Federer-the greatest pusher of all time !!!

[FiReFTW]

a model example of how the "Federer forehand" could look like when someone uses muscles, not physics

Your problem is you can't accept the fact that you can't have physics aka inertia without any power (derived from muscles), it doesn't just start out of thin air.

How much muscles and where is another matter, but you can't have anything your claiming without muscles.

jch's forehand looks much different from federer's forehand, looking at jch forehand you see a very limp arm, completely limp and basically just throwing the limp arm in the contact point.

On Federer's forehand you can see he is relaxed, holds the racquet loose and fluid, but yet has a more stable base and stable stroke (aka muscling it more than simply having an arm like a rope swinging the racquet). Specially later when he gets tougher balls.

You might very well have the maximum racquet speed potential by having a completely limp arm like jch, but at the expense of harder to hit clean shots and also harder to control and aim for spots, EVEN on medium difficulty shots, yet alone in a match situation where the ball is flying all over different directions with different spins and paths and catching u off guard or late or whatever, but I guess if jch would play alot of actual matches instead of casual hitting the ball around he would realize that.

Everyone watching these two videos can see the difference between a completely limp arm of jch and a stable more controlled arm of Federer.

Its the same if someone would say to have a limp arm and grip on a backhand slice, sure you would get the maximum possible RPM spinrate, but timing it and hitting it cleanly is another story, even on medium shots, yet alone in a match against extremely difficult shots.

 

[jch]

@jch claims ur wrist and everything should be completely limp and you shouldn't be using any muscles at all (which is funny because if you didn't then you couldn't even start the swing and ur racquet would also fall from ur hand), and then @Gregory Diamond claims the complete opposite of that, I wonder if they are both the same person and trying to troll this forum or maybe they really are 2 different people.

The source of your arrogance is your ignorance, I'm afraid. You do not understand what you are talking about.

I didn't write a post here in the last 10 years because of people like you. It was a great idea and I will resurrect it shortly.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

@jch claims ur wrist and everything should be completely limp and you shouldn't be using any muscles at all (which is funny because if you didn't then you couldn't even start the swing and ur racquet would also fall from ur hand), and then @Gregory Diamond claims the complete opposite of that, I wonder if they are both the same person and trying to troll this forum or maybe they really are 2 different people.

It is how my technique looks like. I play here with actual Champion of Poland in +50 category.

 

[jch]

jch's forehand looks much different from federer's forehand, looking at jch forehand you see a very limp arm, completely limp and basically just throwing the limp arm in the contact point.

On Federer's forehand you can see he is relaxed, holds the racquet loose and fluid, but yet has a more stable base and stable stroke (aka muscling it more than simply having an arm like a rope swinging the racquet). Specially later when he gets tougher balls.

Rofl. You uncritically compare the stroke used for a year by an old guy from nowhere, with the technique used for over a dozen years, several hours a day, by the best player in the history of the game.

You have no idea, what you are talking about. Man, seriously: wake up.

And yes, inertial forehands are more inertial than Federer forehands. That's the goal, master: go further than your GOD. What's important, both techniques use the same physical principles. Your forehand has nothing in common with Federer forehand, it's more similar to Dimitrov naive version of this technique.

You might very well have the maximum racquet speed potential by having a completely limp arm like jch, but at the expense of harder to hit clean shots and also harder to control and aim for spots, EVEN on medium difficulty shots, yet alone in a match situation where the ball is flying all over different directions with different spins and paths and catching u off guard or late or whatever, but I guess if jch would play alot of actual matches instead of casual hitting the ball around he would realize that.

You are an expert on things you have no right to know anything about. Go back on the court, practice your balance, there is a lot of work to do. BTW, you will not improve your balance significantly, at your technique it is not possible. Good luck. Don't forget to present your videos.

Its the same if someone would say to have a limp arm and grip on a backhand slice, sure you would get the maximum possible RPM spinrate, but timing it and hitting it cleanly is another story, even on medium shots, yet alone in a match against extremely difficult shots.

Funny, I use the same principles in all my strokes - and you "magically" forgot to attack them.

You here are more amazing than I thought.

 

[jch]

It is how my technique looks like. I play here with actual Champion of Poland in +50 category.

FiReFTW, use his forehand technique, please. It was verified in actual matches, rofl.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

FiReFTW, use his forehand technique, please. It was verified in actual matches, rofl.

I like my technique because I like to win. You should teach my opponents inertial tennis so that they could win sometimes. It is really boring to win doing almost nothing.

 

[Curious]

Deleted

 

[Curious]

@jch , I would like to apologise for my antagonistic posts about you. I have promised myself quite a few times actually not to do this but you know.... You're my brother.

 

[jch]

@jch , I would like to apologise for my antagonistic posts about you. I have promised myself quite a few times actually not to do this but you know.... You're my brother.

I reject your apologies. The world is huge, we do not have to share it. Have fun, good luck.

I will make a thread about inertial tennis, to give a source of knowledge for interested players. Then admins will remove all links and it will be useless. Not my problem.

I will certainly no longer try to participate in any technical discussions here.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

Tennis is really simple. You have to push(what looks like hitting is just fast pushing) the ball in the direction where you want it to go and at the same time you should roll the ball. To control the ball you should move the racket so that the strings didnt rotate in the horizontal plane from the moment just before collision to the moment some time after collision. At the same time you should force the racket to go up. When you try to throw the racket at the ball the head of the racket tries to move faster than the handle and there is rotation of the racket in the hirizontal plane. Not only it shortens time the ball is pushed in the right direction but it is the main reason of anglular errors . As I wrote it I thought that I was really wise. I am proud of myself and whatever you`ll say cant change it. I like to like myself.

 

[Curious]

I reject your apologies. The world is huge, we do not have to share it. Have fun, good luck.

No worries. I felt bad about interacting with you this way and I wanted to let you know. That's all.

 

[Chas Tennis]

OP's topic

Overhead view of the forehand of Frank Salazar's forehand.

Federer forehand from above.

Toly composite video of Federer forehand. Remember that if objects move across of up and down in the frame the video can be more accurate but if an object moves toward or away from the camera accuracy is lost. (Think of a bullet going straight up or down in the frame and then across the frame. Now think of the bullet coming directly toward the camera, no movement in frame it gets bigger....)

Serena Williams forehand stop on 53 and 1:00 displays of wrist and racket angle.

Will Hamilton forehand from above camera view.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

OP's topic

Overhead view of the forehand of Frank Salazar's forehand.

OP's topic

Overhead view of the forehand of Frank Salazar's forehand.

We see that from the moment when tha ball is maximally deformed in the strings(when ball pushes hard on the racket) and some time after it left the strings the speed of the head quickly decreases to about 30. Almost the same speed as the handle. During the same time the speed of the handle decreases only slightly. It means that player opposed the presure pushing the handle forward minimizing loss of speed. We see that the speed of the head decreases abruptly even when the ball already left the strings. It means that during that period something pulled the head back. There is no loss of speed without a force. The ball is not on the strings so the ball is not the source of this force. If not the ball than the hand. There is no other logical answer. Pushing the handle forward player at the same time tries to prevent the racket from rotation in horizontal plane. When the hand is released the speed of the head increases again. Everything what I said was confirmed.

 

[Dou]

We see that from the moment when tha ball is maximally deformed in the strings(when ball pushes hard on the racket) and some time after it left the strings the speed of the head quickly decreases to about 30. Almost the same speed as the handle. During the same time the speed of the handle decreases only slightly. It means that player opposed the presure pushing the handle forward minimizing loss of speed. We see that the speed of the head decreases abruptly even when the ball already left the strings. It means that during that period something pulled the head back. There is no loss of speed without a force. The ball is not on the strings so the ball is not the source of this force. If not the ball than the hand. There is no other logical answer. Pushing the handle forward player at the same time tries to prevent the racket from rotation in horizontal plane. When the hand is released the speed of the head increases again. Everything what I said was confirmed.

dude you need to stop... you are spreading bad information.

the handle slows down less simply because the ball hit the face, not the handle.

you may have won some tournaments what not... doesn't matter... you are leaving lots of power on the table.

and fh is not where the lack of release hurts you the most, because the incoming ball has pace and your push can borrow a lot from it.

your serve is probably hurt the most if you don't have a release.. the toss has no incoming pace, your serve will be absolutely powerless.

 

[Chas Tennis]

......
and fh is not where the lack of release hurts you the most, because the incoming ball has pace and your push can borrow a lot from it.

your serve is probably hurt the most if you don't have a release.. the toss has no incoming pace, your serve will be absolutely powerless.

What is a "release"?

 

[Dou]

What is a "release"?

this concept is really important to take a player to the next level after he has learned the swing path for fh, bh, serve etc.

it is related to this thread.

take a shadow swing of fh in your living room. what do you feel? initially you are pulling the handle/throwing.. then you release - feels like you release the handle and let the racket fly (don't release for real though in your living room)... then there is the final follow thru where the racket pulls you into finish.

you should hear a swoosh sound, that's where the maximum speed is... and that's where you want the hit to happen.

again, not so critical in recreational tennis forehand.... the OP apparently won some tournaments per his own claim... you can play half decent amateur fh by pushing against incoming pace, without the release... but that is powerless tennis.

the serve is the same... where is the swoosh sound? if you 'power forward thru the ball' like most amateurs do, that motion would produce a swoosh sound way past the hitting zone... that is powerless tennis.

so.. in your living room, do shadow serves, how do you put the swish on the ball? when do you have to stop 'powering'? by some experiment you will realize that you have to stop the 'powering upward' phase some 3 ft before the racket head meets the ball...

the only shots in tennis that is not hit with the release are the volleys where control is more important than power.

once you understand this concept your game will look so beautiful and 'professional' on the court.... night and day compared to all the 4.0 amateurs out there muscling all over the court but producing powerless stuff.

 

[mcs1970]

I think the OP is more correct in his analysis and more knowledgeable than most folks on this forum would like to believe.

I'm trying to figure out what analysis would that be.

OP claims that Fed and other pros don't use their wrist at the point of contact to accelerate the ball. Every one, other than maybe some rank beginners, know that. There's nothing radical there.

He claims that the wrist is out of the equation at the point of contact and a few moments after. If you look at Fed's or any other pro's videos, that's always true. Again, nothing radical here that the OP has discovered.

The gist of disagreement with what the OP is saying is that he is saying that Fed's loose grip and lag/release is not what contributes to the pace of his shots as much as feeling the ball and rolling the racquet vertically over it. While in theory and freeze framing some slo mo practice videos it might appear plausible, there is zero chance of any world class pace being generated if what OP says were true. As chas said there's a collision going on when the ball meets the racquet, which is why pros and good players tend to keep the wrist perfectly still just before, during, and immediately after the shot. Else their strokes would be very inconsistent. Also, it's not mutually exclusive that you can have a loose grip and still tighten at the point of contact. That is actually the right way to hit even with a loose grip. OP just focuses on the tension around the point of contact and wrongly concludes that a loose grip cannot generate power.

If the OP could think through some of these things more carefully he'd be able to analyze what is happening more clearly.

 

[mad dog1]

If the OP could think through some of these things more carefully he'd be able to analyze what is happening more clearly.

Given that the OP holds a very rigid opinion that the 2hfh is superior to the 1hfh and is the forehand of the future even though the vast majority of the pros choose the 1hfh, ability to analyze when faced with overwhelmingly obvious facts is not his strong suit.

 

[mcs1970]

Given that the OP holds a very rigid opinion that the 2hfh is the superior to the 1hfh and is the forehand of the future even though the vast majority of the pros choose the 1hfh, ability to analyze when faced with overwhelmingly obvious facts is not his strong suit.

Monica Seles won with a 2hfh almost 30 years ago and it has not really caught on a large scale. I highly doubt even OP really believes that it is the fh of the future.

Given that every 2hfh video he links to is his own match play video with the title 'best 2hfh in the world', OP is cleverly just upping the view count of his own match play. Seems part narcissistic and part smart salesman more than anything else. Also given that navigator who has looked into OP's results feels that OP is not really playing the quality level of opposition that he claims he is playing, OP seems to be stretching the truth a little bit, even though his videos do show that he is a pretty good player for his age level.

 

[rogerroger917]

The source of your arrogance is your ignorance, I'm afraid. You do not understand what you are talking about.

I didn't write a post here in the last 10 years because of people like you. It was a great idea and I will resurrect it shortly.

Yes please go on hiatus again. You are not Federer. Your slappy fh is not sound. You hit a bh slice with a eastern grip. Want me to keep going?

 

[rogerroger917]

Thank you!!! Bye bye

I reject your apologies. The world is huge, we do not have to share it. Have fun, good luck.

I will make a thread about inertial tennis, to give a source of knowledge for interested players. Then admins will remove all links and it will be useless. Not my problem.

I will certainly no longer try to participate in any technical discussions here.

 

[bitcoinoperated]

You lost me when I reached the word "pushing"

 

[5263]

The correct part of your post is that Federer doesn't actively push the head of the racquet, you know, at all, during whole motion. He pulls the handle with relaxed wrist and grip, with allows racquet head lag behind. However, by the contact he's almost done with all muscle efforts and only, you know, holds the handle gently so that the racquet doesn't fly away. May be a bit of exaggeration, but true as general concept. Arm (and hand and handle) forward acceleration is over some instance before contact, it actually decelerates, which allows the tip to catch up into contact. Some would even say he pulls the handle accross... @5263

Diamond seems to describe it quite well as he seems to point out what we in modern tennis have said for yrs and recently re-confirmed by Gordon's research.....that the hand changes directions to pull across the body to accel the racket right before contact. But is don't see how any of that is pushing....to me its more like whipping the ball. Fed is not pushing the ball with his hand and in fact, as Gordon also confirmed, is using the wrist to hold the racket back from swinging out too far.

 

[5263]

Tennis is really simple. You have to push(what looks like hitting is just fast pushing) the ball in the direction where you want it to go and at the same time you should roll the ball. To control the ball you should move the racket so that the strings didnt rotate in the horizontal plane from the moment just before collision to the moment some time after collision. At the same time you should force the racket to go up. When you try to throw the racket at the ball the head of the racket tries to move faster than the handle and there is rotation of the racket in the hirizontal plane. Not only it shortens time the ball is pushed in the right direction but it is the main reason of anglular errors . As I wrote it I thought that I was really wise. I am proud of myself and whatever you`ll say cant change it. I like to like myself.

I agree that you do mostly push, but don't get how you see Fed's strokes as being like yours. Fed doesn't push anything like that, but you are also right that he doesn't throw the racket in most cases.

 

[rogerroger917]

I agree that you do mostly push, but don't get how you see Fed's strokes as being like yours. Fed doesn't push anything like that, but you are also right that he doesn't throw the racket in most cases.

Federer also doesn't use 2 hands for fh....

 

[5263]

Federer also doesn't use 2 hands for fh....

True, but the fundamental aspects of the stoke don't change much in the one vs 2 handers Imco.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

I lost in the quarterfinal of National Championships. Before this tournament I injured my injured right wrist and was forced to use inertial tennis. I threw the racket at the ball. As I expected the ball didnt know were to go. My opponent knew that if he played low balls then I would play angles using my two handed forehand so he played almost lobs from both sides. I should go to the net and play volley or smash but I couldnt do it bacause my wrist was injured. The only way I could win in these circumstances was to play high balls all the time . Probably I would win after 4 hours. There was extremely hot so I wanted to be alive after this match so I tried to shorten our match. I managed to do it but I lost. I respect my opponent because he chose the only way he could win. He knew that two handed forehand was the future of tennis so he tried to avoid to play low balls on this side.

But now we all know that the balls dont understand inertial tennis.

 

[rogerroger917]

I lost in the quarterfinal of National Championships. Before this tournament I injured my injured wright wrist and was forced to use inertial tennis. I threw the racket at the ball. As I expected the ball didnt know were to go. My opponent knew that if he played low balls then I would play angles using my two handed forehand so he played almost lobs both sided. I should go to the net and play volley or smash but I couldnt do it bacause my wrist was injured. The only way I could win in these circumstances was to play high balls all the time . Probably I would win after 4 hours. There was extremely hot so I wanted to be alive after this match so I tried to shorten our match. I managed to do it but I lost. I respect my opponent because he chose the only way he could win. He knew that two handed forehand was the future of tennis so he tried to avoid to play low balls on this side.

But now we all know that the balls dont understand inertial tennis.

How do you injure an injured wrist? Lol.
Did you take lessons from the inertial tennis guy?

 

[Gregory Diamond]

How do you injure an injured wrist? Lol.
Did you take lessons from the inertial tennis guy?

I injured right wrist 15 years ago. That is why I play two handed forehand. Last week I injured this wrist so I injured injured right wrist. I shouldnt play tennis at least for 2 weeks.

 

[user92626]

this concept is really important to take a player to the next level after he has learned the swing path for fh, bh, serve etc.

it is related to this thread.

take a shadow swing of fh in your living room. what do you feel? initially you are pulling the handle/throwing.. then you release - feels like you release the handle and let the racket fly (don't release for real though in your living room)... then there is the final follow thru where the racket pulls you into finish.

you should hear a swoosh sound, that's where the maximum speed is... and that's where you want the hit to happen.

again, not so critical in recreational tennis forehand.... the OP apparently won some tournaments per his own claim... you can play half decent amateur fh by pushing against incoming pace, without the release... but that is powerless tennis.

the serve is the same... where is the swoosh sound? if you 'power forward thru the ball' like most amateurs do, that motion would produce a swoosh sound way past the hitting zone... that is powerless tennis.

so.. in your living room, do shadow serves, how do you put the swish on the ball? when do you have to stop 'powering'? by some experiment you will realize that you have to stop the 'powering upward' phase some 3 ft before the racket head meets the ball...

the only shots in tennis that is not hit with the release are the volleys where control is more important than power.

once you understand this concept your game will look so beautiful and 'professional' on the court.... night and day compared to all the 4.0 amateurs out there muscling all over the court but producing powerless stuff.

Oh man this sounds to me like a slapping motion. You stop swinging the racket -- allowing your arm and body parts become passive ? -- before the racket head makes contact.

People, try that at the courts and come back here and discuss.

 

[Dou]

Oh man this sounds to me like a slapping motion. You stop swinging the racket -- allowing your arm and body parts become passive ? -- before the racket head makes contact.

People, try that at the courts and come back here and discuss.

the good players hit like this... that's why their body language looks effortless yet the ball explodes off the touch... because at the touch they are basically doing nothing.

compared to all the amateurs their body language is so ugly, lots of effort, yet somehow the ball seems to push the racket back lol.

makes sense though.... the racket works like a lever... if you force the handle forward, the head actually goes backwards lol.

but yes - please try this and come back to discuss... you will have a whole new perspective.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

There is a great argument here between people who think that you should throw the racket at the ball and those who think that you should push the ball with the wrist laid back before the collision, during collision and some time after the collision with the ball.

In the first theory the speed of the racket before collision is the most important thing. The ball "feels" only the accelerated head of the racket because the rest of your body just cant keep up.

In second theory you use the strongest muscles of your lower and upper body. The ball is colliding with your whole body. You are more a wall for the ball and you can absorb more of its momentum. The speed of the racket is also important in this method but only if you can still have your wrist laid back all the time. Jack Sock is the best example.

Followers of the first method talk about releasing and loose wrist. Usually they think that Federer uses this method what is untrue. You can see in slow motion videos that his wrist is laid beck even some time after the ball left the strings. He releases his wrist later but it cant effect the ball.

The second method allows for great control, precision and power.
I dont know any advantages of the first method but I am sure you will tell me that later.

In my personal opinion the first method is the main reason why millions of players around the world cant direct the ball where they want for 10, 20 or even for 30 years. I am surprised that they couldnt notice that there was something wrong in their technique.

 

[travlerajm]

I use a third method. I use lead tape tune the angular acceleration of the racquet pendulum (MgR/I) so that the angular acceleration of the lower pendulum (the hand and racquet) is linked to that of the the upper pendulum (the arm and torso). A simple single pendulum has repeatable motion and is easier to control than a double pendulum, which is inherently chaotic.

 

[J011yroger]

I think that the OP is incapable of hitting a respectable forehand and instead of getting proper coaching and working at it he would rather concoct a storyline about how everyone with a decent forehand is wrong.

J

 

[Gregory Diamond]

I use a third method. I use lead tape tune the angular acceleration of the racquet pendulum (MgR/I) so that the angular acceleration of the lower pendulum (the hand and racquet) is linked to that of the the upper pendulum (the arm and torso). A simple single pendulum has repeatable motion and is easier to control than a double pendulum, which is inherently chaotic.

You are right. The more degrees of freedom the less control. It is obvious for us but as we can see there are millions "believers" in the first method. They think that it is normal that for years they cant control the balls because their friends (using the same method) have the same problem.

 

[Gregory Diamond]

I think that the OP is incapable of hitting a respectable forehand and instead of getting proper coaching and working at it he would rather concoct a storyline about how everyone with a decent forehand is wrong.

J

Do you think that Jack Sock cant hit respectable forehand ?

 

[J011yroger]

Do you think that Jack Sock cant hit respectable forehand ?

No.

J

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I recall pages and pages of push vs pull discussion in these forum pages back in 2010. Caused a fair amount of confusion. Not sure it was all that helpful at the end of the day. After a whole lot of discussion, the bottom line was that most pro FHs have both pull and push elements. Many have a bit more of one than the other. Not sure it was worth the effort to try to lump all FHs into 2 absolute types. False dichotomy.

 

[J011yroger]

I recall pages and pages of push vs pull discussion in these forum pages back in 2010. Caused a fair amount of confusion. Not sure it was all that helpful at the end of the day. After a whole lot of discussion, the bottom line was that most pro FHs have both pull and push elements. Many have a bit more of one than the other. Not sure it was worth the effort to try to lump all FHs into 2 absolute types.

I miss Tricky.

J

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I miss Tricky.

J

Agreed. A lot of great insight from @tricky. But, in the end, he regretted bringing up the whole push vs pull discussion.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

@J011yroger

Yeah, I wished I never brought the "push vs. pull" thing. It originally came out of discussion between ATP and WTA-style forehands. As SA mentioned, there's variation there. It took a life on its own, and it was never intended as such.

 

[r2473]

 

[a12345]

To clear up some confusion, Gregory is right that at the point of contact Federer is pushing the ball with his wrist back.

But for most of his swing his wrist is loose. The 3rd option between a loose wrist and a firm wrist is both happen. Federer swings with a loose wrist, but nearing the point of contact he firms it up, or at least keeps it held backwards.

Lets call it 90% loose, 10% firm at the end.

This allows you to use your body weight to hit through the ball. Just as importantly it gives you greater control over the ball.

If your wrist was completely loose at contact point and you were using only the "lag and snap" to hit the ball you would lose significant control over the ball.

 

[Dragy]

This allows you to use your body weight to hit through the ball.

Just contrary to physics, sorry.

 

[a12345]

There is a great argument here between people who think that you should throw the racket at the ball and those who think that you should push the ball with the wrist laid back before the collision, during collision and some time after the collision with the ball.

Bear in mind the different technique is taught for a different stroke.

For a WTA forehand throwing the racket at the ball is a correct technique

For an ATP forehand its not suitable. Its more akin to pulling the racket.

So throwing the ball at the racket can be correct if youre using a WTA forehand because your swing can resemble rotating with a ball at the end of a chain. Although you still need to firm up at the end.

 

[a12345]

Just contrary to physics, sorry.

What about Force = Mass x Acceleration.

If your wrist was loose and it was only the racket snap hitting the ball, then largely only the weight of the racket is hitting the ball.

Imagine if I cut the racket in half just slightly before it made contact with the ball , what you would have is a flying racket head hitting an incoming ball. The racket head would not have that much weight to generate the same power that your 75kg of body weight can achieve.

 

[5263]

To clear up some confusion, Gregory is right that at the point of contact Federer is pushing the ball with his wrist back.

But for most of his swing his wrist is loose. The 3rd option between a loose wrist and a firm wrist is both happen. Federer swings with a loose wrist, but nearing the point of contact he firms it up, or at least keeps it held backwards.

Lets call it 90% loose, 10% firm at the end.

This allows you to use your body weight to hit through the ball. Just as importantly it gives you greater control over the ball.

If your wrist was completely loose at contact point and you were using only the "lag and snap" to hit the ball you would lose significant control over the ball.

This is not really easy to understand it seems, but Imo you did the best job here. Imo the disconnect is that posters struggle with the 3D aspect of the racket path as it matches up to the ball path. In this process, I think the brain takes some shortcuts that lead to misunderstanding. Just like on the serve, we have a hand controlling a racket head to go forward, up and across while a racket face adjusts to more open or closed.....to contact a ball that is bending and spinning on a 3D curved path thru the air. To complicate matters more, the path of the contact is not normally squared up or centered as one might expect.

 

[EdbergLetUs]

What about Force = Mass x Acceleration.

If your wrist was loose and it was only the racket snap hitting the ball, then largely only the weight of the racket is hitting the ball.

Imagine if I cut the racket in half just slightly before it made contact with the ball , what you would have is a flying racket head hitting an incoming ball. The racket head would not have that much weight to generate the same power that your 75kg of body weight can achieve.

This is a homerun after hands let go of the bat.

 

[5263]

except baseball swing is a poor model for tennis swing...

 

[Dragy]

What about Force = Mass x Acceleration.

If your wrist was loose and it was only the racket snap hitting the ball, then largely only the weight of the racket is hitting the ball.

Imagine if I cut the racket in half just slightly before it made contact with the ball , what you would have is a flying racket head hitting an incoming ball. The racket head would not have that much weight to generate the same power that your 75kg of body weight can achieve.

I'll put it once, in casual manner to stay within messageboard format. If you need deeper dive into strict description, I'll leave that to you.

1. Your force formula is for force applied to an object. Consider ball mass and ball acceleration to use it. If you want a formula for racquet-ball interaction, it's energy transfer and E=mc^2. However, in a simple application it doesn't take into account object shapes, elasticity, etc, which are a part of equation for actual physics of tennis stroke. If you had a steel sphere hitting a tennis ball directly center-towards-center, you could more or less consider that sphere mass and approach velocity to calculate E. And compare those of different spheres moving with different velocities.

2. For rotational motions it's the relation between "distance of contact point to pivot point" and "distance of mass location to pivot point" which determines the mass "piece" contribution to the interaction energy. Think baseball bat: hit the ball conventional, or flip the bat upside-down and hit the ball with the handle. Moreover, distance is squared for this equation. Which makes mass located around the contact significantly more contributing. You asked about cutting the racquet - yes, a racquet with lighter handle, but same mass in the hoop, will deliver nearly same power for the hit. So even if we you somehow managed to ensure non-elastic wrist, contribution of arm mass would be diminishing with the distance, significantly.

3. You just cannot ensure the wrist to be firm enough to create a monolith arm-racquet structure. Check it - "lock" your wrist as hard as you can with a racquet and make someone throw a ball onto it. It will give way due to joints and muscle elasticity and inconsistent nature of muscle deformation - muscle fibers are never truly static. Now, there'd be some point of limit for the wrist extra lay-back under pressure of collision with incoming ball, but the ball would be gone by that moment. If 3-4ms figure tells you nothing, whatch slow-mo of shanks by pro-players: even though the racquet twists badly, the ball departs with almost the same direction as for sweetspot hit. All visual twisting happens later. Same for the wrist - it still absorbs the collision, tendons stretching, while the ball is already gone. No "feel of entire body", or even arm, through contact.

4. Once again to the "even if we you somehow managed to ensure non-elastic wrist", there's an arm pivoting at shoulder joint before, during and after contact, which separates it from the torso. Actually, if you want entire body mass to contribute to the contact, you should grip the racquet head with both arms at 9 and 3 o'clock and place it facing the incoming ball at belly level, arms bent 90 deg and elbows fixed against pelvis bones. This would arguably eliminate most elastic joints.

5. Even for linear motions, like straight punch in karate, E=mc^2 works for the fastest moving part. The mass of forearm. The velocity of forearm. All body contributes to the punch with proper technic, but its via building up the speed - either via kinetic chain transfer, or via compound, simultaneous activation. This might be a tad simplified, as joints are not exactly hinges, but still a decent model. While actual physics of tennis strokes still hasn't been fully described and modeled, neither the swingpath, nor the sringbed-ball collision. To many moving parts, biomechanical power sources and elastic interactions.

Disclaimer: I'm sorry for all the impresise terms, being neither English native speaker, nor having studied physics in English. Still tried to cover key ideas in a popular manner.