I know I watch the ball before impact on returns, volleys, and etc. But in my several dozen years playing tennis I don't ever recall actually seeing the ball on impact with the strings. Do you see the balling hitting the string bed ? Even when I'm hitting a ground stroke on the forehand with ball out in front of me on a bright sunny day.
Do you actually see the ball on impact?
- Thread starter Dso
- Start date
D
Deleted member 23235
Guest
i know i'm watching the contact properly (keeping my head still, etc...) if i see a yellow blur... i don't actually ever see the ball hit the strings...
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
The point actually isn't whether or not you see the ball hit the strings [likely you can't since it lasts for mere milliseconds]: the point is that if you are keeping your head still and focusing on contact, you aren't lifting your head up to see where you're going to hit the ball and you avoid the errors associated. The same concept is taught in golf: too many golfers lift their head [the one on their shoulders] prematurely which causes the other head [the one on the club] to pull up slightly and you get the "ground ball" shot.
Chas Tennis
G.O.A.T.
Take a video, with camera looking over the ball at impact, that shows your eyes and you might see what you are doing.
Video Recording Frame Rates. An object at 100 MPH or 1760"/sec travels
1760"/sec X 1/30 sec = 59"
in the time between frames at 30 fps. A 50 MPH incoming groundstroke ball travels about 30" between frames with a recording rate of 30 fps.
High speed video is much more accurate:
1760"/sec X 1/240 sec = 7"
Example video
Video Recording Frame Rates. An object at 100 MPH or 1760"/sec travels
1760"/sec X 1/30 sec = 59"
in the time between frames at 30 fps. A 50 MPH incoming groundstroke ball travels about 30" between frames with a recording rate of 30 fps.
High speed video is much more accurate:
1760"/sec X 1/240 sec = 7"
Example video
Last edited:
Haha. Yes. But I wasn't asking that. Just what people see.
fuzz nation
G.O.A.T.
From what I've read, a ball bouncing off either the strings or the court is an event that's too brief for the human eye to record. I also see a blur when I try my best to watch the ball hit my strings - it's a blur for me just before and just after contact. I suppose I'm trying to read the ball's line of travel instead of actually seeing the ball on my strings at contact. Catch the blur, I guess.
That same blur is what makes trouble for us when trying to call a ball that looks like it landed just barely out. But because it lands and rolls a partial revolution before popping up off the court, the blur is typically moving away from a spot that looks like "just out". That blur is usually easier to read (align?) against the contact point on the court compared to the incoming blur, so some balls that are called "just out" are actually "just in".
That same blur is what makes trouble for us when trying to call a ball that looks like it landed just barely out. But because it lands and rolls a partial revolution before popping up off the court, the blur is typically moving away from a spot that looks like "just out". That blur is usually easier to read (align?) against the contact point on the court compared to the incoming blur, so some balls that are called "just out" are actually "just in".
Kalin
Legend
I think they did some experiments and it's pretty much impossible to see the actual contact. The brain continuously 'calculates' the movement of the ball and what the eyes/brain 'see' is, in fact, the place where the ball was a very short moment ago. Or something along these lines 
I'm assuming the sudden change of direction confuses the brain and it's unable to fix the exact spot where contact occurs.
Having said all that, every time I really concentrate on trying to see the moment of contact my ball striking improves tremendously.
I'm assuming the sudden change of direction confuses the brain and it's unable to fix the exact spot where contact occurs.
Having said all that, every time I really concentrate on trying to see the moment of contact my ball striking improves tremendously.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
I don't believe that Roger really sees the ball contact the stringbed. He may have great eyesight and excellent visual skills and may see more than most but I seriously doubt that he sees the ball embedded in the stringbed or even touching the strings except for some extremely rare situations. He probably sees what many of us have seen -- a yellowish blur that is close to the vivinity of the racket but not actually on the stringbed.
However, is the ball is moving very slowly (a few MPH?) and the racket is also moving slowly, we can actually see the ball touch the strings. But this happens very rarely in a match. Not going to see it on normal shots. Not even going to see it on the serve. For the serve, the ball is moving very slowly but the racket ismoving too fast for the eyes to keep up. Once instant your see the ball (toss) and the next instant, the ball is gone. I've yet ot see the ball on the strings for a serve.
Read "Watch The Ball Trajectory!" and learn what elite players see and need to see. And that is exactly how I observe the ball.
Free download at: http://watchtheballtrajectory.jouwweb.nl/downloads-1
Free download at: http://watchtheballtrajectory.jouwweb.nl/downloads-1
The YouTube clip of Djokovic is exactly illustrating the Game Action. And RF and RN do exactly the same. It looks like they are actually looking at the ball at contact. They don't. With their peripherial vision they let the ball come to the point where they constructed the intersection point of the latent outgoing ball trajectory.
zalive
Hall of Fame
There may be some differences between players' ability, though. Not sure if it applies to tennis as well, but I know some tennis table players who told me they assess spin on ball by watching how fast printed marks revolve. I cannot see that even when I try my best, all I see is blur.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
Pretty sure the human eye refreshes about 23 Frames per second. So if a ball traveling 50 mph moves 30" in a 30 FPS video, it's pretty unlikely the human eye will catch the frame of contact.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
... constructed the intersection point of the latent outgoing ball trajectory??? Sound like you are trying too hard.
Novak does not (usually) do the same thing that Roger & Rafa do. Shortly after he starts his forward swing, Roger turns his head and fixes his eyes on the expected contact point. He keeps his head still and his gaze on that contact point for the during of the contact phase and most of his follow-thu. Rafa adopted Roger's gaze technique after a few years on the tour. Rafa doesn't appear to do this every time but, I believe, he does it most of the time.
Novak does not seem to be consistent in his gaze technique at all. Once in a while, he does something similar to Roger's gaze technique but, quite often, he does not. In the video above, Novak appears to track the ball as he starts his forward swing. Unlike Roger however, his gaze does not jump to the expected contact point. His eye never get to the CP at all in this video. Also, unlike Roger, Novak is moving his head during the contact phase. His eyes and head rotate back forward before he even makes contact. I do not recommended this gaze sequence for the average player. Even most advanced players might be better off with something similar to Federer's head/gaze technique.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
I think I was confusing the FPS that films were set at in the old days because that's where everything smoothed out nicely.
Nonetheless the limitations in the human eye frame rate perception will affect your ability to see a moving ball.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
I mostly just close my eyes and pray as I swing forward.
