motion.
What do you think guys? Do we - rec. players (good or bad) really need the so called modern forehand?
I am very good at table tennis and this straight drag back without all this **** you got to learn (elbow up, racquet up, extend the arm, elbow down, do the federer whip motion on forehand etc. etc) makes everything so simple to me.
If you just compare this takeback and the modern forehand takeback and all that **** - this mcenroe forehand really looks so simple , and is a lot easier to master, or let me put it this way - with the mcenro method you can not do so much wrong......as with a modern forehand. or am I wrong?
Also look at his non dominant hand.......all this lessons on how you need to have it straight and in shoulder height --- really? do you really need it? McEnroe keeps it really low - its straight but not over extended ----- its more in a 45° angle. prove me wrong. I just want to simplify things as tennis can be a very confusing sport. OH man. in my opinion it is one of the harder sports to master - to master means --- that you can hit every stroke at least "semi-well"
well it may not be so aesthetically pleasing as some modern forehands but it could be maybe more efficient for somebody.
Last edited: