ATP forehands and what it means for their respective games

[Bender]

The purpose of this thread is to loosely categorise various types of forehands you see on the ATP tour, and what I think it means for their respective games. This is also an opportunity to correct popular misconceptions, where applicable.

For now, I will be categorising the forehands in the following fashion

1. Grip
2. Takebacks
3. Arm style
4. Finish

I will then provide a brief explanation as to the pros and cons of the variations with examples where possible, within each category.

This is a WIP and will take some time to complete, so if you have suggestions on what other aspects of forehands I should cover, please let me know and I will try to include them in the OP.

I will not be talking about WTA forehands in much detail beyond general descriptions as frankly I do not follow the WTA at all.

1. Grips
Types
There are five types of grip that are or were used on the tour, with examples (some of these players use modified versions of these grips, and are denoted with (M)):

1. [Continental ("C")]: Edberg (M), McEnroe (M), Laver, Navratilova
2. Eastern ("E"): Federer, Dimitrov, Del Potro, Gasquet, Sampras
3. Semiwestern ("SW"): Nadal, Murray. Verdasco, Agassi
4. Western ("W"): Djokovic (M), Roddick (M), Kyrgios, Sock, Courier (M)
5. [Hawaiian ("H")]: Berasategui

Notes:

• Continental and Hawaiian grips are in [square brackets] as they are grips that are functionally extinct. The Hawaiian grip is what you get when you hold a continental grip and turn it upside down.
• The most versatile grip is the SW grip as it sits right inbetween the conservative E and the extreme W and H grips.
• The natural strike zone / contact point (ie where the racquet face will be perpendicular to the ground) moves up in height but closer to the body, the more extreme the grip. An E grip for instance will be hit out in front of the body at waist height. A W grip will be hit closer to the body at chest height.

Grip Choice

• Other than the extremes (C, W, and H), the choice of grip is not hugely influential on what kind of ball leaves the forehand.
• The most important factor involved when choosing a grip that works is the natural contact point for the player, and is therefore a matter of personal choice rather than a tactical one.
• However, the choice of grip can be affected by external factors:
  • Surface: On high-bouncing surfaces such as clay or gritty hard courts, a SW to W grip (perhaps even H) is better suited as the contact point will be higher. On low-bouncing / fast surfaces such as grass and slick hard courts, conservative grips ranging from C to a modified SW grip will work.
  • Player rhythm: How early or late a player likes to hit the ball will also affect the choice of grip. Someone who hits super early will not have to deal with high bounces, but will regularly have to deal with low bounces, in which case an E grip is ideal. Federer's a good example of this. Someone who hits on the apex of the bounce will be better off with a grip that allows them to make contact close to the body at a higher strike zone, so a W grip is ideal. Kyrgios is a good example of this.

2. Takebacks
This is an interesting one because these can be significant or insignificant in its effects on the stroke that it is attached to. There are however a few things to consider:

1. Size: Del Potro, Gasquet, F Meyer, F Gonzalez
2. Wrist involvement: Federer, Nadal
3. Racquet angle / elbow direction: Roddick, Khachanov, Kyrgios, Lendl, Sampras

Size

• In this context, size refers to the length of the backswing. Larger backswings can generate more power as there is more room for the racquet to pick up pace, at the cost of being susceptible to being rushed. Thiem notably abbreviated his takeback to become more competitive on hard courts, where the surface is fast enough compared to clay to cause problems on that wing.
• Tradeoff between potential power and timing is crucial. Larger takebacks are beneficial if the resulting firepower is sufficient to end points (F Gonzalez, Thiem, and arguably Del Potro), but if that is not the case, then the associated difficulties in timing will mean that the player will have to adopt a more deep court positioning to get it to work with questionable results (Gasquet).

Wrist Involvement

Racquet Angle / Elbow Direction

• This refers to the angle in which the top of the racquet is pointing during the first half of the takeback, before the racquet is dropped so that the forward swing can begin.
• There are three loose categories:
  1. Forward-pointing: elbow points behind the player, so the player looks like he is elbowing someone behind him when taking back the racquet
  2. Neutral (pointing directly up): elbow points towards the ground
  3. Backwards-pointing: elbow points towards the ground and slightly forwards
• Some players notably have played around with this:
  • Federer went from something inbetween the neutral and backwards-pointing takeback in his early years (until c 2007), then has stayed with a forward-pointing takeback ever since
  • Nadal has used a neutral takeback for most of his career, but had a short stint with the forward-pointing takeback from 2013 to 2015, before switching back to the neutral takeback.
• The three styles of takeback can have a pronounced effect on the forehand:
  • Forward-pointing takebacks are difficult to time but will generate the most spin and--to a lesser extent, power--due to the increased racquet head acceleration ("RHA")
  • Backwards-pointing takebacks are easiest to time but at the cost of spin and a bit of power
  • Neutral takebacks sit somewhere inbetween
• An interesting development in this area in the last 5-10 years is the growing prevalence of younger players using some form of the forward-pointing takeback. Players like Khachanov, Tiafoe, and Kyrgios are notable for this, with Khachanov and Tiafoe in particular a version of this takeback so extreme that their racquets point towards the ground by the end of their takebacks.
  • IMO, the pros / cons of this style of takeback is more extreme than the more traditional forms of takeback.
    • Pro: You get even more spin and power, as the racquet head has more distance to travel as the head rotates from pointing forwards to lagging behind the player in the transition from takeback to forward swing, during which it can continue to accelerate.
    • Cons: Timing issues become even more difficult, more wrist / forearm / shoulder strength is needed, and the motion itself is not as easily repeatable (debatable)

3. Arm Styles
This is where I distinguish between:

1. Straight Arm ("SA") Forehands: Federer, Nadal, Dimitrov, Cilic, Verdasco
2. Double Bend ("DB") Forehands: Djokovic, Murray, Thiem, and just about everyone else

TBC

4. Finish
Broadly speaking, there are three finishes worth talking about, but each style has many variations:

1. Classic finish, over the shoulder
2. Windshield Wiper ("WW") finish, around the shoulder
3. Reverse finish, over the head and back over the dominant shoulder (aka buggy whip, lasso forehand)

Here, I will be talking about the different finishes, its effects, misconceptions, and some personal thoughts about the reverse finish

TBC

 

[Bender]

Reserved

 

[Red Rick]

I'm digging it.

 

[Standaa]

it’s startling to me that Federer puts more spin on his FH shots than Djokovic despite his grip being more conservative by 2 bevels. I use the full western FH grip and the spin is practically automatic and all I need to worry about is how much power I should apply to the shot. whereas the eastern grip is so conservative I feel like I need to break my wrist so I can apply at least some topspin. I couldn’t even play with an eastern FH grip, the most conservative I feel comfortable with is the extreme eastern. so this science of breaking down pro’s FHs is so interesting and weird to me. btw. what does the "modified version of a grip" mean exactly?

thanks for this @Bender , you’re truly saving GPPD with these threads in these dark times.

 

[Jonesy]

it’s startling to me that Federer puts more spin on his FH shots than Djokovic despite his grip being more conservative by 2 bevels. I use the full western FH grip and the spin is practically automatic and all I need to worry about is how much power I should apply to the shot. whereas the eastern grip is so conservative I feel like I need to break my wrist so I can apply at least some topspin. I couldn’t even play with an eastern FH grip, the most conservative I feel comfortable with is the extreme eastern. so this science of breaking down pro’s FHs is so interesting and weird to me. btw. what does the "modified version of a grip" mean exactly?

thanks for this @Bender , you’re truly saving GPPD with these threads in these dark times.

Even if technique is an even bigger factor, the favorite theme of discussion is grips.

You can have spin with eastern grip and you can also flatten out the ball with an western grip. But with the eastern you have to be more conscious of the racket path if you want to hit more spin, and the same could be said of an western grip if the player wants to flatten more the ball.

When under pressure is where the grip of choice of the player becomes more relevant because naturally the player with the western grip will have more spin and consequently more control under pressure, on the other side the player with the eastern will have less control but more potential of attack and counter an easier ball to finish the point.

For example in the long FH rallies usually Fed forehand would break first against Djokovic forehand (more natural spin and control), but on the other side given an easier ball Fed forehand could more easilly crush the ball and finish the point (more natural flat shot with more speed and power).

Of course there are a lot more factors involved and is also influenced by the players style of play. I frequently see this kind of pattern in rec tennis.

 

[BeatlesFan]

thanks for this @Bender , you’re truly saving GPPD with these threads in these dark times.

 

[Standaa]

Even if technique is an even bigger factor the favorite theme of discussion is grips.

You can have spin with eastern grip and you can also flatten out the ball with an western grip. But with the eastern you have to be more conscious of the racket path if you want to hit more spin, and the same could be said of an western grip if the player wants to flatten more the ball.

When under pressure is where the grip of choice of the player becomes more relevant because naturally the player with the western grip will have more spin and consequently more control under pressure, on the other side the player with the eastern will have less control but more potential of attack and counter an easier ball to finish the point.

For example in the long FH rallies usually Fed forehand would break first against Djokovic forehand (more natural spin and control), but on the other side given an easier ball Fed forehand could more easilly crush the ball and finish the point (more natural flat shot with more speed and power).

Of course there are a lot more factors involved and is also influenced by the players style of play. I frequently see this kind of pattern in rec tennis.

the thing is with a more extreme grip it’s just easier to apply topspin, and the opposite goes for power. it’s not that you can’t hit completely flat bombs with a full western grip and topspin moonballs with an eastern grip, it’s just that it becomes harder to play these specific shots with said grips. that’s why I’m surprised someone like Nadal, who is all about the topspin, didn’t learn to play with the western grip, it’s literally perfect for clay players, especially if you want to defend (and please don’t take it like I just said Nadal is a defender)

 

[eman11]

it’s startling to me that Federer puts more spin on his FH shots than Djokovic despite his grip being more conservative by 2 bevels. I use the full western FH grip and the spin is practically automatic and all I need to worry about is how much power I should apply to the shot. whereas the eastern grip is so conservative I feel like I need to break my wrist so I can apply at least some topspin. I couldn’t even play with an eastern FH grip, the most conservative I feel comfortable with is the extreme eastern. so this science of breaking down pro’s FHs is so interesting and weird to me. btw. what does the "modified version of a grip" mean exactly?

thanks for this @Bender , you’re truly saving GPPD with these threads in these dark times.

If I am not mistaken, the "modified" part of one's grip simply is to note the slight difference in not the person's knuckle placement, but rather the palm placement (i.e. where instead of the knuckle and heel pad being on bevel num. 3, the knuckle remains on bevel 3, but the heel pad moves slightly to either between bevel 3 and 4 or completely to bevel 4)

Please, correct me if I'm wrong


also, I do believe that Federer plays with a somewhat modified eastern grip, or has played with this grip from time to time.

 

[Bender]

it’s startling to me that Federer puts more spin on his FH shots than Djokovic despite his grip being more conservative by 2 bevels. I use the full western FH grip and the spin is practically automatic and all I need to worry about is how much power I should apply to the shot. whereas the eastern grip is so conservative I feel like I need to break my wrist so I can apply at least some topspin. I couldn’t even play with an eastern FH grip, the most conservative I feel comfortable with is the extreme eastern. so this science of breaking down pro’s FHs is so interesting and weird to me. btw. what does the "modified version of a grip" mean exactly?

I use an extreme E / very conservative SW grip. Switched from an extreme SW (something that Djokovic uses), then to a vanilla SW, then to the extreme E.

The difference in spin is noticeable but not huge, but that's because I maintain a loose wrist and use grip size 2. The thing with W grips is that the wrist biomechanically doesn't play a large role in the forehand, whereas with E and SW grips, you can see a lot more wrist extension at the very beginning of the forward swing, when your forehand whips forwards, and a bit of wrist flexion in the followthrough (although that's a matter of flair than anything else IMO).

Federer has been using the E grip for a while now, and if you look at his forehand in the image above you can see his wrist laid back due to the inertia of his racquet. His arm is supinated (ie arm rotated palm up) and you can see wrist extension.

If you look at Nadal, you see pretty much the same exact thing going on here. The hitting arm is supinated, and the wrist is extended.

But here if you look at sock, his wrist is more or less neutral with almost no visible bend in the joint anywhere. If he were to extend his wrist, the racquet would be moving perpendicular to the intended swingpath and would nothing at best to the shot.

Chances are that the only wrist movement going on with Sock is ulnar deviation, because that is the only joint movement that is parallel to the swingpath of the racquet--but note that the wrist is far less flexible when bent in that way.

Why is it important that the wrist is allowed to bend and let the racquet lag behind the hitting arm? Acceleration decreases as the racquet approaches contact, giving the racquet some time to swing forwards courtesy of the elasticity of the wrist and of course due to the conservation of momentum. The more the racquet is able to lag, the higher acceleration the racquet is able to achieve, which should translate to a higher racquet speed by the time the head makes contact with the ball. This should result in more spin and power. With W grips, you cannot find ways to exploit racquet lag, so almost all the power must come from your body, which is why W grip users with big forehands tend to be tall and / or strong guys like Sock, Kyrgios, and Gulbis--whereas smaller guys with W grips like Lleyton Hewitt have difficulty generating any power at all off that wing--and why I think he would've been far less relevant even without injuries once surfaces slowed down.

The tl;dr of all this is that if you feel like you have to break your wrist to use an E / SW grip, then you're not doing it right. The wrist plays a big but passive role in the forehand, so there should really be virtually zero tension on that joint.

Modified grips in this thread here refers to an extreme or more conservative version of the standard grip. I've organised the list of pro players using certain grips so that they all gravitate towards the middle grip, ie the SW. So Edberg's modified C grip is a grip that is somewhere between a C and an E grip, whereas Djokovic's modified W grip is one that is somewhere between a W and a SW grip. For players using modified grips, I've put them under the classification that they are closer to, so again Edberg's modified C grip is still closer to a C than an E grip, and Djokovic's modified W grip is still closer to a W than a SW (he's about 3/4 W).

That said, @eman11 is right in that it can also refer to the way in which the grip is fiddled around with in in other ways, such as palm placement. In this thread I have not included examples of this. But in case you were wondering, modified grips without rotating the full hand in one direction or the other can also come about because of grip size. Nadal uses a grip size that is too small for him per conventional wisdom, so his palm move further around the grip than it would with a larger grip. I think this is why some have in the past confused Nadal for using a full W grip, when his swing mechanics would confirm that he's never used such an extreme grip at any point in his adult career.

thanks for this @Bender , you’re truly saving GPPD with these threads in these dark times.

No problemo, I'm just having some fun putting my thoughts out there, although this and the last thread are turning out to be rather laborious

Even if technique is an even bigger factor, the favorite theme of discussion is grips.

You can have spin with eastern grip and you can also flatten out the ball with an western grip. But with the eastern you have to be more conscious of the racket path if you want to hit more spin, and the same could be said of an western grip if the player wants to flatten more the ball.

When under pressure is where the grip of choice of the player becomes more relevant because naturally the player with the western grip will have more spin and consequently more control under pressure, on the other side the player with the eastern will have less control but more potential of attack and counter an easier ball to finish the point.

For example in the long FH rallies usually Fed forehand would break first against Djokovic forehand (more natural spin and control), but on the other side given an easier ball Fed forehand could more easilly crush the ball and finish the point (more natural flat shot with more speed and power).

Of course there are a lot more factors involved and is also influenced by the players style of play. I frequently see this kind of pattern in rec tennis.

I think the main thing is that W grips are swung almost as if you want to hit someone over the head with the back of your fist, the same way you'd knock on a door. But if you want to swing forwards and out from that position, the natural path is to move your arm up, as if you were to deliver an uppercut, which is why W grips are often said to deliver natural spin compared to more conservative grips.

the thing is with a more extreme grip it’s just easier to apply topspin, and the opposite goes for power. it’s not that you can’t hit completely flat bombs with a full western grip and topspin moonballs with an eastern grip, it’s just that it becomes harder to play these specific shots with said grips. that’s why I’m surprised someone like Nadal, who is all about the topspin, didn’t learn to play with the western grip, it’s literally perfect for clay players, especially if you want to defend (and please don’t take it like I just said Nadal is a defender)

It's only perfect for maintaining neutral rallies. Defending often requires getting under the ball just before it bounces a second time, and if you have a W grip that is difficult to pick up on the full stretch, whereas an E and SW grip can get under that ball and take full swings without sacrificing much spin at all.

As stated earlier in a convoluted fashion, any spin advantage you get from the W grip can be sort of compensated with the passive involvement of the wrist, which gives you increased RHA. Conservative grips also more or less force you to hit further away from your body, giving you a longer wingspan, which should also contribute to an increased RHA.

Of course it could be that Nadal just didn't like the W grip. I didn't like it either because I didn't like the constricted feeling of the W forehand, and I like being able to smack a ball from any height.

If I am not mistaken, the "modified" part of one's grip simply is to note the slight difference in not the person's knuckle placement, but rather the palm placement (i.e. where instead of the knuckle and heel pad being on bevel num. 3, the knuckle remains on bevel 3, but the heel pad moves slightly to either between bevel 3 and 4 or completely to bevel 4)

Please, correct me if I'm wrong


also, I do believe that Federer plays with a somewhat modified eastern grip, or has played with this grip from time to time.

I think he used to use the extreme E / modified E grip up to around 2006 ish, but switched to a full E at around the time he changed his takeback from neutral to forward-pointing.

 

[PMChambers]

Federers FH is closer to SW than Eastern.
Djokovic FH is closer to Western than Semi Western
And yet Federer gets classified as Eastern and Djok Western?

 

[Bender]

Federers FH is closer to SW than Eastern.
Djokovic FH is closer to Western than Semi Western
And yet Federer gets classified as Eastern and Djok Western?

Federer’s forehand is a flat E grip

Djokovic’s forehand is 3/4 W.

I don’t see any issue here.

 

[racquetreligion]

Before ww1 there was a Japanese player with a FH that used a western grip and looked like Fognini`s clone
another Japanese player had a FH between sock`s and courier in footage I watched while watching Japanese
tv on its past players documentary. They used lighter racquets and reached rankings up to 4th in the world then.
I cant find the footage of it but there are plenty of FHs that were used 80-100 years ago and in between
that resemble the great FHs of today, its just they either due to equipment of ability didn't make a splash
or the expensive air time technology in filming required that we have today etc.

Funnily enough Nishikori hasn't been able to go past 4th in the world and also never won a slam like his
historic countrymen and Japanese fear the number 4 as it sounds like "death" as well.
Enough to have many buildings with no 4th floor which puzzled ill I was enlightened by locals.

 

[Bender]

I like threads that are more detailed and focused like this - especially in times where I'm sure many of us have time to kill...

One aspect that is important to remember in this thread is that racquet set up is an important factor that influences how a player can swing and what shots they can easily produce.

Players with western grips can absolutely flourish on faster/lower surfaces if their racquet is set up to allow this. Djokovic is the perfect example. He has something very close to Western, however his racquet is heavy, with a high twist weight, depolarised (considerable lead in the lower hoop compared to upper) and a large grip (helps with stability, poor for spin). All of this designed to help him with his style - redirect pace with lower, flatter shots. It's a very control oriented frame that won't generate a lot of spin, but his grips allow him to generate enough spin anyway. Someone with a grip marginally more extreme - like sock - can produce an entirely different swing, but only if his racquet is radically different. Sock's is around 309mm unstrung, polarised with lead at 12, and on top of that he chokes up on his grip rendering it something closer to using a 26.5 inch frame. His swing is lagged in the takeback, and he uses an extreme amount of wrist in his swing. No surprise then, that he does better on slower/bouncier conditions that give him time to hit and rip, or courts that really grip - Indian Wells is a timely example. Struggling on the comeback he made the challenger final and has had success in IW in the past with it's high bounces and friendly spin.

Going the other way, someone with a more conservative grip like Fed, can produce a lot more spin than Djoker because his frame is set up for it. Head-light like Sock, polarised, more open pattern. He has flourished everywhere because his grip is geared for low/fast conditions, but his frame is set to allow a lot of spin, maneuverability.

You will be pleased to hear that I have a very similar thread on this very topic:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/big-3-racquet-specs-and-what-it-means-for-their-respective-games.664884/

As for the racquet lag in Sock's forehand, I will talk about that specifically as I don't consider what he does racquet lag in the conventional sense.

 

[Clay lover]

Before ww1 there was a Japanese player with a FH that used a western grip and looked like Fognini`s clone
another Japanese player had a FH between sock`s and courier in footage I watched while watching Japanese
tv on its past players documentary. They used lighter racquets and reached rankings up to 4th in the world then.
I cant find the footage of it but there are plenty of FHs that were used 80-100 years ago and in between
that resemble the great FHs of today, its just they either due to equipment of ability didn't make a splash
or the expensive air time technology in filming required that we have today etc.

Funnily enough Nishikori hasn't been able to go past 4th in the world and also never won a slam like his
historic countrymen and Japanese fear the number 4 as it sounds like "death" as well.
Enough to have many buildings with no 4th floor which puzzled ill I was enlightened by locals.

Always thought death and four were only homonyms in Chinese culture but now I stand enlightened. I hate the fourless culture in HK as it makes knowing the actual storeys annoying, didn't know it was prevalent in Japanese culture.

 

[Bender]

Always thought death and four were only homonyms in Chinese culture but now I stand enlightened. I hate the fourless culture in HK as it makes knowing the actual storeys annoying, didn't know it was prevalent in Japanese culture.

It's common in a lot of E Asian languages. It's the same in Korea although not as common because the use of Hanja (Chinese characters that have been borrowed for use in the Korean language) is on its way out especially with younger generations.

 

[racquetreligion]

Even the Japanese are growing out of these customs including writing proper Chinese characters
Korean Hangul on the other hand could be argued to be one of the most advanced alphabets ever devised
to be coming into full bloom now in modern times is commendable considering the strong Chinese influences.

A pity Koreans don't make their own quality racquets to challenge established brands as I really like
graphically attractive characters as used in Hangul even Russian Cyrillic and Arabic to name a few.
However Arabic racquets would use too much Silica and Russians probably radioactive Shungite.

 

[racquetreligion]

Rublev, Fognini, Berretini & Khachanov would have to be the simplest FHs in the top 20 atm in that order.
In contrast to the above Nadole, Thiem< Meds, Monfils, Zed & Gof the biggest Fh swings in the top 10
while Nadole the most variety vs the rest in that order.
Thiem is the most brutal hitter in the top 10 hence his unreliable results.
Fed, Stiffy and Agut due to their grips have similar mechanics and efficiency.

 

[DSH]

 

[sanister]

Federer’s forehand is a flat E grip

Djokovic’s forehand is 3/4 W.

I don’t see any issue here.

First off, let me say what a great thread. Made for fantastic reading. The only thing though is that I still believe Fed uses modified eastern, not a proper eastern. I was in fact recently watching his IW final with Thiem and noticed it multiple times. Do you have any pics you can share that show he is using a proper eastern and not modified eastern?