The Eastern Forehand and the Straight Arm Forehand

SpinToWin · Oct 24, 2014

Nowadays it seems that many people are shying away from the eastern forehand and towards semi-western and western forehands as they produce more spin and are more consistent according to many. On the other hand, the straight arm forehand is called the most efficient technique and is what many strive for. The irony of the matter is that the eastern forehand forces the player to use the straight arm forehand in order to have any good result. You see few top players with straight arm forehands, but all top players with eastern forehands have a straight arm forehand (Federer, Dimitrov, Gasquet and Batista Agut being the most noteworthy names). Once you get the straight arm forehand down with the eastern forehand grip, it is a very reliable stroke which allows both hitting flat and with heavy spin, and it is very solid due to the hand being behind the racquet at contact. Furthermore, the wrist is in a very natural position on this stroke, making it very easy on the arm and easy to execute the technique correctly with a loose wrist.

In stark contrast, the straight arm forehand is quite difficult with a semi-western grip and literally impossible with a western grip, as the wrist is in an unnatural position. The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands, as the double bend forehand is much easier with these "modern grips".

What I am trying to say is that people should not shy away from the eastern forehand, despite what is being said about it being an inferior grip in the modern game, as it promotes great technique.

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

It is slightly easier to hit SAFH with eastern grip.
On the other hand, Nadal and Verdasco use semiwestern very nicely and smoothly ...
Sergio Bruguera used SAFH, wondering what grip did he use ?!

Aretium · Oct 24, 2014

I have hit with a straight arm all my life and with an eastern. I do use SW/Eastern and full SW sometimes. I don't like the spin created with the SW/W grip its too floaty and not penetrating enough. Eastern is for attacking players, who will flatten out the shot when needed.

The forehand · Oct 24, 2014

Dimitrov doesn't use a eastern forehand he uses semi-western.

5263 · Oct 24, 2014

SpinToWin said:
The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands, as the double bend forehand is much easier with these "modern grips".

What I am trying to say is that people should not shy away from the eastern forehand, despite what is being said about it being an inferior grip in the modern game, as it promotes great technique.

Imo you are working from several false premises in this post. The biggest Fhs recorded have been from double bend users and it tends to be more simple and consistent. Double bend allows you to hit more in front, which presents a whole range of advantages.

Seems you get a couple of top popular players using the straight arm and now somehow that is more efficient and effective? Really? Well Rafa uses it with a pretty extreme grip and compensates well for the weaknesses of the straight arm and even the mighty Fed has struggled greatly of late to handle his Fh with the consistency needed. Both players, like Sampras, win more with their serve and movement, and would be just as successful or more with a double bend Fh.

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

5263 said:
Double bend allows you to hit more in front, which presents a whole range of advantages.

This is not the case

5263 · Oct 24, 2014

Easy Rider said:
This is not the case

Based on what and which do you use? Can you explain yourself?
While there are always exceptions, my observations are that generally players who use the straight arm with the eastern Fh tend to hit more to the side and that the double bend oversimplified is taking that position, bending the arm and adjusting the grip, bringing the CP more in front.

Aretium · Oct 24, 2014

The straight arm definitely allows you to hit more in front. I find that when i arm the ball my arm is Double bent.

Also, whats wrong with using both? When the ball is deep I have to use a double bend if I am not in position.

boramiNYC · Oct 24, 2014

Both can be viable upto the highest level of the game. But the matter of fact is the straight arm uses more the protraction of the shoulder joint and extension of the elbow joint as part of the swing. For double bend these pieces of the chain are largely held firm.

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

5263 said:
Based on what and which do you use? Can you explain yourself?

I use straight arm, I think last 2,5 yrs ... was hitting DB FH till that point.
Now I can not hit DB FH and when I do/try i feel awkward/stiff/jammed

U can have same results (penetration/depth/you name it) with SA FH as you can with DB FH, BUT with a lot less effort
You cant muscle the ball with SA FH, and you cant get jammed with the ball.
Contact point with SA FH is always at the same distance from the body while with DB FH thats not the case

When RF, RN, FV make mistake on their FH, try to figure out the reason.
Their CP never gets pushed closer towards the body

Rozroz · Oct 24, 2014

i'm trying to get STRAIGHT, but i'm just not getting there

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

Rozroz said:
i'm trying to get STRAIGHT, but i'm just not getting there

open your mind (I really mean that) to feel the real sensation , stay loose all the time otherwise you not going anywhere ... straightening the arm is not that much of a problem
If you wanna go with Federer vision, thats a real task to master

President · Oct 24, 2014

5263 said:
Imo you are working from several false premises in this post. The biggest Fhs recorded have been from double bend users and it tends to be more simple and consistent. Double bend allows you to hit more in front, which presents a whole range of advantages.

Seems you get a couple of top popular players using the straight arm and now somehow that is more efficient and effective? Really? Well Rafa uses it with a pretty extreme grip and compensates well for the weaknesses of the straight arm and even the mighty Fed has struggled greatly of late to handle his Fh with the consistency needed. Both players, like Sampras, win more with their serve and movement, and would be just as successful or more with a double bend Fh.

The vast majority of analysts who have commented on this subject have said that Federer and Nadal have the two best forehands of all time. I don't think it is a coincidence that they both use the straight arm technique.

boramiNYC · Oct 24, 2014

Rozroz said:
i'm trying to get STRAIGHT, but i'm just not getting there

For an effective SAfh you should have the enough flexibility to enable you to straighten the arm and protract the shoulder without flexing the thoracic spine. Most rec players lack such shoulder/chest flexibility or control.

If you address this mobility issue you could see improvement.

WildVolley · Oct 24, 2014

SpinToWin said:
In stark contrast, the straight arm forehand is quite difficult with a semi-western grip and literally impossible with a western grip, as the wrist is in an unnatural position. The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands, as the double bend forehand is much easier with these "modern grips".

I'm questioning the above. Nadal seems to do OK with what I'd term an extreme SW grip.

The odd case is Berasategui, the 1994 French Open finalist who hit with a Hawaiian grip. While he definitely hit some shots with a double bend, I've been told he preferred to hit with his arm almost straight at contact. The poor video quality on the net makes it difficult for me to verify this claim.

WildVolley · Oct 24, 2014

5263 said:
Seems you get a couple of top popular players using the straight arm and now somehow that is more efficient and effective? Really? Well Rafa uses it with a pretty extreme grip and compensates well for the weaknesses of the straight arm and even the mighty Fed has struggled greatly of late to handle his Fh with the consistency needed. Both players, like Sampras, win more with their serve and movement, and would be just as successful or more with a double bend Fh.

Wow!:shock::twisted:

The Federer and Nadal forehands are widely acclaimed as two of the greatest strokes in the history of tennis. You're attempting an extremely difficult sell by claiming these shots would have been better if they'd just bent their arms.

Of course, the dominance of Federer and Nadal is why the SA FH is so discussed these days. However, trying to dismiss the brilliance of these FHs by saying something about serve ability and movement isn't going to convince many people. Both Nadal and Federer rely on the fh as the groundstroke of choice and run around their BHs whenever they can.

I'm not sure we have enough evidence to specify a best technique (and I don't think there's a best single fh technique for all the various balls a pro faces). But the preliminary evidence of measured spin rates and winners suggests to me that the SA FH can't be easily dismissed.

Fintft · Oct 24, 2014

SpinToWin said:
Nowadays it seems that many people are shying away from the eastern forehand and towards semi-western and western forehands as they produce more spin and are more consistent according to many. On the other hand, the straight arm forehand is called the most efficient technique and is what many strive for. The irony of the matter is that the eastern forehand forces the player to use the straight arm forehand in order to have any good result. You see few top players with straight arm forehands, but all top players with eastern forehands have a straight arm forehand (Federer, Dimitrov, Gasquet and Batista Agut being the most noteworthy names). Once you get the straight arm forehand down with the eastern forehand grip, it is a very reliable stroke which allows both hitting flat and with heavy spin, and it is very solid due to the hand being behind the racquet at contact. Furthermore, the wrist is in a very natural position on this stroke, making it very easy on the arm and easy to execute the technique correctly with a loose wrist.

In stark contrast, the straight arm forehand is quite difficult with a semi-western grip and literally impossible with a western grip, as the wrist is in an unnatural position. The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands, as the double bend forehand is much easier with these "modern grips".

What I am trying to say is that people should not shy away from the eastern forehand, despite what is being said about it being an inferior grip in the modern game, as it promotes great technique.

Personally I'm with you

Although I've only dabbled with either SW or DB...

5263 · Oct 24, 2014

Aretium said:
The straight arm definitely allows you to hit more in front. I find that when i arm the ball my arm is Double bent.

Also, whats wrong with using both? When the ball is deep I have to use a double bend if I am not in position.

Nothing at all wrong with using both and Imo that is another advantage of the DB, as they will regularly use the SA when needed with many players. I think you guys are confusing out front to mean in front of your torso instead of closer to the opponents court.

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

U mean like this : http://i.usatoday.net/sports/gallery/2010/tennis/S100912_c_sockspg-horizontal.jpg

5263 · Oct 24, 2014

Easy Rider said:
U mean like this : http://i.usatoday.net/sports/gallery/2010/tennis/S100912_c_sockspg-horizontal.jpg

Are you saying that he would be further in front with a SA?

sez · Oct 24, 2014

Which is better for dealing with high bouncing ball with topspin and why?

5263 · Oct 24, 2014

WildVolley said:
Wow!:shock::twisted:

The Federer and Nadal forehands are widely acclaimed as two of the greatest strokes in the history of tennis. You're attempting an extremely difficult sell by claiming these shots would have been better if they'd just bent their arms.

Of course, the dominance of Federer and Nadal is why the SA FH is so discussed these days. However, trying to dismiss the brilliance of these FHs by saying something about serve ability and movement isn't going to convince many people. Both Nadal and Federer rely on the fh as the groundstroke of choice and run around their BHs whenever they can.

I'm not sure we have enough evidence to specify a best technique (and I don't think there's a best single fh technique for all the various balls a pro faces). But the preliminary evidence of measured spin rates and winners suggests to me that the SA FH can't be easily dismissed.

Glad to see more appreciation for Nadal's Fh here, but I don't see any reason it couldn't be just as good with a bit more consistency if he used the DB, plus he might mix in some SAs at certain times as some players with the DB are prone to do. Also Rafa's Fh contradicts the OP anyway with his grip. Nowhere did I "dismiss their brilliance", but merely attempted to add some perspective that seems to be lost when players hit #1 in the world. Announcers and fans alike raved about Fed's Bh as well until Rafa seemed to expose it a bit. I don't agree that Fed is a top 5 all time Fh or maybe even of his own generation. Imo many of his losses have actually been Fh breakdowns and he has surely struggled with the racket change. Also it depends on how you want to grade the Fh of course, but for a sheer brutal attacking Fh, both Jo-Willie and Monfils are better Imo.

I'm a pretty big fan of the Rafa Fh, but not sure how easy it would be to replicate his style down to the details.

SpinToWin · Oct 24, 2014

The forehand said:
Dimitrov doesn't use a eastern forehand he uses semi-western. I used the eastern forehand for many years and although it is more precise and natural than my western grip forehand(recently changed) numbers don't lie when i practice and play matches. The shear more winners and less errors is surprising. Also i have managed to stay with the straight arm forehand even with the western grip. I think as long as you have already learn't the correct fundamentals for eastern grip it is easy to transition. This is why in my opinion all children starting tennis should play with an eastern forehand as it allows them to learn good fundamentals, however as they become more refined tennis players they should have the choice.

I am pretty sure that Dimitrov uses a eastern forehand just like Fed (at times perhaps adjusting the grip to the situation or letting the grip rotate in his hand at/after contact). I used the western grip for years before switching to the eastern grip straight arm forehand and the results I get are so much more effortless and effective. I've tried a straight arm forehand with a semi western and barely made it, but with a western I could not play any normal groundstroke without forcing my wrist into severely uncomfortable positions.

5263 said:
Imo you are working from several false premises in this post. The biggest Fhs recorded have been from double bend users and it tends to be more simple and consistent. Double bend allows you to hit more in front, which presents a whole range of advantages.

Seems you get a couple of top popular players using the straight arm and now somehow that is more efficient and effective? Really? Well Rafa uses it with a pretty extreme grip and compensates well for the weaknesses of the straight arm and even the mighty Fed has struggled greatly of late to handle his Fh with the consistency needed. Both players, like Sampras, win more with their serve and movement, and would be just as successful or more with a double bend Fh.

You are working from several false premises and are objecting against things I have never said. Roddick used a double bend forehand and in his prime it was one of the biggest forehands in tennis, however, the shot was very physically taxing and had a low margin for error. It is much easier to create pace and spin with a straight arm forehand due to the mechanics of the stroke. Also, as others have mentioned, Fed's and Rafa's forehand have been called the greatest in the sport on several occasions and both use straight arm forehands. Coincidence? I think not. Rafa does not use as extreme of a grip as many seem to suggest. Rafa uses a semi-western grip.

WildVolley said:
I'm questioning the above. Nadal seems to do OK with what I'd term an extreme SW grip.

The odd case is Berasategui, the 1994 French Open finalist who hit with a Hawaiian grip. While he definitely hit some shots with a double bend, I've been told he preferred to hit with his arm almost straight at contact. The poor video quality on the net makes it difficult for me to verify this claim.

Rafa uses a pretty normal semi western grip IMO, but he still needs to put a lot of action on his shots to get them up and down. Rafa cannot really flatten out his forehand (it always has a significant topspin component) and I believe this has to do with his grip (IME the racquet face is more closed on a straight arm forehand). Given his playstyle though, that's an advantage for him.

Easy Rider · Oct 24, 2014

5263 said:
Are you saying that he would be further in front with a SA?

yeah

it would be further infront : http://www.essentialtennis.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/federer-forehand.jpg

and more diagonally away from the body : http://www.optimumtennis.net/images/roger-federer-forehand-technique.jpg

The forehand · Oct 24, 2014

delete post.

TennisCJC · Oct 25, 2014

Is a SA FH simply a longer lever? The ball is struck farther away and in front of the body and a longer lever generates more power which amplifies the pace and spin of the stroke. Seems like a good concept to me but I am not a physicist.

Rozroz · Oct 25, 2014

SpinToWin said:
I used the western grip for years before switching to the eastern grip straight arm forehand and the results I get are so much more effortless and effective.

this is what i wanna try to feel. if this will be possible for me i will be very happy.

WildVolley · Oct 25, 2014

TennisCJC said:
Is a SA FH simply a longer lever? The ball is struck farther away and in front of the body and a longer lever generates more power which amplifies the pace and spin of the stroke. Seems like a good concept to me but I am not a physicist.

This definitely part of it. Some claim that not hitting SA FH is like not hitting a serve with a straight arm.

However, others have suggested that rather than just a longer lever, the SA fh causes different stretch shortening cycles to be fired than when hitting double bend. I know that Gordon (?), the sports scientist that sometimes has articles on Yandell's site was looking at the ATP forehand, but I don't know if he was able to measure a difference with the SA ATP fh versus the DB ATP fh.

SpinToWin · Oct 26, 2014

TennisCJC said:
Is a SA FH simply a longer lever? The ball is struck farther away and in front of the body and a longer lever generates more power which amplifies the pace and spin of the stroke. Seems like a good concept to me but I am not a physicist.

that's one part of it. Since it is a longer lever, a given angular velocity results in a larger tip speed of the racquet. This includes both rotation of the upper body and movement of your arm, so you are creating tip speed much more easily and you have more reach. Additionally, I find that a straight arm forehand accentuates the wrist lag of the ATP style forehand (though that is just my experience).

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

SpinToWin said:
You are working from several false premises and are objecting against things I have never said. Roddick used a double bend forehand and in his prime it was one of the biggest forehands in tennis, however, the shot was very physically taxing and had a low margin for error. It is much easier to create pace and spin with a straight arm forehand due to the mechanics of the stroke. Also, as others have mentioned, Fed's and Rafa's forehand have been called the greatest in the sport on several occasions and both use straight arm forehands. Coincidence? I think not. Rafa does not use as extreme of a grip as many seem to suggest. Rafa uses a semi-western grip.

Rafa cannot really flatten out his forehand (it always has a significant topspin component)

Did I state you said those things? But They did relate to your claim directly or indirectly.
Well you did say these false premises-
On the other hand, the straight arm forehand is called the most efficient technique ...
and...-The irony of the matter is that the eastern forehand forces the player to use the straight arm forehand in order to have any good result.
and...- You see few top players with straight arm forehands, but all top players with eastern forehands have a straight arm forehand
And....- The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands

then continue with more false premises in bold above. What was my false premise you claim?

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

TennisCJC said:
Is a SA FH simply a longer lever? The ball is struck farther away and in front of the body and a longer lever generates more power which amplifies the pace and spin of the stroke. Seems like a good concept to me but I am not a physicist.

Except it is a logical fallacy, since an actual lever requires an effective fulcrum, so here a SA mostly gives you a longer moment arm, which is harder to move and control.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

Easy Rider said:
yeah

it would be further infront : http://www.essentialtennis.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/federer-forehand.jpg

and more diagonally away from the body

The pic of Fed gives no court reference and clearly is well after the ball has left the racket. "More diagonally away" has little to do with the point and could be literally almost directly to the side, but does go to more difficulty to manipulate and perceive the contact point.

torpantennis · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
Except it is a logical fallacy, since an actual lever requires an effective fulcrum, so here a SA mostly gives you a longer moment arm, which is harder to move and control.

Sure, harder to move by armswinging. But harder to move by core/shoulder rotation? I don't think so.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

torpantennis said:
Sure, harder to move by armswinging. But harder to move by core/shoulder rotation? I don't think so.

Sure it is. Just like a skater can adjust their radius to adjust their spin speed. It may not be a great difference in torque required, but that is only part of it. We can only swing as hard as we can control in tennis and the limiting factor is control or we would see even more big 120+ Fhs or even 130+. A pro can likely hit over 130 with either SA or bent, but hits slower to maintain control.

So the Critical key is controllable power, not Max power, and so far that has been demonstrated to be higher with the bent Fh. So many fall into the trap of chasing power in technique, when Imo it is a technique that gives you control to use the power potential you have. It's like getting a bigger engine for your race car when the track curves are such that you can't use the full power of the engine you have. You need better suspension and tires to improve in the turns before you need more engine. Most players would hit much harder if they didn't miss.

torpantennis · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
Sure it is. Just like a skater can adjust their radius to adjust their spin speed. It may not be a great difference in torque required, but that is only part of it. We can only swing as hard as we can control in tennis and the limiting factor is control or we would see even more big 120+ Fhs or even 130+. A pro can likely hit over 130 with either SA or bent, but hits slower to maintain control.

So the Critical key is controllable power, not Max power, and so far that has been demonstrated to be higher with the bent Fh. So many fall into the trap of chasing power in technique, when Imo it is a technique that gives you control to use the power potential you have. Most players would hit much harder if they didn't miss.

But you have to swing less hard with SA, because the longer leverage will give as much RHS, with less aggressive core rotation.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

torpantennis said:
But you have to swing less hard with SA, because the longer leverage will give as much RHS, with less aggressive core rotation.

You are correct, there is a trade off; but don't you think that the faster DB Fhs being recorded being slightly faster than the fastest SA Fhs is a pretty good indicator of what is going on?

torpantennis · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
You are correct, there is a trade off; but don't you think that the faster DB Fhs being recorded being slightly faster than the fastest SA Fhs is a pretty good indicator of what is going on?

I think the thing is, that if you go absolutely all-out, DB is much easier to control. BUT, on average rally ball SA is much more energy efficient and possibly also easier to control, due to much less core rotation required to hit the same ball.

SO, on hitting winners to sitting ducks, I'd prefer DB, but on baseline rallying I'd prefer SA.

WildVolley · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
You are correct, there is a trade off; but don't you think that the faster DB Fhs being recorded being slightly faster than the fastest SA Fhs is a pretty good indicator of what is going on?

James Blake hit some of the hardest forehand on record and he was closer to a SA fh than a DB fh in my opinion. Also, I've seen Verdasco hit a 117mph forehand off of a sitting ball, which is more impressive than Blake's 125mph forehand off a hard serve. Of course, some of the hardest hitters used a DB like Soderling.

In other words, I'm not sure that it is really possible to quantify whether it is easier to hit a DB harder than a SA.

I've been transitioning more toward SA myself, but my arm doesn't straighten out as much and I look a bit more like Blake at contact than Federer or Nadal.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

WildVolley said:
James Blake hit some of the hardest forehand on record and he was closer to a SA fh than a DB fh in my opinion. Also, I've seen Verdasco hit a 117mph forehand off of a sitting ball, which is more impressive than Blake's 125mph forehand off a hard serve. Of course, some of the hardest hitters used a DB like Soderling.

In other words, I'm not sure that it is really possible to quantify whether it is easier to hit a DB harder than a SA.

I've been transitioning more toward SA myself, but my arm doesn't straighten out as much and I look a bit more like Blake at contact than Federer or Nadal.

Close to a SA is a DB, but as far as I know, every Fh recorded over 121 has been a DB. If you know of a SA recorded over 125, I'd love to see and read about it.

SpinToWin · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
Did I state you said those things? But They did relate to your claim directly or indirectly.
Well you did say these false premises-
On the other hand, the straight arm forehand is called the most efficient technique ...
and...-The irony of the matter is that the eastern forehand forces the player to use the straight arm forehand in order to have any good result.
and...- You see few top players with straight arm forehands, but all top players with eastern forehands have a straight arm forehand
And....- The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips therefore explains why we see so few straight arm forehands

then continue with more false premises in bold above. What was my false premise you claim?

Yes, the straight arm forehand is the most efficient technique as it needs the least energy to produce a certain result (definition of efficiency).

Yes, playing a double bend eastern forehand is very hard and yields no good results, hence the eastern forehand promotes the straight arm forehand.

Yes, most top players don't use straight arm forehands but top players with eastern forehands all use straight arm forehands.

I concede that my last claim was worded badly. Let me rephrase it:

The development in tennis where many players use semi-western and western grips may be an explanation as to why we see so few straight arm forehands, as the double bend forehand is much easier with these "modern grips".

I meant it more as a possibility for explaining this strange development (considering all the praise you hear for the straight arm forehands and all the benefits the technique undoubtedly has).

I find your definition of "big" for a forehand to be the big issue with your argument. If we consider big to be how hard you can potentially hit a shot, then it is a meaningless value (with Monfils somewhere near the top, but nobody would argue that Monfils has one of the best forehands in history). Both Rafa and Fed consistently played more pace and spin off their forehand (in their respective primes) than the competition. Because you need to exert less effort to produce a certain result with a SA forehand, the stroke is more controlled, which translates to hitting heavier shots more consistently. That IMO is what makes a forehand "big".

WildVolley · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
Close to a SA is a DB, but as far as I know, every Fh recorded over 121 has been a DB. If you know of a SA recorded over 125, I'd love to see and read about it.

Well, watch this Verdasco 117mph fh. I think it is more impressive than some of the faster I've seen, because the incoming ball doesn't have a great amount of pace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REMxYUYz6hk

Also, there are degrees of db. I'd say that Blake's fh is closer to a SA than a DB. I'd class Tsonga and Soderling as clear DBs.

SpinToWin · Oct 26, 2014

WildVolley said:
Well, watch this Verdasco 117mph fh. I think it is more impressive than some of the faster I've seen, because the incoming ball doesn't have a great amount of pace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REMxYUYz6hk

Also, there are degrees of db. I'd say that Blake's fh is closer to a SA than a DB. I'd class Tsonga and Soderling as clear DBs.

And Blake's fastest forehand was clocked in at 125 mph, the fastest forehand ever hit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiHCjwd3LiQ

And yeah, that looks a lot like a straight arm.

WildVolley · Oct 26, 2014

SpinToWin said:
And Blake's fastest forehand was clocked in at 125 mph, the fastest forehand ever hit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiHCjwd3LiQ

And yeah, that looks a lot like a straight arm.

Here is a video of Blake hitting his forehand with some nice slow motion, even though the resolution on this clip is low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kluhYnSlGZU

I think that it can be argued either way. When I try to hit a SA, I end up with what looks like a slight bend, much like Blake.

However, I think 5263 is probably arguing that there might be a control issue that makes the DB superior for very hard hits. Most times, the pros aren't going full out. For example, I've seen Tursunov hit over 100mph forehands multiple times in practice. Some looked to be over 110mph, but he doesn't hit that hard in matches, because he was really flattening them out and swinging away.

SpinToWin · Oct 26, 2014

WildVolley said:
Here is a video of Blake hitting his forehand with some nice slow motion, even though the resolution on this clip is low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kluhYnSlGZU

I think that it can be argued either way. When I try to hit a SA, I end up with what looks like a slight bend, much like Blake.

However, I think 5263 is probably arguing that there might be a control issue that makes the DB superior for very hard hits. Most times, the pros aren't going full out. For example, I've seen Tursunov hit over 100mph forehands multiple times in practice. Some looked to be over 110mph, but he doesn't hit that hard in matches, because he was really flattening them out and swinging away.

That's very true and that's the key part. High peaks are not the most important thing, rather, a high average is what is desirable (Monfils' forehand has a higher ceiling in terms of pace than Nadal's for example, but nobody would take Monfils' forehand over Nadal's).

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

WildVolley said:
Also, there are degrees of db. I'd say that Blake's fh is closer to a SA than a DB..

very interesting point of view, but for me, you are either SA or anything else is bent; that is if you buy into this SA/BA distinction to begin with. Blake normally hits without excessive bend, but still clearly a DB Fh, as seen in the link you provided. I stopped the vid of the 125mph Fh at 31 secs and he had a clear bend as he started forward, but even if someone wants to contend that Fh was more Straight than his norm, it really goes more to my point that often DB hitters will use SA or near it, and that is one more reason the DB is superior as a base Fh.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

SpinToWin said:
(Monfils' forehand has a higher ceiling in terms of pace than Nadal's for example, but nobody would take Monfils' forehand over Nadal's).

Really? There is nothing wrong with Monfils' Fh and it is truly one of the all time greats if not the best ever. It's not his Fh that lets him down; it's his head and habits.

That said, you are somewhat correct in that I also love Nadal's Fh and it would be a very tough choice to pick from either of these other worldly Fhs.

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

SpinToWin said:
Yes, the straight arm forehand is the most efficient technique as it needs the least energy to produce a certain result (definition of efficiency).
(with Monfils somewhere near the top, but nobody would argue that Monfils has one of the best forehands in history).

Because you need to exert less effort to produce a certain result with a SA forehand, the stroke is more controlled, which translates to hitting heavier shots more consistently. That IMO is what makes a forehand "big".

Just repeating this efficiency claim does not make it true. You have Zero evidence this is a fact.

And yes, Monfils clearly has one of the all time great Fhs and is one of the Fhs I put above Fed's. If Monfils spent 5 yrs at # 1 with the exact same Fh, many of you would be gushing over it like you do Fed's, but the truth is the quality of Monfils Fh has nothing to do with him underachieving over his career. Like Tsonga, he is inconsistent for other reasons than Fh technique.

Rafa4Ever · Oct 26, 2014

slight bend is best imo
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/..._federer_evolution_modern_forehand_part1.html

5263 · Oct 26, 2014

Rafa4Ever said:
slight bend is best imo
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/..._federer_evolution_modern_forehand_part1.html

Now that is a case Imo someone could legitimately make above

Interesting article with an interesting admission, stating..."When I started trying to break down the shot, I couldn't reconcile the things Federer appeared to be doing with what I thought I knew about the modern forehand."

Glad to see that and some of it goes back to a debate we had here on the forum about is there really a separate SA & DB Fh. I contended years back this was an artificial distinction and they were only variations of the basic Modern Fh. Sure some players tend to use some variations more than others, like Rafa does with the Bolo, but they are all just versions of the Modern Fh. This article seems to go into several artificial distinctions that have been claimed thru the years as well.

TennisCJC · Oct 26, 2014

5263 said:
Except it is a logical fallacy, since an actual lever requires an effective fulcrum, so here a SA mostly gives you a longer moment arm, which is harder to move and control.

Well, you are welcome to your opinion but I don't think the concept of a longer lever delivering more pace and spin is a fallacy. And, I actually agree with you that it is harder to move and control too as you are working farther away from your body. But, if you adjust to it - it does have merit. Between Federer, Nadal and Del Po over 80% of the slams in the last 10 years or so were won by SA players in the era of the FH nonetheless.

Bent arm is akin to choking up on a baseball bat. Yes, it is easy to control the bat head. Yes, you can still hit for power - see Barry Bonds. But, no, you cannot get the easy power of a longer lever - see Henry Aaron.

The Eastern Forehand and the Straight Arm Forehand

Talk Tennis Guru

Professional

Hall of Fame

Rookie

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

Professional

Rookie

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Similar threads