*theories in the scientific sense
To further develop, trying out different approaches is very inefficient, long and tiring... We can compare both ways to solve this problem with a simplified example.
Maximize f(x,y)= 3xy^2 subject to y=4x+2
? What does this have to do with training your body to hit tennis balls?
If you know what to practice and how to practice it, you learn faster... This math problem is an analogy: it‘s more efficient to solve your problem using a systematic analysis than running in all directions at once.
And here I thought you meant you don't need to understand it to feel it...LOL
If you know what to practice and how to practice it, you learn faster... This math problem is an analogy: it‘s more efficient to solve your problem using a systematic analysis than running in all directions at once.
There are pretty standard ways to teach tennis at this point. All the top coaches coach a similar system. I don't really see people trying to hit a top spin fh using a continental grip these days. Some things are self explanatory once you hit some tennis balls and see the results. The same goes I don't need the science to tell me to not use a kids racket to play as its too small. I just know it.
I guess we have to take your word that you were teaching 'modern' in 1968 since like so many of your assertions there is no empirical 'scientific' proof of it. I have to ask, has your teaching evolved at all since 1968 and if so how has it--if not it can't be called 'modern' can it? Nothing that happened 45 years ago can still be considered 'modern'--nothing. So what exactly is your definition of 'modern'?I venture that I was coaching modern tennis before he was even born, starting in 1968 with Pancho Segura at the Beverly Hills Tennis Club.
Another contributing solution is having more positive, more famous coaches posting on TalkTennis. They may differ in opinion, but I say: "Bring It On".
I guess we have to take your word that you were teaching 'modern' in 1968 since like so many of your assertions there is no empirical proof of it. I have to ask, has your teaching evolved at all since 1968 and if so how has it--if not it can't be called 'modern' can it? Nothing that happened 45 years ago can still be considered 'modern'--nothing. So what exactly is your definition of 'modern'?
FWIW, I went to Segura when I was in college (I played for an NCAA National Championship team, played pro tennis, and currently coach) when he was the pro at La Costa (well after his time with you at the BHTC) and he did not teach like you. Prior to that I took a few private lessons from Pancho Gonzalez, who you claim to base at least some of your teachings on, and again he did not teach like you. And neither of them hit open stance, semi-western, windshield-wiper, 'yank' across forehands (Segura in fact hit his forehand with 2 hands).
So again, what exactly is your defintion of 'modern'? And what exactly are the current crop of Americans doing that is not 'modern' (be specific)? Maybe that would clear a lot of things up.
(I'm going ignore the responses from the minions).
And none of the 'more famous coaches' would ever bother to post here for the simple reason that they just don't have to--their work and their results speak for themselves. I'm actually surprised someone of your 'legendary stature' would find this little forum so important to you. That alone says a lot...
You still didn't answer my questions, but then I really didn't expect you would. But in a way that in itself does answer them.Well, JW, I preached, in 1968, open stance, topspin, stalking the ball, finishing across the opposite shoulder. In 1971 I started putting a string 3 ft. over the net to promote topspin, I used this in Spain in 1973. In Brazil in the 1980s I experimented by putting the string 5 ft over the net, and I emphasized waiting for the ball to emphasize the Zone, always testing, seeing what gave out the best results. In 1989 I published my first book, "Tennis in 2 Hours" (a name that the Germans called me when I coached there in the 80s). I gave a copy of the book at the 1989 Sunshine Cup to the Russian coach, for the Russian Tennis Federation. Bud Collins confirmed the next year, on his first trip to Moscow that coaches there loved it and asked him for more copies. I learned from a Belgrade coach that is now in Australia that my 1989 book was in Belgrade in 1991 and well received by coaches.
Then came the 1990s, and for four years I participated with instruction in more than 100 New Tennis Magazine shows, and we sold DVDs with that instruction through the TV show. From 1994 to 2000 I worked for ESPN International as an ATP, Australian Open and French Open commentator. I started emphasizing hitting on the lower part of the strings for topspin. I then commented for another channel PSN, in 1992 for the whole year, doing Wimbledon.
I retired from broadcasting in December 2000 and dedicated my time to promote my modern tennis videos (the term came up in 1991 as a friend of mine started doing surveys for me in Boca Raton and I started using it, and Brad Holbrook said in a New Tennis Magazine TV show that I was "the father of modern tennis"). In the 2000s I started emphasizing more and more pulling across instead of just swinging across and I added two more videos in 2006 and 2007. Then I started to visit Europe again (where I had played so much in the 1960s), meeting with old friends that were now coaches (Tony Roche in Rome, Angel Gimenez and Pato Alvarez in Barcelona, and in England meeting with David Lloyd and laying out teaching his main Next Generation clubs top coaches the system, plus seminars in Belgium, Holland and Finland, with great reception).
Next, in 2008, 2009 and 2010 producing 4 more DVDs, the series Tennis Into the Future, I just authored a new DVD, The Best of Oscar, a compilation, stroke by stroke of my most salient video segments, and I am on the process of writing a new book. I know my methodology is quite controversial and revolutionary, but it is a real good service to kids and public at large.
This is a long answer to your question, but also need to say that Segura played open stance two-handed forehands which was a bullet, and I did not teach like he taught, neither like Gonzalez, I taught like Segura and Gonzales played, not how they taught, although Gonzales forehand was a bit continental and not his forte. But Gonzalez serve, his slice approach, his volleys were a beauty to behold. I also studied/copied, some of the best strokes of all time, including the modern players. You must have witnessed, being a pro player and now a coach, some of the incredible shotmaking of many champions and I am lucky to have witnessed the evolutions that the game took and proud to be a part of that.
Finally, to answer your question specifically, American coaches stress to play forehands semi-open, which is a bit less efficient than the open stance for pulling across, and, perhaps for that reason, they are not geting that much action on the ball. They are also not tracking the ball long enough. Other than that, the USA has some fantastic prospects. I would say, encourage them to yank the ball up and across. When you get the feel, the harder you hit, the more the ball goes in.
I wish you a very Happy New Year and the best in your endeavors as a coach and in life. I am 73 years old, semi-retired, enjoying life myself, and loving every day. Occasionally I have posted in Talk Tennis, and thought starting my own thread to post tips would be a fun thing to do. I have the time, and a ton of materials to post.
Best, Oscar
I wish this thread would not get so argumentative and defensive. I like hearing the tips and insights that I can use to improve or expand my tennis, rather than it becoming a he said, she said discussion.
I like this way of approaching a stroke. The racquet is just an extension of my hand. I have total control over my hand, and so total control over the racquet. When I think and visualize and execute this way, while remembering to prepare early and keep my eye on the ball to racquet contact, then I always, not almost always but always, make good strokes and hit good shots ... where I want to hit them. But of course I'm an amateur with comparatively little experience, and am somewhat lazy, and so I almost invariably neglect one of the essential ingredients on almost all of my shots.It is almost as if playing tennis with the hand. The fingers have feel, have awareness. The racquet has not.
Have you guys seen the video of Djokovic teaching how to serve? He says its all in the wrist snap. High speed video of top pros show its really not about snapping the wrist. But that is what djokos coach used to elicit a certain performance from him. So djoko thinks its because he snaps his wrists.
The best coaches in every sport realises that players need to keep things simple and uncluttered in their minds. So they play without conscious thought and play in the moment. Which coincidentally is the reason drills and patterns of play are used by the top coaches of all sports. So the situation is familiar to the player. The players body just does what it knows. There is no overriding ego sitting ontop of the mind during the split second between hits.
You cannot get much better as a player watching videos. You can however get much better if you have a coach that watches videos of your technique and game play. The job of the player is to keep it simple in a complex dynamic situation of the point in a tennis match.
Have you guys seen the video of djokovic teaching how to serve? He says its all in the wrist snap. High speed video of top pros show its really not about snapping the wrist. But that is what djokos coach used to elicit a certain performance from him. So djoko thinks its because he snaps his wrists.
of course you can get better as a player watching videos. as long as you realize that there is something of value presented in those videos, that is worth trying out for yourself and could improve your own game.
than you need to apply yourself to the task and practice, practice,....
Good point, it is this video, towards the end:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0dldQUtRbo
It looks like he truly believes that he actually snaps his wrist, while in practice he clearly pronates, not snaps. Regardless, somebody apparently used "wrist snapping" as a way to teach him how to improve his serve.
Oscar,
Do you have any insight into how to teach someone to be able to curve the ball left-right or right-left like Federer is able to do? (He'll commonly have to ball curve to the right on an inside out forehand, for example)
Thanks
I think you both have a lot to offer to any tennis player who sincerely wants to improve and is willing to do the necessary work to improve.To All,
So I have been castigated for daring to post in this Wegnerite thread. Is there anyone here that is not too brainwashed to note the sequence of events?
Wegner copied one of my posts and inserted it in toto here along with a series of weak and evasive responses.
I feel I have the right to respond to that tactic and will continue to if--or if I just happen to feel like it for that matter.
I'm sometimes able to do this on both forehand and backhand shots, and I'm just a very low level competitor.Brushing the ball across will lead to that famous inside out left to right curve. There is also an upward component, but just dropping the racquet below the ball to approach it and pulling the racquet towards you and the finish will naturally induce the windshield wiper lift as well.
some nice tips above from Oscar... my 2 cents below on 1 bit -
the fact that the greatest RHS is near the finish, is a result of the racket being released after impact... it does not necessarily mean that the player tried to do that.
just wonna make sure that players are not misled into trying to achieve the fastest speed before the finish... that may result in over-rotation.
Oscar, great thread!
By the way, you advocated teaching a young boy the pull across forehand as he will get big and strong enough to keep it effective as he ages. How about the girls? Would you teach an 8 year old girl the same or instead teach a more penetrating and extending forehand as she may have strength limitations when she is older?
We usually teach boys and girls differently, and teach the girls to have more penetrating and flatter forehands.
Thanks and have a good New Years.
some nice tips above from Oscar... my 2 cents below on 1 bit -
the fact that the greatest RHS is near the finish, is a result of the racket being released after impact... it does not necessarily mean that the player tried to do that.
just wonna make sure that players are not misled into trying to achieve the fastest speed before the finish... that may result in over-rotation.
I think it is more common for your general player to be fast in the beginning of the stroke and slower to the end. They rush the movement in the beginning and then choke up at the finish in hopes the ball goes in. I have found by really working on correcting this rhythm, my strokes and serve really came together.
thanks for the good tips, Oscar
some thoughts
the finish
seems like a really good drill. i´ll try this with a particular student of mine who struggles in this respect.
do you agree that tip is more geared towards beginners?
Sometimes I need to do this drill with a good player to avoid the choke.
the outside foot
sometimes it looks from the outside as if you don´t care about footwork at all. good to see a tip on footwork
I have an entire DVD, Modern Footwork, dedicated to this subject. It's very delicate. There are a lot of misconceptions around footwork.
stay in the present
good advice in any sport. i feel staying in the present is always easier when you know what to do with your time. could be a split step or a good unit turn, or some adjustment steps,...
Also covered abundantly in my works. Timing these particulars is of the essence, so you don't get stuck.
delay
the tip with the two hands preventing you from preparing to early is good, but that would mean a unit turn is o.k., right?
Absolutely, but later rather than sooner.
happy New Year Oscar, thanks for your contributions
luvforty, when you yank the ball to get more power...
I took that the "yank" across was more for the non-hitting hand, both arms working in unison of course but the yanking/pulling across was with the non-hitting hand prior to impact. It seems to increase rhs, has worked well for me the last couple of days..maybe Mr. Wegner or someone will clarify, thanks.Oscar, aren't we supposed to relax the arm to maximize the kinetic chain? If we try to yank the ball, by definition the arm isn't relaxed anymore. Is this somewhat contradicting?
Thanks for sharing tennis tips. I've been enjoying them.
Oscar....I have your book, I have taken key points and written them down. Since May, using your technique my game has completely changed. I have no fear facing better players anymore. My confidence has been the biggest factor. I now give much higher level players fits. Sometimes I feel like I can spin my forehand wherever I want in the court.
I am no longer nervously racing in my mind a million check points. I am relaxed, just looking for the ball, running to it and sending it along it's way wrapping that follow through around me.
My swing is no longer fast to the ball....like amatur golfers....who try to HIT the ball. Instead, I am swinging the racquet through the ball building up speed in my follow through.
I am 57 and I love tennis more now than ever. Should have changed to this years ago. Would have saved me a lot of frustration!
Oscar, aren't we supposed to relax the arm to maximize the kinetic chain? If we try to yank the ball, by definition the arm isn't relaxed anymore. Is this somewhat contradicting?
Thanks for sharing tennis tips. I've been enjoying them.
I took that the "yank" across was more for the non-hitting hand, both arms working in unison of course but the yanking/pulling across was with the non-hitting hand prior to impact. It seems to increase rhs, has worked well for me the last couple of days..maybe Mr. Wegner or someone will clarify, thanks.
-if not it can't be called 'modern' can it? Nothing that happened 45 years ago can still be considered 'modern'--nothing. ..
5263:
Yes JW is struggling under what for you guys is a wild agenda--called truth.
So do you also not realize that "MTM" stands for Modern Tennis Methodology?;
the name of the instruction?
Or is this just more of your admitted "hobby" agenda of harassing Oscar?
The word 'modern' is an adjective, not a noun. Saying 'I was coaching modern tennis in 1969' (not 'I taught MTM') is not using the 'name of the instruction'--it's describing the instruction. Modern 45 years ago is an oxymoron. And continually falling back on the notion that modern is just the name of the instruction is really a lame cop out.
Oscar,
I just saw this from a prominent S. Fl coach.
"I use phrases like,'work the wrist thru the stroke, towards the target,
work the hand thru the ball towards target, elongate hitting zone,
fully pronate forearm before comming across torso."
and some argue that no one is still teaching this way.
Nice post. Great thread. Thanks to Wegner. I value input from 5263 and Oscar Wegner. Admire OW's accomplishments. Will take what I think I can use from this. Most appreciated. Thanks to you guys (and others) for sharing your wisdom.5263, I would like to keep this thread clean in the sense that we are just talking about technique, answers to questions, tips, drills, and so on. Others have their own thread and I don't post in their territory anymore, as it could cause friction and get threads deleted. I know readers enjoy seeing different points of view. So perhaps it is better to keep things positive and not point fingers or start arguments. At least in this thread. Let me be a good example.
Of course, 5263, your contributions are highly valuable, and I know you like to participate across TalkTennis' threads. I view my responsibility (as clarified by moderators and the administrator) as different. To stay within boundaries, to keep things calm and within the rules of TalkTennis, and to contribute to the readers (we had over 6,500 views already) as much as possible.
Happy and very prosperous 2013.
The word 'modern' is an adjective, not a noun. Saying 'I was coaching modern tennis in 1969' (not 'I taught MTM') is not using the 'name of the instruction'--it's describing the instruction. Modern 45 years ago is an oxymoron. And continually falling back on the notion that modern is just the name of the instruction is really a lame cop out.
Oscar,
I am using the Eastern Forehand grip and I am not getting as much topspin as I would like. My shots have one to two feet net clearance and I would like at least three feet net clearance.
Would you advise changing to Semi-Western?
Or keep the Eastern grip and brush up more?
I think this is great advice. Anyway, it seems to work for me. The relaxing part. It seems that I'm able to use Eastern or SemiWestern or whatever grip and still hit good shots. The most important part seems to be relaxation and preparation. Relaxed grip, relaxed wrist, relaxed swing, and, above all, good footwork and keeping eye on the ball = really good shots.If you keep your grip a bit loose, it might adjust itself instinctively. If it stays Eastern or goes gradually Semi-Western it is just a matter of feel. Don't force it either way. And let us know here in this thread what happened as a result.
I have an idea. If you started a JY tennis ideas thread I am sure people would enjoy it just as much as this one. I know I would.
Oscar....I have your book, I have taken key points and written them down. Since May, using your technique my game has completely changed. I have no fear facing better players anymore. My confidence has been the biggest factor. I now give much higher level players fits. Sometimes I feel like I can spin my forehand wherever I want in the court.