ATP or WTA-style forehand better for rec players?

Very interesting discussions and lots of different opinions on this matter. I guess I'll have to just try it out myself and see how it goes. But seeing that my forehand is my best shot I probably won't completely rebuild it. My serve is more in need of that...
 
People who say Recs can't hit an ATP FH is talking nonsense. Pros are like all most humans with 2 arms and 2 legs. With enough practice and dedication, you can develop it. It takes practice, practice, practice.

How bad do you want it?
Click to expand...

This. I'd add that IMHO alot of the tennis skill is about being able to do a skill well - not so much the basic mechanical parts. Most people can SHADOW an ATP forehand with some practice and an understanding of how it really works (how you lag into the slot)...But they can't hit the shot as well - cept on a perfect 'feed' kind of ball. That's because so much of tennis is timing, anticipation and feel.

Golf is a sport that's MUCH more technically demanding - but no one thinks that rec players can't swing LIKE the pros - they just don't do it as well. But a big part of the reason why this is so obvious is because the golf ball doesn't move at all. You don't need to anctipate where its going to land or move your feet to make sure you hit it at the right spot.

Basically once you get the hang of the mechanics to a modest extent its a matter of trying to implement them in actual play - and improving your tennis skills (anticipation, timing, and feel) so that it can be used effectively.

But here is the rub BOTH ATP and WTA style strokes have this problem. If you are hitting WTA properly you need a long swing - and this is a tough timing issue. You are also likely hitting a flatter (but not flat) ball - and again this takes alot of coordination and timing to do well. So while you can eventually do well with either - I feel that for a man trying to mimic the main style of the ATP is the better choice. I don't feel that one style or the other is really easier to master.

I feel like some people here believe tennis is some extremely techncial sport that comes down to mastering certain micromovements that mortals will never be able to master.. In my view its more about learning some basic technique and then practicing that technique over and over and over - in different situations - trying to hit the ball to different places - while preserving your mechanics.

Most people never make it there - but simply because they don't put in the hours you need.. not because non-mortals can never hope to hit like a pro.

Give a regular guy 10,000 hours of hitting with some basic mechanical understanding of proper swings and hit would hit very pro like. He probably woudn't win alot of touranments because he would lack the athleticism. But to the average observer he would LOOK just like a pro - even in slow motion..
 
Last edited:
All good points above, and add to it the fitness component...it's hard to hit a technically perfect swing an hour into a match with a tough opponent who's running you call over the court.
 
I still like a shortened WTA forehand on certain shots, like ROS's, against faster than expected or deeper balls, and also when I'm tired or just slow on the uptake.
I like the ATP forehand for easy power and spin when I'm fresh, I like the fact it turns my shoulder's with takeback two handed, and I like it's topspin with some pace so I can swing almost fully out, and keep the ball in.
Plenty of drawbacks to each, and of course, hard to tell WHEN to use which in what situation.
 
My coach answers many of my questions saying "it's timing" or "it's adjustments". I think he means what Guy was getting at. There's no secret move, you just have to hit a lot of different types of balls, in different situations, always trying to improve, get better contact, letting your body adjust.
 
stephan_58 said:
Very interesting discussions and lots of different opinions on this matter. I guess I'll have to just try it out myself and see how it goes. But seeing that my forehand is my best shot I probably won't completely rebuild it. My serve is more in need of that...
Click to expand...

Bolded is the crucial statement. Why rework the best part of your game when there are a million other things any rec player could focus on to improve?

I certainly don't agree with the sentiment that a recreational player is unable to develop a stroke similar in mechanics to a professional stroke. I just think the differences between the two strokes tend to get over-sold. My point is that completely changing your fh is a big undertaking and that the payoff is relatively modest. Which is fine if you're a young junior hoping to win a scholarship or make the pros someday or if your fh is a liability (in relation to the rest of your game) that needs help. But probably not worth it if you're trying to solve a problem that you don't have in the first place.
 
Cowboyardee said:
Bolded is the crucial statement. Why rework the best part of your game when there are a million other things any rec player could focus on to improve?

I certainly don't agree with the sentiment that a recreational player is unable to develop a stroke similar in mechanics to a professional stroke. I just think the differences between the two strokes tend to get over-sold. My point is that completely changing your fh is a big undertaking and that the payoff is relatively modest. Which is fine if you're a young junior hoping to win a scholarship or make the pros someday or if your fh is a liability (in relation to the rest of your game) that needs help. But probably not worth it if you're trying to solve a problem that you don't have in the first place.
Click to expand...

The main reason why I was thinking about it is that I believe that it's better to have 1 great weapon (my forehand is good but there's always room for improvement) with otherwise mediocre shots than a lot of decent shots with no weapon. But I do agree with you that it's probably too much work for me as a weekend hacker and not at all sure it will be worth it in the end. Especially after reading jdubbs's experience who tried the switch and regrets it.
 
LoboLaw1984 said:
Why don't you just not worry about this silly distinction and just work on your footwork or something.
Click to expand...

There are some pretty legit reasons Imo. Using me for an example, years ago before I paid attention to these issues, I had thought that I didn't have that nice big loop that many associate with good strokes, but didn't care too much since my Fh was pretty darned good. At times I had worked at getting that bigger loop behind (more wta), but it just never felt right. It tended to give me timing issues, and especially against bigger hitters as well as in doubles. After learning more about this, I realized my Fh was just more like the ATP....which was sort of nice so I didn't have to feel like it was lacking something. I could just focus on improving what I was already doing and clean it up a bit more.
 
LoboLaw1984 said:
Best post of the thread. This whole concept is ridiculous. Just learn the fundamentals and stop obsessing over nonsense.
Click to expand...

The concept is not the trivial nonsense you believe it to be. The OP is supposedly a 4.0 player. If this is the case, I would think that he has learned most, if not all, of the fundamentals already. He is looking to improve. Perhaps adopting more of an ATP-style FH might increase his potential.

I believe that the shorter takeback of the ATP-style makes it much easier to time the forward swing -- particularly in faster and deeper balls. This can possibly make his FH more consistent. He could very well gain greater access to power and spin as well. The ATP FH relies less on arm swing and more on body rotation (coiling & uncoiling).

LeeD said:
I still like a shortened WTA forehand on certain shots, like ROS's, against faster than expected or deeper balls, and also when I'm tired or just slow on the uptake...
Click to expand...

In what respects are your shortened WTA FH different from an ATP FH?
 
Shortened WTA forehand is direct straight takeback, one handed, with very little loop at the initiation of the swing forwards. Just like return of serves.
ATP FH is a loopy high rackethead takeback, needing slightly more time to get the forward swing done with, so sometimes late to deep or harder than normal hit balls.
 
Anyone try using WTA-style clothing with a ATP-style forehand?

I believe the WTA-style clothing may provide more lower body ventilation and overall freedom of movement, resulting in higher peak force and more sustained output with less degradation over long matches.
 
I believe that the shorter takeback of the ATP-style makes it much easier to time the forward swing -- particularly in faster and deeper balls. This can possibly make his FH more consistent. He could very well gain greater access to power and spin as well. The ATP FH relies less on arm swing and more on body rotation (coiling & uncoiling).
Click to expand...

This. It's not clear at all that the WTA forehand is that much easier to hit well. It's a longer swing - and the greater distance the racquet has to travel before it meets the ball can lead to things going wrong.

Guys around here like to think that the WTA forehand is like the 'easier' version - not sure that's true at all.. Its not easier - its just different.
 
Shortened WTA forehand is direct straight takeback, one handed, with very little loop at the initiation of the swing forwards. Just like return of serves.
Click to expand...

Not so sure the differences between WTA and ATP are all that clear all the time. The major difference I think is the 'flip' to create the slot position with the ATP forehand - rather then just forcibly laying back the wrist entirely. Fed lets the momentum of the foreward swing lay his wrist back. It's a subtle difference - but significant..

If we look at Fed's forehand return of serve - there is still a flip.

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


Now check Sharapova..longer swing and no flip..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bOdpQTA5Lg

Both men and women have the tip up to some extent - even on return of serve..
 
Last edited:
Random question: where would a forehand like Kimiko Date's fit in this spectrum? What bout McEnroe?

Likewise, by the criteria presented in the video, I don't know how most pre-open era forehands would be categorized. Would they fall into these distinctions at all?:confused:
 
^^^WTA. If not ATP - then WTA. But if you want more complicated the tennisspeed blogger guy has 3 or 4 types. I suppose technically these would be like type 5 and type 6.

Personally while I see the differences on video - and I get it. I think its a little overblown. Seems to me alot of guys have relaxed forearm and let the racquet lag back and use a shorter swing - but thats about it..

Guys like Tennisspeed make it sound like rocket science..

http://blog.tennisspeed.com/2011/12/roadmap-to-hall-of-fame-forehand-part-3.html

I do like how Macci explains it - much simpler.. You get into the pat the dog - with a relaxed forearm and then pull the racquet. Bam. I think its tad more complicated then that because you have to rotate your whole arm as you swing foreward (the so called WW). But its still better then this paralysis by analysis stuff..
 
Not so sure the differences between WTA and ATP are all that clear all the time. The major difference I think is the 'flip' to create the slot position with the ATP forehand - rather then just forcibly laying back the wrist entirely. Fed lets the momentum of the foreward swing lay his wrist back. It's a subtle difference - but significant..

If we look at Fed's forehand return of serve - there is still a flip.
Click to expand...

Return of serve is not a ground stroke, it's a "return of serve" and quiet different due to reaction time, completely different direction and spin. Federer chips a lot of returns a do a lot of players, it's not their ground shot. You might as well show Federers serve as an example of ATP volley style. Compare Federes FH and Sharapova FH preferably during a normal rally point and not whilst defending on the stretch. The difference is that of the "current ATP" and WTA style.

There was a time not long ago all players, male or female played with WTA style so calling it WTA is a bit misleading and adds a level of negativity to it as it's implying "do you want to play like a girl". Though the modern ATP is a nice shot and allows a lot of safety for huge power. The WTA will change, Serena uses a ATP style it will likely dominate over time time the mens game but likely take longer to become standard as it relies on core strength.
 
Isn't this like totally irrelevant for all rec players?

I am 4.0 and hit both, depending on the situation, since both provide pros and cons, but I don't think, that anybody under...whatever, 5.0 or so, can truly benefit from one of them.
 
Surion said:
Isn't this like totally irrelevant for all rec players?

I am 4.0 and hit both, depending on the situation, since both provide pros and cons, but I don't think, that anybody under...whatever, 5.0 or so, can truly benefit from one of them.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of using both, IMO it is better to stick with one Option. I agree that it doesn't really matter what you use, chardy has one of the best ATP FHs and he uses the "WTA style" (if we are talking the takeback, his finish is Standard WW of course) and many women use the ATP style successfully (stosur, kuznetsova, errani, henin).

at the highest male Level the ATP might provide a VERY SMALL Advantage because it takes less time but other than that it does not really matter.

however using an ATP FH is not that hard either. it can be learned, if it Comes naturally to you go ahead and use it, I just think that spending your court time working on other things will give you a better bang for the buck.
 
Return of serve is not a ground stroke, it's a "return of serve" and quiet different due to reaction time, completely different direction and spin. Federer chips a lot of returns a do a lot of players, it's not their ground shot. You might as well show Federers serve as an example of ATP volley style. Compare Federes FH and Sharapova FH preferably during a normal rally point and not whilst defending on the stretch. The difference is that of the "current ATP" and WTA style.
Click to expand...

Thanks for lecture. Wait no not really.

LeeD suggested that his WTA forehand looked like a ATP return of serve. If you actually looked at the video I provided you would see Fed return a serve on the forehand side - and notice that it has the hallmarks of his regular forehand - namely the fip and short backswing, and the racquet pointed up to some extent (smaller loop but still there)... Same with the Sharapova forehand return..

I know your local pro might teach the chip return - but in reality - especially on the forehand side pros generally use a modified version of their basic stroke - as the video evidence shows..
 
I think the key element of ATP forehand is how the racquet slides into the slot after the forward swing starts.. The ATP swing goes from pat the dog position to the slot - and the wrist extension angle increases dramatically - Fed seems to go to 90 or maybe more..

It's not really about a short swing - Genie's swing is short - but there is no flip. The question I have is why does the lag enable the short swing to generate more power then a short 'lag-free' swing like Genie's.

I'd like to know the physics of it..
 
To snap a whip, you don't need a long motion.
On tennis serves, the high hand, high elbow AFTER contact totaly shortens the followthru, but it helps with ball speed and fast swing.
It's something to do with loading and unloading, allowing the head of the racket to come thru past the hand, adding RHSpeed, without a need for fast hand speed.
 
Fed, Berdych are probably the best models I think. I feel this forum badly overcomplicates the forehand groundstroke and makes it sound like some kind of rocket science.. and that no one outside of a 6.5 can hit anything like them..
 
Only the people who can't hit an ATP forehand at rec level are proclaiming that it's not possible. Quite similar to fat people who can't lose weight/unable to get ripped who claim their genes is preventing them from achieving their goals.

With enough practice/hard work, it's possible.
 
dominikk1985 said:
I'm not a fan of using both, IMO it is better to stick with one Option. I agree that it doesn't really matter what you use, chardy has one of the best ATP FHs and he uses the "WTA style" (if we are talking the takeback, his finish is Standard WW of course) and many women use the ATP style successfully (stosur, kuznetsova, errani, henin).

at the highest male Level the ATP might provide a VERY SMALL Advantage because it takes less time but other than that it does not really matter.

however using an ATP FH is not that hard either. it can be learned, if it Comes naturally to you go ahead and use it, I just think that spending your court time working on other things will give you a better bang for the buck.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm going to disagree. I think there is a big advantage to the ATP because of the huge amount of power and torque you can get from it. For me, what was missing was a monster forehand I could really get behind.

Now, I am still learning it, and it kind of sucks, but in certain matches I've seen a great increase in power and winners I wasn't hitting before.

Now I just have to harness the power and get more consistent with it. But the "lag and snap" creates a lot more power on the forehand.
 
I think we might need both.....
ATP windup for groundies and slow incoming serves.
WTA, but short takeback, for return of medium fast serves, when caught on deep or harder hit balls, and against body shots.
 
jdubbs said:
Now I just have to harness the power and get more consistent with it. But the "lag and snap" creates a lot more power on the forehand.
Click to expand...

The bold above may be your problem in harnessing it. That may be consistent with how you perceive Macci, but I think you hit the nail on the head about what he and Gordon have not realized yet. They think the flip creates SSC that is immediately converted to power for the stroke, but the flip and drag only load the system so that it is ready when the power action takes place.

The lag is started with the flip for the atp and the flip is important to power later in the stroke....but not via a snap at that point. The flip sets the racket into the lag position to drag the racket with the head loaded with feel and force. Using this drag, you pull the butt cap to near the contact. At that point, the hand changes directions to pull more across the body, tightening the arc as it starts on what will be seen as part of the follow thru. The racket head, lagging the actions of the hand, will be powered to continue out to contact much like someone riding an innertube behind a turning boat. Just like the boat driver can control the tube riders pace and power, the hand can feel and control the racket head as it powers out to and across contact under acceleration. Make sense? :)
 
Last edited:
5263 said:
The bold above may be your problem in harnessing it. That may be consistent with how you perceive Macci, but I think you hit the nail on the head about what he and Gordon have not realized yet. They think the flip creates SSC that is immediately converted to power for the stroke, but the flip and drag only load the system so that it is ready when the power action takes place.

The lag is started with the flip for the atp and the flip is important to power later in the stroke....but not via a snap at that point. The flip sets the racket into the lag position to drag the racket with the head loaded with feel and force. Using this drag, you pull the butt cap to near the contact. At that point, the hand changes directions to pull more across the body, tightening the arc as it starts on what will be seen as part of the follow thru. The racket head, lagging the actions of the hand, will be powered to continue out to contact much like someone riding an innertube behind a turning boat. Just like the boat driver can control the tube riders pace and power, the hand can feel and control the racket head as it powers out to and across contact under acceleration. Make sense? :)
Click to expand...

No, I mean, you're likely correct, but what you have said is too technical for me with too many moving parts. But this is just how I take instruction, I need to be thinking about MAX maybe two things when i hit the ball, ideally one thing (like...hit the ball more out front).
All this talk about drag, hand changing directions, tighten the arc, power out and across contact under acceleration...its too much for me to really be able to put into action.

I looked at Macci's video, and the one thing I got from it was that the backswing was more to the side rather than back, so I'm going to try that next to see if I can shorten the swing and get more consistency.

Hopefully I'll get it soon.
 
jdubbs said:
No, I mean, you're likely correct, but what you have said is too technical for me with too many moving parts. But this is just how I take instruction, I need to be thinking about MAX maybe two things when i hit the ball, ideally one thing .
Click to expand...

YES, you are very correct here :) and thanks for being so polite with your response.
But you know how generally folks on here want to get down to the dirty details and scrutinize.

SO my two things would be, pull your hand close to contact, then pull up and across to your finish! Best to you
 
The bold above may be your problem in harnessing it. That may be consistent with how you perceive Macci, but I think you hit the nail on the head about what he and Gordon have not realized yet. They think the flip creates SSC that is immediately converted to power for the stroke, but the flip and drag only load the system so that it is ready when the power action takes place.
Click to expand...

I can see why Macci doesn't get it either. We know the flip forehands seem to be hit as hard as WTA style ones but with less swing length (elbow does not get to other side of body). But I do not understand why..

WTA forehands use the C shape kind of racquet head up - to racquet head down change in the backswing - so they should have some ISR in their swing as well..

So how does the flip add more power?
 
GuyClinch said:
I can see why Macci doesn't get it either. We know the flip forehands seem to be hit as hard as WTA style ones but with less swing length (elbow does not get to other side of body). But I do not understand why..

WTA forehands use the C shape kind of racquet head up - to racquet head down change in the backswing - so they should have some ISR in their swing as well..

So how does the flip add more power?
Click to expand...

Flip doesn't add power as 5263 explained above. The "flip" is simply dropping the racket head and hand into the slot in order to start forward movement. It does allow the head to lag the hand which is "loading" potential power but from there you have to have a good swing forward to contact and into the follow-thru to reap the potential of the loading. Also, to me "flip" is a horrible word to describe the process. I know Macci likes it but I think all you are really doing it letting the racket head drop and the wrist lay back a little as you transition from take back to forward movement. Flip makes it sound like you are jerking something or turning something over in a way that is less than smooth. To me, the change should be smooth with no sudden manipulations of the wrist. If you prep with the head up and take the racket back with the palm away and slightly down, the flip will happen naturally if you keep a loose wrist and try to hit topspin.
 
TennisCJC said:
Flip doesn't add power as 5263 explained above. The "flip" is simply dropping the racket head and hand into the slot in order to start forward movement. It does allow the head to lag the hand which is "loading" potential power but from there you have to have a good swing forward to contact and into the follow-thru to reap the potential of the loading. Also, to me "flip" is a horrible word to describe the process. I know Macci likes it but I think all you are really doing it letting the racket head drop and the wrist lay back a little as you transition from take back to forward movement. Flip makes it sound like you are jerking something or turning something over in a way that is less than smooth. To me, the change should be smooth with no sudden manipulations of the wrist. If you prep with the head up and take the racket back with the palm away and slightly down, the flip will happen naturally if you keep a loose wrist and try to hit topspin.
Click to expand...

Ditto this, especially the bold.

It so critical to establish the face angle and swing plane well before the contact point and keep that stable through contact. Flipping, jerking, etc would all seem to work against that. You do need that racquet lag and whipping action to get the head speed, but near contact I think the goal is to keep it smooth.
 
^ I do not have a problem with the "flip" terminology. However, I can see where the terminology/concept could work for some yet mislead others. I believe that concept was observed/developed by Dr Brian Gordon. The terminology may have come about from discussions between Gordon and Macci. Here is Yandell talking about this with respect to a 2-handed BH.

JohnYandell said:
The flip is the rotation of the hand arm and racket downward from the top of the backswing in the atp two-hander (bent straight version). The racket head goes from pointing slightly tip up (and also being outside of the hands) rapidly to the position for the start of the forward swing.

This is a term coined not by me but by Brian Gordon and Rick Macci to describe the action that naturally follows the atp backswing and the start of the forward swing with the pull.
Click to expand...
 
Flip doesn't add power as 5263 explained above. The "flip" is simply dropping the racket head and hand into the slot in order to start forward movement. It does allow the head to lag the hand which is "loading" potential power but from there you have to have a good swing forward to contact and into the follow-thru to reap the potential of the loading. Also, to me "flip" is a horrible word to describe the process. I know Macci likes it but I think all you are really doing it letting the racket head drop and the wrist lay back a little as you transition from take back to forward movement. Flip makes it sound like you are jerking something or turning something over in a way that is less than smooth. To me, the change should be smooth with no sudden manipulations of the wrist. If you prep with the head up and take the racket back with the palm away and slightly down, the flip will happen naturally if you keep a loose wrist and try to hit topspin.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. I agree with your ideas about the ATP forehand - you are letting the racquet drop into the slot as you swing forward. This is why it takes such a loose relaxed grip. Swing to stiff your racquet head doesn't drop enough and you don't get enough topspin and hit the ball into the net.

My point was that an WTA forehand simply lays back the wrist and loops the racquet around till they get into the same slot position. But the racquet is still laid back. So how does flipping into the slot position generate more power then just looping into the slot position...

Classic WTA style forehand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-qq9q4y6gk

Federer forehand (great for seeing the flip):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ImeQaAyFPc

The flip must somehow load the wrist and allow that energy to be sprung back into the ball - in a way that the WTA style doesn't really provide.. I also wonder if its possible that some players have elements of both styles in their strokes.

I just call it flip forehand because that change really IMHO is the signature of the ATP forehand. Both forehands feature upward racquet head prep - somewhat of a loop (much smaller on the men's as they don't need the loop to faciliate the drop as much) and have ISR to provide topspin. Both have laid back racquets and thus provide some extra leverage.
 
SystemicAnomaly said:
^ I do not have a problem with the "flip" terminology. However, I can see where the terminology/concept could work for some yet mislead others. I believe that concept was observed/developed by Dr Brian Gordon. The terminology may have come about from discussions between Gordon and Macci. Here is Yandell talking about this with respect to a 2-handed BH.
Click to expand...

There seems to be a conflict between those who insist on smoothness of the motion and those who, like Macci, think forehand is all about the violent pull.

The reason why "flip" is not inappropriate is because it communicates that the move is rapid. Per Yandel: "The racket head goes from pointing slightly tip up (and also being outside of the hands) rapidly to the position for the start of the forward swing."
 
Last edited:
GuyClinch said:
The flip must somehow load the wrist and allow that energy to be sprung back into the ball - in a way that the WTA style doesn't really provide.. I also wonder if its possible that some players have elements of both styles in their strokes.

I just call it flip forehand because that change really IMHO is the signature of the ATP forehand. Both forehands feature upward racquet head prep - somewhat of a loop (much smaller on the men's as they don't need the loop to faciliate the drop as much) and have ISR to provide topspin. Both have laid back racquets and thus provide some extra leverage.
Click to expand...

I agree. The flip loads the muscles and tendons with elastic energy, as if the arm was a rubber band. That's why the flip needs to be fast, rapid, and violent. The energy stored that way, gets released later in the swing.
 
Last edited:
wannabe good said:
That's why the flip needs to be fast, rapid,....... The energy stored that way, gets released later in the swing.
Click to expand...

I think you are mostly right here above as to how and why the flip needs to be quick. The flip seems to be the best known/found way to get to the loaded position in an instant!

This quick response system is very helpful to timing fast incoming balls that are often on the rise. It also lets you get the racket head loaded with the right tension for a very direct path to the contact. Yes, there is still some slight arc on the path to the contact, which will serve to maintain the loading/tension that was gained in the flip, but it is quite a direct at the same time, which is crucial to controlling contact with the speedy incoming ball. Unlike with the C path of the WTA, the ATP swing can speed up to time or adjust for the contact without upsetting critical balance of loading desired.

Last and not least, the loaded racket is ready for the hand's change of direction which will elicit a quick and strong accel of the racket into contact. For you that have driven the boat pulling the inner tube around the lake and swinging them out wide by turning the boat sharper in an instant, you likely know a bit on how this works, and how important it is to have the tube in just the right spot loaded with the right amount of tension before making the turn that swings them out. If you don't have the tension set up, then the tube won't react nearly as fast or aggressive as it swings out.

For those of you who have ridden the tube with a good driver, then you know how the racket head feels when the boat turns sharply to swing it out. :)
 
Last edited:
This quick response system is very helpful to timing fast incoming balls that are often on the rise. It also lets you get the racket head loaded with the right tension for a very direct path to the contact. Yes, there is still some slight arc on the path to the contact, which will serve to maintain the loading/tension that was gained in the flip, but it is quite a direct at the same time, which is crucial to controlling contact with the speedy incoming ball. Unlike with the C path of the WTA, the ATP swing can speed up to time or adjust for the contact without upsetting critical balance of loading desired.
Click to expand...

Seems legit. I will say there is some C path in alot of ATP style forehands though..

I been thinking about this and I see a continumum..

Most extreme flip..very little C.

Sock:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWqrVOW_-SE

Sock's racquet goes from not only being up - but facing in the wrong direction - to being in a slot like position on the pull. I think he has the most extreme flip in the world - and I don't believe his Jamming his wrist at the precise time to make this happen - its a legit flip (which should feel like letting go - and not forcing IMHO).

Decent Flip - some C:
The gold standard male forehand..

Fed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ImeQaAyFPc

Fed brings the racquet almost to butt cap pointing to ball - but the flip takes the racquet head below the ball and increases the wrist layback.. The position is not ENTIRELY different then Hewitt there is at least a small C..


Modest Flip - Some C

Teaching Pro: Lock and Roll

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMNtq393tvo

One of my favorite no pro forehands - I think its an excellent model for men. Its almost a best of both worlds kinda swing..

Almost no flip (but some bend back) - pretty big C:

Del Portro.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGodD1fMfHY


Wrist Locked - no Flip/additional Layback - large C - WTA style:

Hewitt:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-qq9q4y6gk

I know tennisspeed and maybe others view ATP forehand as some entirely different breed - but I have looked at them - and I don't agree. Its more of a tweak of the WTA style - relaxing the forearm and hand so that it drops into the slot on the foreward swing and letting that ssc work for you..
 
GuyClinch said:
Seems legit. I will say there is some C path in alot of ATP style forehands though..

I know tennisspeed and maybe others view ATP forehand as some entirely different breed - but I have looked at them - and I don't agree. Its more of a tweak of the WTA style - relaxing the forearm and hand so that it drops into the slot on the foreward swing and letting that ssc work for you..
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with your point. Any of these categories, whether it be double bend vs straight arm, or atp wta are pretty much what there "namers" say they are, but at the same time, there is overlap on issues and great variety in what players do when they need to in different situations.

Even though I tend to reject putting players in a box as this tends to do, I also see some good in having ways to break it down.
 
So this concept has already devolved into "WTA forehand = hit like a girl" vs "ATP forehand = hit like a man". That is essentially what is going on in this discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cg.tennis
Is Johanna Konta's Forehand ATP Style or WTA Style?
2
Replies
92
Views
15K
Daniel Andrade
D
J
practicing ATP forehand
Replies
1
Views
1K
brianmch
B
Curious
Embracing WTA forehand
3 4 5
Replies
244
Views
13K
Curious
Curious
T
Is Nadal the only player with an 'ATP-style' two-handed backhand?
Replies
10
Views
3K
LoboLaw1984
L
louis netman
Beginning Junior and Beginning Rec Players: ATP Style FH?
Replies
4
Views
444
johnmccabe
johnmccabe
Back
Top