Holding/absorbing the ball

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Yo if you are still around, i was watching this vid and a couple of shots sound different like I am barely contacting the ball. Like the one at 31sec and 34sec. Very different sounds. Is that what you are talking about the one at 31 sec? Is that absorbing the ball vs the one at 34?

Can no one comment on the differnt sounds??
 
Well I am more into improvised music than strict music notes. So I sort of identify with Federers words: It is about synchronising yourself to the ball.
But I see your point in that a tennis rally will never follow a strict metric tempo. I just see some similarities as well.
I once compared watching a Federer match to listening to a jazz concert. There will be errors but there will also be magic. So don't get worked up about the mishits and the shanks because it's part of the deal. Also, to quote Robert Fripp, "A great guitarist is true to the moment he finds himself in". Which is similar to the notion of playing the shot appropriate for one's court position etc. And there's plenty of time sig changes in jazz so that's accounted for as well. ;)
 
Can no one comment on the differnt sounds??
It is difficult to make out from this sort of video because it doesn't sound as loud as the sound of hitting a tennis ball would be in the flesh. It's also tough to gauge the speed of the ball from video. That is, whether the lack of sound in the first shot is because it was a clean hit or just because there wasn't enough behind it. You have to answer that. Did it look to you as if the first ball sped away without much effort from your side? If so, you are on the right track. A really clean hit will still be loud but the sound will be rich and focussed whereas with slightly off center hits or shots hit too early or too late there is more sound from the frame. In a really clean hit, the sound is essentially just of the ball landing on the stringbed. Now please don't take this literally and try to translate this to a physics equation as many seem to do in this space. That is not the point of my comparison; I am only interested in the perception of sound however that it may be factually inaccurate. When I don't hear that sound which I described, I know I am not making contact as well as I should. Further, I use more of an Eastern grip so my contact tends to be pretty flush. Those with more extreme grips may well report a different sound (but having watched those who hit a really big ball with strong semi westerns, I think the basic idea is the same).
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
One would think a solid methodology wouldnt be sooooo polarizing. ..
Well there are many things in this world where the logic is not obvious to some. This argument/debate about the use of open stance and hitting across the ball has raged on for over 100 yrs now. Just as you claim one style is polarizing, so too is the opposite (traditional training) just as polarizing.
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Well there are many things in this world where the logic is not obvious to some. This argument/debate about the use of open stance and hitting across the ball has raged on for over 100 yrs now. Just as you claim one style is polarizing, so too is the opposite (traditional training) just as polarizing.
Really? Is anyone even representing traditional training? Is there a website or book or some classic certification for instructors??

Hopefully we can all agree that the closed stance on the fh is not the way to be hitting. Its not polarizing if no one argues the opposite position.

All i know is you do an MTM thread and percentages go up dramatically that it will be nuked.

Do a Salzenstein, Thomaz, FYB, Top Tennis Training, etc thread or post their vids and nothing happens. Start one with Oscar and big time issues and threads get nuked. Clearly there is something about MTM that polarizes people way more than other coaching methods or vids. You may want to figure out why that is the case.

That makes me severly doubt the validity of the methodology....
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
It is difficult to make out from this sort of video because it doesn't sound as loud as the sound of hitting a tennis ball would be in the flesh. It's also tough to gauge the speed of the ball from video. That is, whether the lack of sound in the first shot is because it was a clean hit or just because there wasn't enough behind it. You have to answer that. Did it look to you as if the first ball sped away without much effort from your side? If so, you are on the right track. A really clean hit will still be loud but the sound will be rich and focussed whereas with slightly off center hits or shots hit too early or too late there is more sound from the frame. In a really clean hit, the sound is essentially just of the ball landing on the stringbed. Now please don't take this literally and try to translate this to a physics equation as many seem to do in this space. That is not the point of my comparison; I am only interested in the perception of sound however that it may be factually inaccurate. When I don't hear that sound which I described, I know I am not making contact as well as I should. Further, I use more of an Eastern grip so my contact tends to be pretty flush. Those with more extreme grips may well report a different sound (but having watched those who hit a really big ball with strong semi westerns, I think the basic idea is the same).
Not really sure i know the answer. Think the 2 different shots were just mistimed. Probably caught at a higher attack angle than the rest.

Eastern is a crazy grip. Kudos for you being able to use it!!!

Think i hit fairly clean from past vid analysis
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
All i know is you do an MTM thread and percentages go up dramatically that it will be nuked.

You may want to figure out why that is the case.

That makes me severly doubt the validity of the methodology....
In all reality, there is only one poster that gets the threads nuked, lol, otherwise it's just a normal debate for the most part. Why should I figure out why? Actually we really know why and it has nothing to do with tennis. I have very little to do with either side of this other than calling out or correcting misinfo I may be aware of. As you accurately note, no legit coach is in denial of the place in top tennis for open stance and hitting across the ball these days.

I will say thank goodness for the controversy though, because that is how I found the Modern Strokes many years ago, lol, reading about traditional coaches going off about crazy opens stances and arc swings.
 
I once compared watching a Federer match to listening to a jazz concert. There will be errors but there will also be magic. So don't get worked up about the mishits and the shanks because it's part of the deal. Also, to quote Robert Fripp, "A great guitarist is true to the moment he finds himself in". Which is similar to the notion of playing the shot appropriate for one's court position etc. And there's plenty of time sig changes in jazz so that's accounted for as well. ;)
The late great pianoplayer Horace Parlan lived and teached in Denmark for many years. One of his pupils told about his statement that "playing jazz is not an effort, it is a state". These words can be applied to for instance long distance running, and playing tennis and other stuff I reckon.
 
Last edited:
The late great pianoplayer Horace Parlan lived and taeched in Denmark for many years. One of his pupils told about his statement that "playing jazz is not an effort, it is a state". These words can be applied to for instance long distance running, and playing tennis and other stuff I reckon.
I would think long-distance running would be the most comparable to a state since it's monotonous [and I don't necessarily mean that derogatorily]. Jazz less so but some sets can go one for a while. But tennis is not: there is sudden movement, moments of great exertion, longer moments of inactivity, etc. I would think it would be more difficult to reach a state [ie the zone] when there is such variety [which makes those who can achieve it all the more impressive].
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
I would think long-distance running would be the most comparable to a state since it's monotonous [and I don't necessarily mean that derogatorily]. Jazz less so but some sets can go one for a while. But tennis is not: there is sudden movement, moments of great exertion, longer moments of inactivity, etc. I would think it would be more difficult to reach a state [ie the zone] when there is such variety [which makes those who can achieve it all the more impressive].
Totally agree with normal tennis. But open tennis is the way to the zone. Your brain just shuts down because of dizzyness and points are automatic:

 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Yes but doesn't the zone apply to you winning points? ;)
I won enough and man tennis is mental dude. Actual points are really irrelevant to the mental game. Like look at 1:06. Cant you see how demoralizing that backhand was. The amount of talent and confidence to hit that was like a mental Vulcan Squeeze....
 
I won enough and man tennis is mental dude. Actual points are really irrelevant to the mental game. Like look at 1:06. Cant you see how demoralizing that backhand was. The amount of talent and confidence to hit that was like a mental Vulcan Squeeze....
When viewed in slow-motion without the racquet or ball, it looks like you're doing Tai Chi; either that or you're trying to shoo a bug away.
 

onehandbh

Legend
The late great pianoplayer Horace Parlan lived and teached in Denmark for many years. One of his pupils told about his statement that "playing jazz is not an effort, it is a state". These words can be applied to for instance long distance running, and playing tennis and other stuff I reckon.
Some of the great jazz musicians where not just random improvisers going with the flow. They know actually know and understand the "fundamentals" and other music forms very well inside/out.
They are not random in their improvisation.

A toddler learning to play music may be somewhat random.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
Routine firmware update on the greatest TT thread. @Sentinel may have cracked the collo/Suresh code:

I didn't know Suresh was an IT guy.
And even if he is I don't see him using python. He must have developed his own programming language because of the superiority complex. Any ideas as to what he would have named it?
S? S++? GulabJamun??
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

I’m adding this to the hold/absorb thread.

It’s the right answer.
 
Some of the great jazz musicians where not just random improvisers going with the flow. They know actually know and understand the "fundamentals" and other music forms very well inside/out.
They are not random in their improvisation.

A toddler learning to play music may be somewhat random.
I did not use the word random. Horace Parlan was a highly proficient, skilled and (perhaps not in the academic way, but anyway) schooled musician. All this could be part of what what enables you to reach a place where playing is a state, a sustainable condition, rather than an effort, a performance. There are so many synonyms, or ways to try to describe this, being in the zone, flow, let the music play you, take part in a nonjudgemental way, egolessness. I suppose we're in "the inner game of tennis" territory. Here is Federers advice to Bill Gates:
"Be aggressive but loose. Breathe deep. Keep a Zen-like focus on the ball."
"Let go," Federer said.
"He made it clear," Gates says, "that we were going to have fun."
Or as Federer once said: "It is about synchronizing yourself to the ball."
Edit: Oh I wrote that before. This thread seems a long time ago allready. It is because I've been in the moment ever since.
 
Last edited:
I'm an Australian tennis coach based in Singapore and for all beginners and rec players the biggest fundamental flaw I notice that prohibits this level on improving any stroke is the ability to hold/absorb the ball. Push and turn on the ball is key. Create the most resistance on the ball then accelerate with the most mass. Like rowing or Swimming, "catch the water" (special mentions to coach Doug King for originally highlighting how important this is in my coaching.

The amount of people I have seen improve from total beginner or rec player is through the ability to hold the ball on the string.

Two of the most evil words a coach can say is swinging and hitting and they are used the most by coaches.
All this does is makes people accelerate the racquet further from the ball thus the ball just bounces of the stings and the larger body parts don't work with the ball, your hand and arm become he main power source.

Very effective coaching cues I use and it works like gold-
" wait for the ball, catch the ball, coil into the ball slowly, rotate on the ball, ask your-self are you hitting the ball or catching the ball, the slower you go into the ball the better you will absorb it.
" are u rotating before the ball or on the ball" catch the ball with the most coils then you have more potential energy to move the ball with less effort.

Once someone achieves understanding of catching you will find any strokes are much easier for a student to develop well. You want your student to prevent any chance of a swinging, absorb the ball and a big thrust with the big guys.

I found this from the legend coach Doug King and it sums up perfectly what I'm talking about-

His quote and pic sums up everything, pure gold -

"In the modern game, the swing of racquet is minimised. The result is better contact between the racquet and the ball- that translates into less slapping into and pulling of the Ball and fewer off center hits. The hand positions the racquet to the ball and allows a leveraged drive and turn of the ball initiated with the body" Doug King


Hi collo, don't be angry with the people who don't understand what you are willing to show us all. Tennis is a difficult game for a good reason. Your "catch/absorb" the ball cue is a very good one and I am shocked that even John yandell was not able to understand you. One of the most difficult part of striking a ball is to not muscle it with the arm, to get rid of the tension in the arm, and your cue is helping in that. Even if catching it is not possible, it actually helps in relaxing the arm before rotating the hips, the trunk etc. You are also right in saying that the closer to the ball you relax the arm and start rotating the trunk , the less misshits you will get. I find that your explanations of how to strike are the best definitions of what touch really is.
 
Truly amazed that this thread lives on even tho' it appears the collo has left the building. Has he posted at all in the past 3 or 4 weeks? Perhaps there is a finite limit to how many times he was willing to say the very same things over and over and over again.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
 
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
The problem is, he didn't say the same thing: he kept changing his argument depending on who he was arguing with. Some of the time he stated that it was just a concept. Some of the time he stated it was really occurring. For the latter times, when people pointed out the impossibility based on a contact time of ball with strings of 4ms, he ignored it.

Belief in what one is saying is not the issue: ignoring valid points people bring up is.

Then there was his posting style: the "I'm right and if you disagree with me you are too stupid to understand so go away" school of journalism. That's also an issue although it doesn't change the bio-mechanical factors. It just makes it less likely that people will be open-minded to anything he has to say, even if it's true.

Have you read the entire thread, Mr. Windmill?
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Saying the same thing over and over is just a sign of firm belief in what he is saying. I don't see anything wrong with that.
ok
 
Commenting the Hopman Cup, Danish commentator, former top 30 doubles player and coach of Li Na (when she won the FO), Michael Mortensen, praised a player for "really massaging the ball" in a top spin shot. Of course the player did not really massage the ball (to do that you would actually need to hold the ball on the strings), but I reckon most people would understand what he was conveying. On the other hand most people would probably also agree that a 4 ms massage is not worth paying for.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Commenting the Hopman Cup, Danish commentator, former top 30 doubles player and coach of Li Na (when she won the FO), Michael Mortensen, praised a player for "really massaging the ball" in a top spin shot. Of course the player did not really massage the ball (to do that you would actually need to hold the ball on the strings), but I reckon most people would understand what he was conveying. On the other hand most people would probably also agree that a 4 ms massage is not worth paying for.
4 ms happy ending? One stroke and he is broke?
 
The problem is, he didn't say the same thing: he kept changing his argument depending on who he was arguing with. Some of the time he stated that it was just a concept. Some of the time he stated it was really occurring. For the latter times, when people pointed out the impossibility based on a contact time of ball with strings of 4ms, he ignored it.

Belief in what one is saying is not the issue: ignoring valid points people bring up is.

Then there was his posting style: the "I'm right and if you disagree with me you are too stupid to understand so go away" school of journalism. That's also an issue although it doesn't change the bio-mechanical factors. It just makes it less likely that people will be open-minded to anything he has to say, even if it's true.

Have you read the entire thread, Mr. Windmill?
Haha, I only reached page 23 when things went already crazy from all sides. I am just used to interpret things and not take them too literally. I just find his "catching" the ball very useful as I myself experimented with several ways of approaching the ball and the mental picture of catching it helped a lot.
 

Curious

Legend
Haha, I only reached page 23 when things went already crazy from all sides. I am just used to interpret things and not take them too literally. I just find his "catching" the ball very useful as I myself experimented with several ways of approaching the ball and the mental picture of catching it helped a lot.
Maybe for volleys but I find it hard to understand how it helps one for groundstrokes.
 
Maybe for volleys but I find it hard to understand how it helps one for groundstrokes.
In my case, mentally catching instead of hitting helps in not muscling the ball with the arm and instead use the rotation of the hips and the shoulders to hit the ball. In match situations where I use to be more tense, it has made a difference in my case.
 

oserver

Professional
I'm an Australian tennis coach based in Singapore and for all beginners and rec players the biggest fundamental flaw I notice that prohibits this level on improving any stroke is the ability to hold/absorb the ball. Push and turn on the ball is key. Create the most resistance on the ball then accelerate with the most mass. Like rowing or Swimming, "catch the water" (special mentions to coach Doug King for originally highlighting how important this is in my coaching.

The amount of people I have seen improve from total beginner or rec player is through the ability to hold the ball on the string.

Two of the most evil words a coach can say is swinging and hitting and they are used the most by coaches.
All this does is makes people accelerate the racquet further from the ball thus the ball just bounces of the stings and the larger body parts don't work with the ball, your hand and arm become he main power source.

Very effective coaching cues I use and it works like gold-
" wait for the ball, catch the ball, coil into the ball slowly, rotate on the ball, ask your-self are you hitting the ball or catching the ball, the slower you go into the ball the better you will absorb it.
" are u rotating before the ball or on the ball" catch the ball with the most coils then you have more potential energy to move the ball with less effort.

Once someone achieves understanding of catching you will find any strokes are much easier for a student to develop well. You want your student to prevent any chance of a swinging, absorb the ball and a big thrust with the big guys.

I found this from the legend coach Doug King and it sums up perfectly what I'm talking about-

His quote and pic sums up everything, pure gold -

"In the modern game, the swing of racquet is minimised. The result better contact between the racquet and the ball- that translates into less slapping into and pulling of the Ball and fewer off center hits. The hand positions the racquet to the ball and allows a leveraged drive and turn of the ball initiated with the body" Doug King


I have some data to show that tennis forms and techniques do have impact on prolong or shortening the ball stay on string bed. The sound graphs I included in the following paper (page 5 of 6) maybe a "handyman's proof", but anyone can reproduce it using higher speed camera and sound equipment.

Wrist Extension Tennis Serve (WTES) Serve Paper
 
Last edited:

Hmgraphite1

Hall of Fame
I did "feel" a "catch" this summer while grooving on the ball machine. It happened on rally balls where I wasn't "arming" the shot in the least. Had a really loose grip, but no follow through. The "catch" feeling was actually an "anti-catch" as the "feeling" was a rebound off a loosely held racquet. Felt great, grooved, "pocketed". But there was nothing I was doing during impact other than a "loose grip" "out" of impact.
 

oserver

Professional
nothing. its pretty simple. If you believe that you can somehow act on the ball WHILE ITS ON THE STRINGS then this is the thread for you. I know of 3 posters who seem to believe this. @collotennis, @gregorydiamond and @oserver. Enough said.
"you can somehow act on the ball WHILE ITS ON THE STRINGS", what a distorted statement!? My paper says that if you have a correct form and techniques, the ball will stay on the string bed longer than otherwise. Nothing about ACT on the ball while feeling the ball is on the string bed.
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
"you can somehow act on the ball WHILE ITS ON THE STRINGS", what a distorted statement!? My paper says that if you have a correct form and techniques, the ball will stay on the string bed longer than otherwise. Nothing about ACT on the ball while feeling the ball is on the string bed.
Well this thread is about acting but even if you don't claim that its just silly trying to make the ball stay on the strings longer. Its like 4ms so you get to 5ms if thats even possible....any proof besides the recordings which you acknowledge aren't really proof (handymans proof)? Any studies that back up your assertion? Say that pros keep the ball on the strings longer than say college players?
 
Well this thread is about acting but even if you don't claim that its just silly trying to make the ball stay on the strings longer. Its like 4ms so you get to 5ms if thats even possible....any proof besides the recordings which you acknowledge aren't really proof (handymans proof)? Any studies that back up your assertion? Say that pros keep the ball on the strings longer than say college players?
Yes about acting, but not reacting in 4 ms. And 5 ms is a 25% increase of 4 ms.
 
Top