Found this article on Nadal's forehand

[NamRanger]

Just found this article


http://www.tennis.com/yourgame/instructionarticles/forehand/forehand.aspx?id=56544



Was browsing around and happened to find this. Does Nadal really hit this forehand alot? It seems that he likes to use the reverse forehand way more often then the follow through across type forehand.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeXRYb-B3OM


Example of him using the reverse forehand.


What's intresting is how similiar his forehand is to Federer now that you watch it in frame by frame analysis. Although he muscles the ball alot more then Federer, there's lots of wrist action, and he hits it with a pretty straight arm.

 

[tricky]

Was browsing around and happened to find this. Does Nadal really hit this forehand alot? It seems that he likes to use the reverse forehand way more often then the follow through across type forehand.

Yup, it's the basis of his FH stroke. No elbow bend. During the follow through, he uses a wiper motion with his hands in order to change trajectory and let the racquet fly above his head. There's very little actual muscling of the ball except for the wiping motion. And even then, it's really passive tension.

His ideal contact zone is lower than most Western grip players. About waist level to shoulder level. But the key thing with Nadal's FH is that it has an extremely wide ball height zone, where he can hit balls at knee level all the way to above his head. That and his athleticism are the basis for his defense on FH side. In other words, he can return anything back if he can catch up to it, including low flat shots. Seriously, Nadal's FH is one of the greatest defensive strokes in tennis. You basically have to crank the ball past him to beat him .

Also, by avoiding the elbow bend, he can also generate a flat shot with his western grip on the short ball. Which is what he does to put people away. If he can only step in the ball, his FH would be a true offensive weapon.

That all said, the lack of elbow bends means even his flat shots don't have great pace.

What's intresting is how similiar his forehand is to Federer now that you watch it in frame by frame analysis

Grip aside, Fed's inside-out shot is similar to Nadal's normal FH.

 

[NamRanger]

Then why is it Federer is able to produce so much pace on a relatively straight arm forehand? Is it because of the grip?

 

[tricky]

Then why is it Federer is able to produce so much pace on a relatively straight arm forehand? Is it because of the grip?

I actually don't think his pace on his straight-arm shots is that great. Fed uses both straight-arm and double bend forehands. The former is mostly for inside-out shots. Which is part of the problem with playing Federer. He does with the FH what most pros do with the serve -- he conceals what's coming. Besides some footwork adjustment to hit the ball more in front, you can't read when Fed will go wide angle on you. You can only guess by playing out percentages, but usually the guy is left guessing and is late.

Also because he straightens out his arm, his wrist position is more laid-back and it imparts more side spin, moving away from the person.

 

[Sagittar]

yeah i've read this article before , nice one though ..

 

[Ross K]

NamRanger and tricky, excellant posts (& links.) Cheers. V interesting. I confess to previously being unaware that Nadal uses this straight-arm technique. Moreover, funilly enough, I was thinking only 2 days ago about this when during a game - the point was over and I was merely knocking a few balls back over the net - somewhat unconsciously, I produced an absolute blistering rocket of a shot from straight-arming the ball; it was such a belter, I noted the fact then and there.
Do you reckon I should attempt to master this technique and incorporate it into my fh game? Is it commonly used?

 

[tricky]

Do you reckon I should attempt to master this technique and incorporate it into my fh game? Is it commonly used?

Yeah, Nadal's is a variation of the reverse forehand. Sampras's running crosscourt forehand is the ultimate model. You . . .

1) Step into the trajectory of ball
2) Initiate swing plane below ball height
3) Sling the racquet forward with straight arm
4) Make a reverse C motion bottom to up, with the raquet ending up behind your head

 

[NamRanger]

NamRanger and tricky, excellant posts (& links.) Cheers. V interesting. I confess to previously being unaware that Nadal uses this straight-arm technique. Moreover, funilly enough, I was thinking only 2 days ago about this when during a game - the point was over and I was merely knocking a few balls back over the net - somewhat unconsciously, I produced an absolute blistering rocket of a shot from straight-arming the ball; it was such a belter, I noted the fact then and there.
Do you reckon I should attempt to master this technique and incorporate it into my fh game? Is it commonly used?

The straight arm technique is a very difficult technique to do because not only is it hard to control and time, but the risk of injury is very high. I wouldn't do it unless you absolutely know what you are doing.

 

[habib]

I actually don't think his pace on his straight-arm shots is that great. Fed uses both straight-arm and double bend forehands. The former is mostly for inside-out shots.

Also because he straightens out his arm, his wrist position is more laid-back and it imparts more side spin, moving away from the person.

In very, very few situations have I seen Federer *not* hit a forehand with a straight arm, and most of those were when he was either jammed from an oncoming shot, or jammed because he was late stepping around his backhand. And yes, the pace is pretty overwhelming when he lets it rip. Mind you, I don't agree with your assessment of how much pace Nadal generates on his flatter shots, either.

As for the article - I find it interesting that they went with the around-the-body follow through, as that is a relatively rare sight from Nadal nowadays - most of his forehands are "reverse forehand" over/behind the head finishes.

 

[jackson vile]

Also Blake and Paradorn hit this way, Paradorn hits with the straightest arm.

Something all these people have in comon is that they have huge forehands.

IMO a lot of people don't understand the straight arm method, it forces you to accelerate the racket head much much more as you have to be extremely relaxed on contact and thus it will injur no one but those that have no idea what they are doing.

IMO it is simular to a squash shot and yes the serve.

 

[habib]

Also Blake and Paradorn hit this way, Paradorn hits with the straightest arm.

Something all these people have in comon is that they have huge forehands.

IMO a lot of people don't understand the straight arm method, it forces you to accelerate the racket head much much more as you have to be extremely relaxed on contact and thus it will injur no one but those that have no idea what they are doing.

Well, I think it comes back to basic physics. If we take as given that the rotation of the hips/torso is what pulls the racquet around, then given the same rotational velocity of the upper body, a racquet farther out from the center of rotation (straight arm) will be travelling at faster speeds (since it will be covering more ground in the same amount of time) than one closer in (bent arm).

There're reasons why Federer and Nadal can generate what are probably the two highest racquet speeds on tour - straight arm on contact and a lot of wrist action (which is almost necessitated by the straightened arm).

 

[tricky]

The straight arm technique is a very difficult technique to do because not only is it hard to control and time, but the risk of injury is very high. I wouldn't do it unless you absolutely know what you are doing.

Mmm . . . I'm actually not sure of that. The straight arm technique takes away probably the most timing-oriented part of the kinetic chain, the elbow bend. It's easier to go reverse forehand on the run than set up your elbow to flick on the ball. In terms of injury, there's a lot of centrifugal force applied to the elbow joint, but with a stable grip, I don't see that being so much of an issue.

In very, very few situations have I seen Federer *not* hit a forehand with a straight arm, and most of those were when he was either jammed from an oncoming shot, or jammed because he was late stepping around his backhand.

Fed usually uses a double-bend technique, but he goes into full behind-the-body arm extension prior to forward swing, as if he were going to go into a straight-arm forehand. His motion is a little bit like a sidearm pitcher, where he kinda throws his racket at the ball. In any case, it lets him use more of the kinetic chain than most other players.

If we take as given that the rotation of the hips/torso is what pulls the racquet around, then given the same rotational velocity of the upper body, a racquet farther out from the center of rotation (straight arm) will be travelling at faster speeds (since it will be covering more ground in the same amount of time) than one closer in (bent arm).

It's not so much that, but that often the reverse grip FH has a less complex kinetic chain, and is often better paired with linear weight transfer..

Theoretically, the double bend has higher potential racquet speed, because there's an extra stage in the chain. But, when on the run or if unable to properly time the shot, the extra stage causes problems, which in turn makes you to slow down your shot.

 

[JohnYandell]

Looking at about 200 Federer forehands:

1/3 straight arm
1/3 double bend
1/3 in between

The particular hitting arm position can also be combined with varying degrees of extension and hand rotation, varying degrees of torso rotation, and a variety of stances and court positions.

There are probably 25 or so distinct variations, so I would be hesitant to say anything about "the" Federer forehand. This incredible variety is one of the factors that make this shot so tough.

 

[Ross K]

What should you do re feet positioning and legs on the straightarmer?
I tried out the technique a little yesterday and noted a tendency to come right up on my toes as I hit. Is this good form? Isn't Rafa noted for his wide set feet/leg stance, deep bend, angular and dynamic motion - not my telegraph pole look?

 

[chico9166]

clearly, the degree to which federer's wrist is flexed at the bottom of the swing has something to do with his cannon forehand. very few, if any achieve that kind of stretch in the forearm during the change of direction stage in the swing

 

[habib]

clearly, the degree to which federer's wrist is flexed at the bottom of the swing has something to do with his cannon forehand. very few, if any achieve that kind of stretch in the forearm during the change of direction stage in the swing

Sure, but on the other hand, when you're coming at the ball with as straight an arm as Federer (since even when he does use a double-bend, it's still much straighter than most pros) it's almost a requirement that your wrist be bent far back to compensate for the lack of elbow bend.

 

[habib]

Fed usually uses a double-bend technique, but he goes into full behind-the-body arm extension prior to forward swing, as if he were going to go into a straight-arm forehand. His motion is a little bit like a sidearm pitcher, where he kinda throws his racket at the ball. In any case, it lets him use more of the kinetic chain than most other players.

I wouldn't say he "usually" uses a double-bend. He makes contact with a straight arm at least as often as he does with a double-bend, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was more often. Look at some of his super slow-mo videos, where he's hitting an 'in-position' forehand (ie: not stretched out wide etc..), and you'll notice that he has a straight arm on contact the majority of the time.

It's not so much that, but that often the reverse grip FH has a less complex kinetic chain, and is often better paired with linear weight transfer..

Huh? When did we start talking about a reverse grip FH?

Theoretically, the double bend has higher potential racquet speed, because there's an extra stage in the chain. But, when on the run or if unable to properly time the shot, the extra stage causes problems, which in turn makes you to slow down your shot.

Too simplistic, I think. Theoretically, what has the most potential for racquet speed is what you mentioned above - the side-arm pitching delivery. The classical (which is an odd term to use for something that hasn't been around very long) open stance forehand maintains the same elbow angle right up into the follow-through. The elbow plays a role to position the racquet, but not so much in terms of accelerating it - which is what a side-arm (or any throwing motion, really) involves. So to me, the ideal swing appears to be one where you're using the elbow as an additional part of the kinetic chain to further prople your arm forward, with the arm straightening at contact to release all the pent up energy, much like the arm is generally straight at the point of release when throwing something.

Roddick actually comes close to this, although his technique is ugly, ungainly, and awkward beyond belief. But watching his forehand, it's almost obvious that the kid used to play competitive baseball. If you watch his slow-mo videos, he launches that elbow out and then uses it to pull the racquet forward. His problem is that he doesn't have the timing or the agility to take the ball farther in front, where his arm would be straighter during contact (it's very bent when he makes contact now).

 

[chico9166]

Sure, but on the other hand, when you're coming at the ball with as straight an arm as Federer (since even when he does use a double-bend, it's still much straighter than most pros) it's almost a requirement that your wrist be bent far back to compensate for the lack of elbow bend.

fair enough, however, my point is more that federer achieves this incredible wrist flexion in an eastern grip as opposed to nadal, roddick etc whom all use stronger grips. i think this is an important distinction. as you probably know, the stronger grips lend themselves toward more natural lag. federer is able to achieve this lag with a grip that is not as conducive to it. the flexiblity in his wrist, and his ability to stay relaxed at the change of direction stage of his swing(which throws his arm into this supinated, and extended postion)is truly amazing, and in my opinion one of the key componants to his massive forehand

 

[habib]

fair enough, however, my point is more that federer achieves this incredible wrist flexion in an eastern grip as opposed to nadal, roddick etc whom all use stronger grips. i think this is an important distinction. as you probably know, the stronger grips lend themselves toward more natural lag. federer is able to achieve this lag with a grip that is not as conducive to it. the flexiblity in his wrist, and his ability to stay relaxed at the change of direction stage of his swing(which throws his arm into this supinated, and extended postion)is truly amazing, and in my opinion one of the key componants to his massive forehand

Wait, since when does Fed use an Eastern grip?

 

[chico9166]

Wait, since when does Fed use an Eastern grip?

like all good players, federer has the ablility to rotate grips depending on surface, bounce, intent, however,his stock grip is what i call a strong eastern grip. it is not a true eastern, but it is certainly not a semiwestern.

 

[JohnYandell]

Fed's grip is a 3 1/2 / 3. Just slightly toward the semi-western from Pete Sampras, but less than Agassi.

He has the most conservative fh grip of anyone playing except Henman and maybe Hrbaty. It accounts for a large percentage of the things he is able to do.

 

[chico9166]

Fed's grip is a 3 1/2 / 3. Just slightly toward the semi-western from Pete Sampras, but less than Agassi.

He has the most conservative fh grip of anyone playing except Henman and maybe Hrbaty. It accounts for a large percentage of the things he is able to d

o.

AS an instructor, i am always looking at new information on the modern game, and i think your work is quite good. could you please expand on "it acccounts for a large percentage of the things he is able to do" clearly his abliity to incorporate modern swing componants while using a conservative grip is central to his explosive forehand in my humble opinion

 

[JohnYandell]

It makes it natural for him to hit the ball early, step in when appropriate, and extend the hell out of his swing, the way we associate with "old style tennis".

The more extreme the grip, the higher the natural contact height and the more awkward it is to stay up tight and pick the ball early.

At the same time he's married that with the hand and arm rotation and torso rotation of the extreme styles. So even though he hits the ball in a flatter arc on his drives, they are very heavy with more spin than Agassi or Sampras.

It's a synthesis that breaks the mold.

 

[habib]

It makes it natural for him to hit the ball early, step in when appropriate, and extend the hell out of his swing, the way we associate with "old style tennis".

The more extreme the grip, the higher the natural contact height and the more awkward it is to stay up tight and pick the ball early.

At the same time he's married that with the hand and arm rotation and torso rotation of the extreme styles. So even though he hits the ball in a flatter arc on his drives, they are very heavy with more spin than Agassi or Sampras.

It's a synthesis that breaks the mold.

This is interesting. While I'm aware of his ability to change grips depending on situation, it had always looked to me like his default grip was a SW. Moreover, he seems to hit with not only more spin than Agassi or Sampras, but also just about everyone else out there barring Nadal and perhaps a few other claycourters.

 

[tricky]

It's a synthesis that breaks the mold.

Exactly. Knowing what Fed's FH helps explain why Fed is able to manufacture certain kinds of shots, and why his opponents have problems trading shots with him on that wing.

Look at some of his super slow-mo videos, where he's hitting an 'in-position' forehand (ie: not stretched out wide etc..), and you'll notice that he has a straight arm on contact the majority of the time.

Again, as Yandell says, he mixes it up. He starts out with a backswing that facilitates the straight-arm FH, but he usually bends the elbow around. He kinda has to do this because he needs a little extra time to set up the wristy of his FH. For example, because he has a more conservative grip, his swing is less adept at taking very high bounces. For that reason, he'll go straight-arm in order to take the ball out more in front and jump in order to hit the ball at the ideal contact height.

The other thing is, if you use a straight-arm motion, you can rotate on the ball, regardless of grip, more without causing the elbow to hitch and messing up the swing plane. So, it enables both Fed and Nadal to have more horizontal-ish swing planes going into the contact zone while creating a lot of top spin,

Huh? When did we start talking about a reverse grip FH?

Ah, sorry. I meant reverse FH.

The classical (which is an odd term to use for something that hasn't been around very long) open stance forehand maintains the same elbow angle right up into the follow-through.

That's true, yes.

So to me, the ideal swing appears to be one where you're using the elbow as an additional part of the kinetic chain to further prople your arm forward,

Yeah, that's facilitated with the double-bend FH.

with the arm straightening at contact to release all the pent up energy, much like the arm is generally straight at the point of release when throwing something.

Nah, see, when the arm straightens out, you've already released all the potential energy. This has been shown, for example, when measuring bat speed. Most of the acceleration occurs during the beginning stage after the turn around, and then the rotational velocity basically is the same once the arms have already reached full extension. Really, the important thing is that the elbow, shoulder rotators, hip, wrist, and so on, go through a proper stretch-shorten at some point in the kinetic chain. In a real game situation, it's hard to get everything to release optimally. Nadal, for example, doesn't really have the elbow bend stage, but he has a smooth transition between the hips and the shoulders. He gets very full rotation action going into the horizontal portion of his swing plane.

Really, Nadal's FH is pretty cool. A friend of mine has sort of a Nadal mancrush and uses a Western grip. But, he assumed Nadal used some kind of elbow action to get the racquet to fly up through the zone. The straight-arm FH for a Western grip wasn't something he ever considered. In any case, he may not necessarily manufacture exceptional (for the men's game) racquet speed, so much as that, he can swing with an almost Eastern-flat plane and with pace on short balls, or he can generate enormous amounts of top spin from an extreme range of height.

His problem is that he doesn't have the timing or the agility to take the ball farther in front, where his arm would be straighter during contact (it's very bent when he makes contact now).

Again, I don't feel a straight-arm per se translates to higher racquet speed. It's again some component of a muscle contributing to the racquet speed, and whether that particular muscle has a stretch-shortern cycle or not.

The truth is, I'm not sure why Roddick doesn't attack the short ball more or can't crank the ball harder. Sure, it could be the grip, but Roddick had a monster FH only a few years ago. And I figure it doesn't make sense to go more extreme on fast HC and grass surfaces, even though it's clear that even in Wimbledon and US Open, he's just not hitting shots with the same depth as before.

 

[tricky]

Moreover, he seems to hit with not only more spin than Agassi or Sampras, but also just about everyone else out there barring Nadal and perhaps a few other claycourters

Fed has an interesting hitch that creates a lot of energy with his wrist. That energy helps increase racquet speed further, but its primary purpose is to enable him to create a lot more spin on the ball without affecting swing plane. That hitch is mostly possible because he closes his racquet face with an Eastern-ish grip; if you don't close the face, or if you don't use a conservative grip, the hitch (or stretch-shorten cycle) doesn't work the same way.

The truth is, I'm still not sure how he executes that hitch so naturally. It's just not something you would normally do with that stroke.

 

[habib]

Again, as Yandell says, he mixes it up. He starts out with a backswing that facilitates the straight-arm FH, but he usually bends the elbow around. He kinda has to do this because he needs a little extra time to set up the wristy of his FH. For example, because he has a more conservative grip, his swing is less adept at taking very high bounces. For that reason, he'll go straight-arm in order to take the ball out more in front and jump in order to hit the ball at the ideal contact height.

I don't know that I agree with you about how long it takes him to set up his wristy forehands; nor about his swing being less adept at taking high bounces. In fact, he's one of the best at handling high bounces on his forehand. Sure, he jumps to make contact at the ideal point, but there are few forehands on which he doesn't leave the ground, and even on most high forehands he jumps only enough to take the ball around shoulder level - which is hardly ideal for the grip he apparently uses.

Ah, sorry. I meant reverse FH.

Oh, ok. Wait, why are you suddenly talking about a reverse FH?

Nah, see, when the arm straightens out, you've already released all the potential energy. This has been shown, for example, when measuring bat speed. Most of the acceleration occurs during the beginning stage after the turn around, and then the rotational velocity basically is the same once the arms have already reached full extension.

Right, this makes sense. What I should have said was that contact (for tennis)/release point (for baseball or throwing in general) occurs almost immediately before the arm straightens and begins its follow through. Certainly not with the elbow still significantly bent.

In any case, he may not necessarily manufacture exceptional (for the men's game) racquet speed, so much as that, he can swing with an almost Eastern-flat plane and with pace on short balls, or he can generate enormous amounts of top spin from an extreme range of height.

Are you talking about your friend, or Federer? Because if the latter, then yes indeed he manufactures exceptional racquet speeds.

Again, I don't feel a straight-arm per se translates to higher racquet speed. It's again some component of a muscle contributing to the racquet speed, and whether that particular muscle has a stretch-shortern cycle or not.

Well, I didn't claim that it necessarily does. I simply believe that, given solid already-solid technique, you could improve pace and spin production by unfolding the arm into contact more (which of course will result in a straighter arm at/near contact).

The truth is, I'm not sure why Roddick doesn't attack the short ball more or can't crank the ball harder. Sure, it could be the grip, but Roddick had a monster FH only a few years ago. And I figure it doesn't make sense to go more extreme on fast HC and grass surfaces, even though it's clear that even in Wimbledon and US Open, he's just not hitting shots with the same depth as before.

He seems to be hitting the ball with a lot more topspin and noticeably loopier trajectory than he did just a few years ago. In way, this has helped him out, because the running forehand which he used to dump into the net on every other attempt has become more consistent. But it's also made it a lot more difficult for him to pressure his opponent and hit winners like he used to. Why he's sticking with it as it is now, I have no idea. It just doesn't seem as effective a shot.

The other possibility is that, given how reliant Roddick is on that elbow spring to generate power on his FH, it is entirely likely that as he ages and looses agility, he's going to lose pace no matter what.

 

[habib]

Fed has an interesting hitch that creates a lot of energy with his wrist. That energy helps increase racquet speed further, but its primary purpose is to enable him to create a lot more spin on the ball without affecting swing plane. That hitch is mostly possible because he closes his racquet face with an Eastern-ish grip; if you don't close the face, or if you don't use a conservative grip, the hitch (or stretch-shorten cycle) doesn't work the same way.

The truth is, I'm still not sure how he executes that hitch so naturally. It's just not something you would normally do with that stroke.

Well, the wrist action he achieves on his forehand (and, at times, backhand) reminds me one helluva lot of how you hit a forehand in racquetball, squash, and badminton. Moreover, considering that he's been playing squash nearly as long as he's been playing tennis, I would not be at all surprised if he's managed to translate the whippiness of the wristy forehands strokes we see in those 3 other racquetsports into his tennis technique.

He must have unbelievably strong forearms to pull it off though.

 

[tricky]

Sure, he jumps to make contact at the ideal point, but there are few forehands on which he doesn't leave the ground, and even on most high forehands he jumps only enough to take the ball around shoulder level - which is hardly ideal for the grip he apparently uses.

Fed himself is great at taking the high ball. It's just that his swing isn't optimal at that point. But, say lot of true SW/Western swingers don't need to take the ground in order to return shots above their shoulder level. That's all that's meant by that.

Oh, ok. Wait, why are you suddenly talking about a reverse FH?

In regards to Nadal's swing style.

What I should have said was that contact (for tennis)/release point (for baseball or throwing in general) occurs almost immediately before the arm straightens and begins its follow through.

Ah, yes, that's true.

Are you talking about your friend, or Federer? Because if the latter, then yes indeed he manufactures exceptional racquet speeds.

Oh actually I was talking about Nadal. Haha. Federer's racquet speed is terrific; his pace is underrated.

Well, the wrist action he achieves on his forehand (and, at times, backhand) reminds me one helluva lot of how you hit a forehand in racquetball, squash, and badminton.

He usually doesn't use wrist snap though (except for that running squash shot.) What I mean is that, he sets up a closed racquet face prior to sending the racquet forward, and then lets the wrist fling back to re-open back. But the thing is, to rotate the face with an Eastern-ish grip at that point is inherently not part of the swing, and so it requires a special stage just to set that up.

But you're right about Fed's forearm. He himself remarked that he's always had a very strong wrist, which really means his forearms are very strong and his wrist is very flexible.

I simply believe that, given solid already-solid technique, you could improve pace and spin production by unfolding the arm into contact more (which of course will result in a straighter arm at/near contact).

Yeah, I think that's where we disagree. I think the unfolding of the arm as part of the kinetic chain (or as that portion of the arm is transitioning from backswing to forward motion), is where that can improve racquet speed. Whereas I believe unfolding the arm to increase effective lever length into the contact zone, which is how I'm interpreting your take, would actually slow down the effective rotational velocity.

 

[habib]

Oh actually I was talking about Nadal. Haha. Federer's racquet speed is terrific; his pace is underrated.

Ah. Well, in that case, I still think Nadal generates exceptional racquet speed.

He usually doesn't use wrist snap though (except for that running squash shot.) What I mean is that, he sets up a closed racquet face prior to sending the racquet forward, and then lets the wrist fling back to re-open back. But the thing is, to rotate the face with an Eastern-ish grip at that point is inherently not part of the swing, and so it requires a special stage just to set that up.

Technically, even squash/racquetball/badminton shots don't use wrist snap, they use forearm pronation. But what I was basically saying is that the way he whips his arm into the shots is very reminiscent of how you hit a shot in other racquetsports, where the racquet/projectile mass combination is light enough to allow that without risk of dislocating something.

But you're right about Fed's forearm. He himself remarked that he's always had a very strong wrist, which really means his forearms are very strong and his wrist is very flexible.

Well I guess we all know what his hobbies were before Mirka came along, eh? Eh? EH? ;-)

Yeah, I think that's where we disagree. I think the unfolding of the arm as part of the kinetic chain (or as that portion of the arm is transitioning from backswing to forward motion), is where that can improve racquet speed. Whereas I believe unfolding the arm to increase effective lever length into the contact zone, which is how I'm interpreting your take, would actually slow down the effective rotational velocity.

Nono, you're misinterpreting what I said. Actually, our ideas are very much inline. What I said was that I believed that "you could improve pace and spin production by unfolding the arm into contact more." I don't intend this to mean that you straighten your arm more during the swing or anything like that. But rather that you simply make contact later, relative to when the stroke began, so that the arm is more unfolded/nearly straight at that time, which is when, as I believe we agreed, velocity is maximized.

 

[tricky]

But what I was basically saying is that the way he whips his arm into the shots is very reminiscent of how you hit a shot in other racquetsports, where the racquet/projectile mass combination is light enough to allow that without risk of dislocating something

I definitely agree with that, and definitely it influences his passing shots. I think that swatting habit kinda creeps (in a bad way) into his volleying game too.

Well I guess we all know what his hobbies were before Mirka came along, eh? Eh? EH?

The funny thing is, Federer was kinda wound up in the early 2000s. And then suddenly he really chilled out . . .

But rather that you simply make contact later, relative to when the stroke began, so that the arm is more unfolded/nearly straight at that time, which is when, as I believe we agreed, velocity is maximized.

Okay, I think I better understand what you're saying. So, basically, you feel that the elbow joint should essentially float away from the body through the forward swing. Akin to what a straight-arm forehand, or even a more classic FH, would be. Rather than something like a double-bend, where the elbow bends/shortens through the contact zone after reaching its maximum length.

 

[habib]

I definitely agree with that, and definitely it influences his passing shots. I think that swatting habit kinda creeps (in a bad way) into his volleying game too.

I think it's less the swatting, and more the wrist action in general that creeps into his volleying.

Okay, I think I better understand what you're saying. So, basically, you feel that the elbow joint should essentially float away from the body through the forward swing. Akin to what a straight-arm forehand, or even a more classic FH, would be. Rather than something like a double-bend, where the elbow bends/shortens through the contact zone after reaching its maximum length.

Well, a little bit from column A, a little bit from column C. Yes, I think a floating elbow is ideal for maximizing velocity. Keeping the elbow in appears to me to be a way of a) imparting better control of the racquet, and b) synchronizing the swing with the hip/shoulder turn. Ideally, as you say, you want a smooth kinetic-chain reaction. If the elbow is to play a role, it needs to float away from the body at some point. However, I'm not talking about the away-floating elbow of the classical stroke. What I'm picturing is an elbow joint that first bends/contracts as you start the stroke, and then unbends into the shot, basically like a catapult. So rather than the classic open stance forehand chain of: legs -> hips -> shoulder -> racquet, you'd have the elbow catapulting forward between the shoulder and racquet stages. Of course, ideally, you'd actually see something like: legs -> hips -> shoulder -> elbow -> wrist -> racquet, which I think is what Federer is really getting at with his forehand.

 

[JohnYandell]

I wouldn't call Fed's forehand wristy at all. In the vast majority of all balls his wrist is well laid back at contact.

This is crystal clear in the high speed video. Because he is so relaxed and rotates the hand and arm so much in so many different degrees, observers with the naked eye have an even harder time understanding this than with more conventional players like Agassi.

 

[habib]

I wouldn't call Fed's forehand wristy at all. In the vast majority of all balls his wrist is well laid back at contact.

This is crystal clear in the high speed video. Because he is so relaxed and rotates the hand and arm so much in so many different degrees, observers with the naked eye have an even harder time understanding this than with more conventional players like Agassi.

To tell you the truth, I think that in these instances, high speed video can actually disguise certain movements which are more obvious when the delay caused by viewing videos at such slow speeds is absent.

The 'wristyness' of badminton shots is also not nearly as evident when viewed at 1000FPS. These high speeds vids expand split-second intervals into much longer time frames, IMO making certain things appear more static than they may actually be.

This isn't to say that Fed swats at the ball, or that the use of his wrist/forearm is anywhere as pronounced as in other racquet sports, but relative to the tennis world, it is quite wristy.

 

[JohnYandell]

I'll have to disagree there. I'll have to take the position that more information is better than less information.

There is in some of his forehands a gradual release through the motion. In others the wrist actually moves slightly further backwards (more laid back)just after the hit.

I think the key point as to how the wrist moves, if at all, comes down to what the player is trying to do, where he is on the court, etc. But for the average player learning the feeling of solid contact with the wrist back should be the starting point.

The problem in all of this is when players start believing that the there is a conscious forward snap, it destroys the underlying technical elements of the stroke. I've seen that hundreds of times. Players are convinced they are capturing the "snap" of the pros, but when you put them side by side with the player they think they are imitating you quickly see how this is the opposite of true.

Whatever the wrist does is a function of the other larger forces in the motion, combined with the general relaxation of the players.

 

[habib]

I'll have to disagree there. I'll have to take the position that more information is better than less information.

Sure, but this is a case of different information, not more of it.

There is in some of his forehands a gradual release through the motion. In others the wrist actually moves slightly further backwards (more laid back)just after the hit.

I think the key point as to how the wrist moves, if at all, comes down to what the player is trying to do, where he is on the court, etc. But for the average player learning the feeling of solid contact with the wrist back should be the starting point.

The problem in all of this is when players start believing that the there is a conscious forward snap, it destroys the underlying technical elements of the stroke. I've seen that hundreds of times. Players are convinced they are capturing the "snap" of the pros, but when you put them side by side with the player they think they are imitating you quickly see how this is the opposite of true.

Whatever the wrist does is a function of the other larger forces in the motion, combined with the general relaxation of the players.

I can go along with this. I wasn't originally trying to imply that the wrist snap was a conscious or intentional component. Even in badminton, where the wrist/forearm is more or less the ultimate point of energy transfer, its action is intentional in very few instances, being restricted to situations where you don't have time or positioning to engage other, larger force generators . Any full swing uses the arm like a whip, and the forearm pronates at the end simply because that's what the arm's movement dictates it to do.

 

[tricky]

Any full swing uses the arm like a whip, and the forearm pronates at the end simply because that's what the arm's movement dictates it to do.

Yeah, the key thing I think Yandell is saying, that the player doesn't intentionally pronate his racquet to produce topspin. If the wrist is loose and the ball hits the lower part of the face, sure the angle will turn a little, but that's just the natural impact.

Some people think that the loose back-wrist position directly contributes to the racquet speed. That's probably not true because the wrist angle doesn't change a lot, even considering release, through the contact zone.

 

[habib]

Yeah, the key thing I think Yandell is saying, that the player doesn't intentionally pronate his racquet to produce topspin. If the wrist is loose and the ball hits the lower part of the face, sure the angle will turn a little, but that's just the natural impact.

Some people think that the loose back-wrist position directly contributes to the racquet speed. That's probably not true because the wrist angle doesn't change a lot, even considering release, through the contact zone.

True, but even a minor change in wrist angle, such as a slight release, just prir to contact can influence the racquet speed going into contact a good deal.

 

[JohnYandell]

I think we need to be careful with the terms here.

I actually think that the counterclock wise hand and arm rotation is the (or one of the) intentional variables.

The other is the extension. The wrist release as our dear friend BB has also argued, more or less takes care of itself--or not as the case may be.

Shot selection--depth, spin, angle, pace comes from the combination of these two things. First the extension, or how much a player extends the swing forward and upward. This is mainly a lifting motion from the shoulder, but also driven by torso rotation.

The second is how much he turns the hand, arm, and racket over, as a unit, the so-called "wiper."

You can have great extension and little rotation, or less extension and extreme rotation, and any combination in between. This accounts for much of the confusion about the so-called modern forehand.

People pick one shot, think of it as "the" forehand or "Federer's" forehand when what they have really done is simply isolate the focus on one variation.

To understand the big picture you have to look at the range of combinations. Federer has the greatest number of possible variations I've looked at and this is one of the factors that makes his forehand so wonderous and tough.