Controlling the contact height on groundstrokes
- Thread starter Curious
- Start date
ballmachineguy
Hall of Fame
Your opponent’s level will determine contact height as much as the ball striker’s level. If you are hitting with a hack, all sorts of balls will come your way. Watch pro tennis, they exchange the same shots over and over for the most part.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
That’s true. I was thinking a rec player does not seem to worry much about trying to have similar contact heights by adjusting movement to the ball and in a way they just react and accept whatever height it is. In other words they prefer to adjust their swings instead of trying to control the contact height themselves actively.
Last edited:
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
Reading and predicting the ball trajectory. Then move to intercept the trajectory at preferred spot. It's already hard enough calculation, then add in the wind and different court surfaces. After mastering the basics and fundamentals, it's the algorithm in the brain that separates excellent vs very good players. Finding the ideal contact is a big chunk of that. Having said that, gotta stay realistic about it. Even the goat himself is known for hitting shots in Spiderman pose.
footwork & ball anticipation
mindset should be, "move my strikezone to the ball" vs. "wait for ball to go into my strikezone"
That's out of a high player's control. There's no time to get into position to keep a fixed window of contact height. Can barely get to the ball laterally as it is. A high level player is comfortable making adjustments for varying contact points (height and spacing). There is only time to decide to take the ball on-the-rise or on the way down.
Unless you're practicing with a ball feeder machine or exclusively backing up to take the ball on the way down, there's no time for that.
I think they prioritize court position and recovery.
Unless you're practicing with a ball feeder machine or exclusively backing up to take the ball on the way down, there's no time for that.
I think they prioritize court position and recovery.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Well, you have the option to meet/intercept the ball at different spots unless you’re under pressure, no? I thought post #6 above explained it perfectly well.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin..."
Of course you'll want to make it as consistent as possible but adjusting is part of the game
I'll say my weakness is consistency but my strength is the adjusting. Wonder if other players view themselves on that same spectrum
MyFearHand
Professional
I would say this is only somewhat true. I think low level players and high level players are at the extremes for variation in contact height. Low level players have a high variance in contact height because they recognize the ball late, they have poor footwork, their technique is poor and their opponents tend to accidentally put the ball in inconsistent locations.
High level players deal with variation in contact height because their opponents are pushing them into uncomfortable positions. They adapt their swings to the balls they are given.
It’s complicated to teach people tennis. The reality is that good players adapt well and immediately to the situation at hand. They don’t hit the same forehand over and over in actual match play. But if you go out as a coach and explain this to a beginner they take this as carte blanche to hit the ball however they want. That’s not what the pros do, their forehands all look somewhat similar. But they adjust backswing, contact height, swing finish, what their body does as they hit the ball.
So coaches tell a white lie (that they may not even know is untrue) that you try to hit the same forehand on every shot. And you just move so you’re in the correct position to hit it.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Adjusting the feet vs adjusting the swing.
badmice2
Professional
why must it be one or the other? It’s both.Adjusting the feet vs adjusting the swing.
Pros prep immediately after they anticipate the stroke they need to hit…as early as the ball leaving their opponent’s racket if they read the play - more often then not they’re prepped before the ball crosses the net.
It helps that most pros utilize hitting pattern rather than trying to change directions whether they have access to the shots or not. Most follow the directional principle, which takes some guess work out of the prep work.
Once racket is prepped, they spend the rest of their time looking for spacing and anticipate when to initiate their swing - of which most of the time is around when the ball hits the ground on their side.
it’s hard to have a discussion solely on the basis of contact height, because contact (point) is almost always a mix of height and spacing.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
If you are on offense off a short ball, you often have to decide whether to take the ball as early as possible to rob the opponent of time or if you want to wait for an optimal ball height to hit a solid shot - mostly the pros will hit the ball on the rise in either case. In many cases, they even jump and hit the ball at shoulder height to get more margin over the net and hit it as flat/hard as possible.
If you are on defense, you just try to hit whatever shot you can based on what little time you have to get to the ball and you can’t choose your contact height - you might even have to hit a squash-type shot instead of an usual tennis shot.
If you are hitting a neutral ball, you might keep your contact point more consistent at a height that feels optimal to execute well. Again offensive players prefer to hit at this height with the ball on the rise while others might hit the ball when it drops to their preferred height.
Pros in general are more comfortable with hitting offensive shots at higher contact points than rec players and so, many of them will choose the contact height that hurries their opponent while giving the player a reasonable margin to execute the shot successfully. Pros of course anticipate the ball very well and can judge much earlier where they need to be to hit the shot they want.
If you are on defense, you just try to hit whatever shot you can based on what little time you have to get to the ball and you can’t choose your contact height - you might even have to hit a squash-type shot instead of an usual tennis shot.
If you are hitting a neutral ball, you might keep your contact point more consistent at a height that feels optimal to execute well. Again offensive players prefer to hit at this height with the ball on the rise while others might hit the ball when it drops to their preferred height.
Pros in general are more comfortable with hitting offensive shots at higher contact points than rec players and so, many of them will choose the contact height that hurries their opponent while giving the player a reasonable margin to execute the shot successfully. Pros of course anticipate the ball very well and can judge much earlier where they need to be to hit the shot they want.
Last edited:
zill
Legend
Curious
G.O.A.T.
zill
Legend
Not yet...on track though.No.
I like hitting it sometimes.
on all of those excamples you had more than enough time to:
1. step forward and take on the rise
2. step back, and take on the descent
so maybe you didn't move because you weren't sure where it was going to bounce? or you're conserving energy? or just warming up? etc...
i can see not taking on the rise, as that can be uncomfortable if you're not used to doing it (feels "rushed" in the beginning)
whhen i practice i fight to make contact between shoulder (ideal) and waist... but i have more than enough opporutnites to "practice" out of my strikezone shots (mainlly because my opponent is too good/my footwork not good enough), but in general i'm fighting for "ideal"...
side note, head high balls on the fh side, while not ideal for xfer'ing max energy, does let me hit a fh inside out with fade (side spin that spins to my right - i'm a righty, so imo not terrible if you're making contact at head height. on the fh side.)
You should try to do both and compromise.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Two interesting recent points about contact point.
First was listening to some of the coaching for Alcz during the last few matches, where are one point Alcaraz was saying the ball isn't coming up where he wants and Ferrero essentially telling him to take the ball where he needs to (which was earlier for pressure).
The second was Roddick's video talking about Nadal and how armchair pundits keep saying just to take the ball earlier to counteract Nadal's spin and weight of ball, but how that isn't always a solution.
So as far as contact point for us mere rec mortals, of course we have a preference for contact point in terms of height, and we position ourselves for it. We practice to learn to take balls early or later to compensate for time and positions though. But to your question or thoughts, I think higher level players use variety in contact as part of tactics, or are better at handling the variety, where lower players lack experience with positioning and have to deal with more balls just where they end up when they get there.
First was listening to some of the coaching for Alcz during the last few matches, where are one point Alcaraz was saying the ball isn't coming up where he wants and Ferrero essentially telling him to take the ball where he needs to (which was earlier for pressure).
The second was Roddick's video talking about Nadal and how armchair pundits keep saying just to take the ball earlier to counteract Nadal's spin and weight of ball, but how that isn't always a solution.
So as far as contact point for us mere rec mortals, of course we have a preference for contact point in terms of height, and we position ourselves for it. We practice to learn to take balls early or later to compensate for time and positions though. But to your question or thoughts, I think higher level players use variety in contact as part of tactics, or are better at handling the variety, where lower players lack experience with positioning and have to deal with more balls just where they end up when they get there.
but every higher level player, was once a lower level player... and how they got there, was through intention..
agree that it's easier said than done to "take everything on the rise"... especially when dealing with nadal like spin (or whatever that means for one's level)... but still need to try, to learn the skill (part of which is being able to choose the right ball to do it on).
Dragy
Legend
I would say, it’s reasonable to think about where to take balls on the full-match length when you face consistently-uncomfortable heights: like playing a moonballer, or opposite, a slicer… so you can pick the tendency and change your positioning and movement to get more balls at acceptable heights.
In a meantime, it’s absolutely crucial to have ability to efficiently play balls of different heights on ball-by-ball basis. Particularly the FH side, where you can efficiently and with intent play balls all the way from knee height to head height, and decently neutralize it from the shoelaces and even above the head…
Last edited:
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
I naturally prefer moving forward to hit on the rise. due to the lack of court hour and some basics, my contact point varies a lot, still. but when I watch D1 player from close distance at court level, their CP definitely varies more than I imagined, largely because opponents making things difficult.
Lately I'm learning to play far behind the baseline to find more comfortable CP. this developing process is probably the opposite of how it should be. here is my question. do people generally learn to deal with different CP first at low-intermediate level and then reduce the variance as they move up over the years? or good players generally don't rush into hit on the rise until they have very good CP playing from back?
i play back by default too... then look for balls to move up to...
when a beginner learns, they are fed balls perfectly in their strike zone... but as they start playing more dynamic points, they will have to "improvise" as their anticipation, footwork, etc... are not good... but the goals is the reduce making contact, outside of the contact zone...
over time i think one's contact zone gets bigger (ie. i can comfortably hit fh's abofe my head, and below my knees), but i still am striving to keep it in the "sweet spot" of my contact zone (e.g. between waist and shoulder), but my opponents always are trying to do the opposite...
hititng on the rise is def an advanced skill.
Dragy
Legend
At some point (after reading a lot of 2015 tt) I was hugging the baseline and rushing to hit everything as if it was going to explode after the peak…
Then I learned to wait for the ball and hit on descend more. Notice - I have been playing on clay a lot, so many shots peaked head high. I really have enjoyed hard court bounces much more.
Now I do both and am pretty decent in recognizing and acting (preparing, stepping, swinging) accordingly. I’m happy to hit chest-height ball if I have time to set up. I can do things with knee-height ball - it goes low over the net very naturally with moderate arc, good for angles from inside; from back at the baseline more lift required to put it deep.
I’m not fond of hitting balls on the steep rise, even if it’s belly height. But sometimes have to. Other times, I fall back to either play it chest-height as it falls, or even from farther back - drive it from more neutral stance and belly-height.
Then I learned to wait for the ball and hit on descend more. Notice - I have been playing on clay a lot, so many shots peaked head high. I really have enjoyed hard court bounces much more.
Now I do both and am pretty decent in recognizing and acting (preparing, stepping, swinging) accordingly. I’m happy to hit chest-height ball if I have time to set up. I can do things with knee-height ball - it goes low over the net very naturally with moderate arc, good for angles from inside; from back at the baseline more lift required to put it deep.
I’m not fond of hitting balls on the steep rise, even if it’s belly height. But sometimes have to. Other times, I fall back to either play it chest-height as it falls, or even from farther back - drive it from more neutral stance and belly-height.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Fell in that trap as well, and probably took me longer than it should to realize it, and just how to position better. lol.
badmice2
Professional
time and space.
If you have time to create space, you should move your feet to find the contact you want.
When you dont have it, you will have to decide what you're going to compromise...make more space to gain time for the contact? or time the spacing for some specific contact?
If you have time to create space, you should move your feet to find the contact you want.
When you dont have it, you will have to decide what you're going to compromise...make more space to gain time for the contact? or time the spacing for some specific contact?
Last edited:
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
A great Canadian coach even merged them together. Time and space are somewhat tradable.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
While constructing a point you are usually trying to take time away from an opponent or to create space on the court into which you can hit a forcing/winning shot later. If you are trying to take time away, you will likely hit the ball early and meet the ball at whatever contact height you can execute early. If you are trying to create open space, you might need to be more accurate with your shot to put it in the right target near the lines/net and here you might worry about waiting for the right contact height to execute precisely.
badmice2
Professional
this is your goal by working your own time and space to deliver the shot.
badmice2
Professional
agreed. the variable is time and space when we speak of contact point, contact height.
ballmachineguy
Hall of Fame
If you are going to hit like you do in the video, you better move forward or back to get it in your strike zone.
In the picture below, your max coil should be about where your shoulders are at the contact point seen here. In other words, start more open with high balls. Any tennis stroke accelerates from the point the racquet head starts at the ball to the contact point and sometime after contact starts to slow down. If you start from your normal coil point, you will be decelerating by contact on a head high or higher ball. As a general rule, if your hand moves “24 inches to contact on a normal ball, you need to start your hand to where it will travel ~24” to a high ball. Or, as reasonably close to that as you can get. Starting more open will be a necessity.
Last edited:
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, my coach used to say, it should be at least semi open in that situation.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Important video. When I do consistency drills with players that can sustain it for 50-100 shots at a time, the miss always comes when a shot is hit right at the player as we all get lazy with footwork when we think we don’t have to move much. Same with the most effective returns being the ones hit right at the server and it is better than hitting into corners (unless you hit a clean winner) to get a short ball back or even to force an error. This is particularly true at lower levels where players don’t know how to recover quickly with proper footwork after their serve and also sometimes don’t get into an alert stance quickly with both hands on their racquet.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Made me think about something else I probably heard in one of the videos. I guess body serve is good but if it’s fast enough, right? Make the opponent move to hit is the tip I heard. Now compare fastish serves to the strike zones of the opponent vs slower ones with an annoying spin to the corners. I believe the latter is harder to deal with.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I think it depends on the player. Some players like ‘width’ or more space to extend their arms on the return - usually true for slicers and those who like to hit short angled returns and use the full width of the court. With them, body serves are particularly effective and you may find that body serves to one side (FH or BH) are even more effective. Others are not good at taking one or two steps to return and here serving closer to the lines might be effective.
I would say that a good first serve that has good pace and spin can be effective whatever the location with obviously targets near the lines leading to more service winners. On second serves, body serves are generally under-utilized as too many players serve only to the BH wing. Many returners are used to BH returns and can slice effectively when given width, but are too slow to get out the way when jammed. Also putting more spin on a second serve than the returner is anticipating can lead to errors and short balls. So, even serving to the same target, it is good to vary the spin level. In doubles, body serves invariably result in a return to the net opponent who can put it away.
I agree if there is time, move to a better contact point. But I think its low on the priority list because of the many reasons mentioned. I think what is more important is to recognize the difference in contact points and develop different swing adjustments to hit them effectively. Even for a learning rec player because having enough time is dictated by your opponent, and later at intermediate levels you will probably no long have that luxury of time. Then it was a lot of time wasted focusing on something you won't get to execute often and constantly forced to hit uncomfortable never practiced before shots.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Hard to improve in something without awareness of the need and practice. Adjusting swings all the time can make a rec player’s already lazy feet even lazier.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Unless there is a specific technique issue identified by my coach I’m trying to correct, I find it better to have outcome oriented practices for different shots or styles of play - focus on hitting winners, hitting harder to different targets, consistency/not missing, accuracy or hitting to smaller targets, hitting on the move etc. Then you can also measure if you are getting better with metrics from the drills over time. Generally you want to hit harder than you will in matches and correct whatever prevents you from having control/accuracy at that pace.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Sure. Nice outcome oriented approach. I tend to dissect and examine elements. In this case it’s the contact height and how it could be improved. First awareness, then move the feet accordingly. You might say, well, you need to move feet anyway.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I guess I don’t fully understand how your practice method works when you post that you will focus on one element in your next practice. Let’s say you will keep your contact height constant on your FH in your next practice - but what are you trying to achieve with each shot? Hit it anywhere in the court or one side of the court at whatever pace? What is a successful shot and what is not when you hit all of them at one contact height? And then what do you learn from it or improve?
In my case, let’s say I set up cone targets in one deep corner of the court in a small zone and I am trying to blast FHs at close to my full swing speed at my target zone. I will make some and miss some. On each miss, I will try to self-diagnose what went wrong or what is going right. Maybe I’ll notice that when I keep the contact point at a certain height it is easier for me to hit my target while hitting hard. So, as the drill progresses, I will try to keep at that contact point and see if I am very successful. Then I might start hitting slightly earlier (higher height) and see if I can make other swing/footwork adjustments to still hit my target. If I succeed, that is a good practice as I’ve spent a couple of hours executing at higher pace than match normal at different contact heights and now I have more options available for my matches in terms of what is my comfort zone.
Last edited:
Dragy
Legend
The problem is, for me, if you focus on playing at some optimal height exclusively and don’t get comfortable with different heights, don’t expand your strike zone enough, you get vulnerable:
- not every spot/distance in court will favor same height of contact
- good opponent will test how you play against various heights and seek for weaknesses to expose
I promise, if you cannot play chest+ high balls decently, I’ll be able to get at least every third ball up there, which you will be able to counter only by risky on-the-rise plays, or falling deep back.
Same for low balls, diet of all skidding slices and low drives.
Should you be moving vertically to get better height for your shot? Absolutely, but in my opinion, it’s far from one optimal strikezone.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
My goal would be to move better so that most of my unforced groundstroke heights are in an ‘optimal’ range so that I have a better chance of hitting the ball cleanly and achieving the intended result.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Which is what on each shot? I’ve seen some videos of your practices in the past (a while ago I admit) focused on technique elements and most shots go into the middle of the court - what I would call a No-Hit zone. When I saw videos of a couple of matches, you hit a lot into the No-hit zone exactly similar to how you practice.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
@socallefty @Dragy
My point in this thread was really as simple as this. Apparently not that simple for you, guys.
My point in this thread was really as simple as this. Apparently not that simple for you, guys.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Because it depends on how offensive or defensive you want to play in a match to beat your opponent. If I play someone with no weapons and worse shot tolerance than me, I’m going to have a ‘consistency rally’ mentality and execute at my preferred contact height more often than not. If I play a better player who is controlling point patterns, there is greater urgency to find solutions including being more early on shots to take away time. The contact height is a means to an end and never an end by itself.
Similar threads
