How does Fognini gets so much Spin on his FH?

FailBetter

Semi-Pro
OCJEi3a.png


MMqevch.jpg




RPgu4Oc.jpg



He seems to be constantly over 50rps on average. There are not many players in that range. But it never looks like he is going for heavy spin. Also he seems to hit much flatter than Rafa or Thiem.
Shouldnt it be difficult to deal with? Flat power with crazy spin...
 

Curious

G.O.A.T.
This is why Fabio is one of the better ball-strikers out there.

What blows my mind is how little he bends his knees. He just like walks over to the ball and just cranks it.
He has a big belly which I later found out, is actually great oblique muscles! Can imagine the torque they can create.
 

NuBas

Legend
@FailBetter I think it has to do with how he makes contact with the ball. I know a player who has a slow swing but his balls have tons of spin, more than others who swing faster.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
He cheats. Playing a tweener racket with spin pattern.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

FailBetter

Semi-Pro
anyone has number from Tiafoe?wonder how much spin he puts on those balls
Yeah he is in the low 50'is too (3000rpm) average.
I saw both Fabio and Tiafoe live at last year USO. But on Tiafoes ball you can see that spin much better compared to Fabios.
It was quite funny to watch becaus he played against De Minaur whos Ball is really flat.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
Look at the contact in these two guys hits.


Excess of lag in Fabio’s shot and the face is fliping much more over the ball than Andy’s. And the follow thru is much more driven thry the ball. Due to the axplanatory nature of the clip, it is impossible to say exactly, but I’d say Fabio has way longer contact time and more closing racket during the contact than Andy.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
This is why Fabio is one of the better ball-strikers out there.

What blows my mind is how little he bends his knees. He just like walks over to the ball and just cranks it.

The secret is in his shoulder turn. Abbs strength.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

Curiosity

Professional
Yeah he is in the low 50'is too (3000rpm) average.
I saw both Fabio and Tiafoe live at last year USO. But on Tiafoes ball you can see that spin much better compared to Fabios.
It was quite funny to watch becaus he played against De Minaur whos Ball is really flat.

There are a number of good slow motion videos of Fabio's forehand on YouTube.

His forehand stroke takes major ESR just as forward motion starts, as many players do. He sometimes gets the racquet head low, but not always. His double-bend motion form and synchronization is generally very standard. He uses massive ISR directly into contact, which is a major source of both acceleration and spin. In the video below the upper arm roll for both the ESR and ISR is very clear. Can't miss it.

As a clear example, showing both some obviously intentional big spin hits, as well as some flatter swings (but still major ISR), here's an example:

 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Excess of lag in Fabio’s shot and the face is fliping much more over the ball than Andy’s. And the follow thru is much more driven thry the ball. Due to the axplanatory nature of the clip, it is impossible to say exactly, but I’d say Fabio has way longer contact time and more closing racket during the contact than Andy.

The mechanics of creating spin in its base is quite simple, mostly it's RHS plus racquet's tilt on contact (relative to racquet's head trajectory). The rest is string bed and racquet's physical properties (head size, string spacing...). So, yeah, it's closing the racquet (plus racquet trajectory). Contact time has nothing to do with it, it's consequential anyway, just racquet's tilt plus trajectory plus RHS.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
The mechanics of creating spin in its base is quite simple, mostly it's RHS plus racquet's tilt on contact (relative to racquet's head trajectory). The rest is string bed and racquet's physical properties (head size, string spacing...). So, yeah, it's closing the racquet (plus racquet trajectory). Contact time has nothing to do with it, it's consequential anyway, just racquet's tilt plus trajectory plus RHS.

Physics is simple, but the mechanics in producing the high RHS is not at all simple as so many rec players cannot. And if could, they don’t usually produce enough spin for the pace.

Exept for the hit there is also this, if the tilt is changing (closing) significantly during contact it creates a gearing effect.

In Fognini’s case compared to Murray, there seems to be significant difference in the face behaviour.

While Murray has his racket ”perpendicular” at the start of the contact and during the contact to the target, Fognini’s is twisted back, open to his right (closed horizontally) and closes during contact.

And another dimension is, that on the two featured shots, Murray’s ball seems to bounce off the strings earlier. That could, and probably is a sign of significantly lower RHS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
We'll have to first agree on what we're seeing :)
In the vid above at 0:45 you can see a clean centre hit, no off centre. I don't see tilt changing a bit, looks fixed to me. I see tilt change on contact on slight off centres when ball contact is lower than centre. First hit in the vid is a mishit ball.

I don't think it's a good idea (or at least not for any rec player) to actually change tilt during contact. It's sensitive to time and it easily leads to inconsistency. But more important, it's completely unnecessary. If you ensure sufficient tilt spin will generate in sufficient quantity, providing the RHS is there.

Any rec player can produce whatever tilt he wishes on the ball and will adjust the outgoing ball trajectory with the racquet head trajectory. The difference will be in the RHS. Pro players use all the mechanisms to efficiently increase the acceleration/RHS and there's the difference. Ensure the tilt that Fogna is using but produce it with much less RHS, it will result in a half-moonballish slow topspin shot, with much less spin too because there was no enough RHS to back it up.

Rec players without a developed nice technique typically end with hitting with less spin because that's pretty much the only way for them to get the pace they want, and the tilt they use on the contact is not big. If they close the racquet further down they lose pace because they don't generate enough RHS to have it all.
 
Last edited:

zalive

Hall of Fame
It really is simple. RHS is the energy we put. Racquet head tilt determines relations, how much of the RHS energy is used to generate pace and how much to generate spin. There will be some energy loss through the string bed and the frame, too. But the tilt will decide the ratio (pace/spin) of energy transfer.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
This is, what I see.

fbc293f4db5914601f0ef633e81f4263.jpg


Yellow line - racket tilt prior to impact,
Green line - racket tilt in the beginning of contact
Blue line - racket tilt after the launch of the ball

There is a difference between each lines in forward tilt. The following cannot have happened, if there is no change in the tilt in between.

There are forces, that make that happen, cause the impact is not perpendicular.

I do agree, that RHS plays a big role, but the impact impulse is turning the the face by cosine of that angle. And that enhances the spinn with higher RHS even more.

If you hit with stiff wrist the change is slower.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
This is, what I see.

fbc293f4db5914601f0ef633e81f4263.jpg


Yellow line - racket tilt prior to impact,
Green line - racket tilt in the beginning of contact
Blue line - racket tilt after the launch of the ball

There is a difference between each lines in forward tilt. The following cannot have happened, if there is no change in the tilt in between.

There are forces, that make that happen, cause the impact is not perpendicular.

I do agree, that RHS plays a big role, but the impact impulse is turning the the face by cosine of that angle. And that enhances the spinn with higher RHS even more.

If you hit with stiff wrist the change is slower.

This screenshot is after the impact, the only change of tilt I see is a change on impact. Because of the impact. I don't see any tilt change right before the contact. So, this is what you meant?

Again it's physics. There was a great web site still active some 3-4 years ago (I think it's no longer active) with physics formulas explaining why even hitting with the centre creates a torsional momentum which direction is trying to close the racquet's head down (I guess this is what you as well mean by 'forces that make it happen'?), so if your hand is loose you can expect this to happen even on perfect centre hits. Physics formulas explain this. However if you hit up from the centre it's possible that created counter-momentum because of unfavourable direction annuls the torsional momentum normally created, but hitting the centre (and especially below centre) will create that momentum in a direction of closing the racquet's face down.

It's also known that smaller grip sizes aid spin generation because there will be less resistance to created torsional momentum - momentum in your hand resisting torsional rotation of the racquet in your hand is less with a smaller grip size. What's also great is that this momentum gets bigger with not only bigger RHS but also with bigger incoming speed of the ball - so when hitting harder you actually get bit more closed tilt so you generate bit more spin. Changing the ratio when you'll already have a huge pace because of big incoming speed of the ball, that's exactly what you need: more control over the ball while pace can't suffer because of big incoming speed.

I think with Fogna it's solely loose grip plus small grip size for the size of his hand, which allows this torsional momentum to have a bigger effect on closing the racquet further down. Plus...this?

If you hit with stiff wrist the change is slower.

Do you mean that he's started to release his wrist (from the full extension) just prior to contact, which unlocks the wrist so it can allow more torsional movement? I'm unable to tell from that angle.
If this happens it might further explain why he allows more of that torsional closing the racquet's face down to happen.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
This screenshot is after the impact, the only change of tilt I see is a change on impact. Because of the impact. I don't see any tilt change right before the contact. So, this is what you meant?

Again it's physics. There was a great web site still active some 3-4 years ago (I think it's no longer active) with physics formulas explaining why even hitting with the centre creates a torsional momentum which direction is trying to close the racquet's head down (I guess this is what you as well mean by 'forces that make it happen'?), so if your hand is loose you can expect this to happen even on perfect centre hits. Physics formulas explain this. However if you hit up from the centre it's possible that created counter-momentum because of unfavourable direction annuls the torsional momentum normally created, but hitting the centre (and especially below centre) will create that momentum in a direction of closing the racquet's face down.

It's also known that smaller grip sizes aid spin generation because there will be less resistance to created torsional momentum - momentum in your hand resisting torsional rotation of the racquet in your hand is less with a smaller grip size. What's also great is that this momentum gets bigger with not only bigger RHS but also with bigger incoming speed of the ball - so when hitting harder you actually get bit more closed tilt so you generate bit more spin. Changing the ratio when you'll already have a huge pace because of big incoming speed of the ball, that's exactly what you need: more control over the ball while pace can't suffer because of big incoming speed.

I think with Fogna it's solely loose grip plus small grip size for the size of his hand, which allows this torsional momentum to have a bigger effect on closing the racquet further down. Plus...this?



Do you mean that he's started to release his wrist (from the full extension) just prior to contact, which unlocks the wrist so it can allow more torsional movement? I'm unable to tell from that angle.
If this happens it might further explain why he allows more of that torsional closing the racquet's face down to happen.

Yes for the first and second paragraph, agreeing on the third.

The torq momentum is relative to the impact force. The faster the head, the more it will generate torque.

And a definite no for the last. The twisting/rolling face is a byproduct, and I referred to the rec levels, when pointing out stiff wrist.

Loose grip and loose wrist, I think. The amount of ESR and ISR of Fognini’s are huge. Lot, if not the most of rec players woun’t be able to twist their arm in that manner and to the same extent. Plus the timing with a loose arm.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Yeah we understand each other now.
Edit: I must correct myself, torque is a correct term, torsion is a consequence which happens to material, but this is a torque which causes a racquet to rotate/change its tilt. You're completely right Pete, ty.
 
Last edited:

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
Interesting to see how Andy loads more with his back (right) leg, while Fognini with his front (left) leg. The left leg style of loading shows Fognini as being more upright. Andy's back leg loading happens slightly earlier during his racquet take back, while Fognini's right after he finished his "pat the dog".

Andy pushes off the ground with his back (right) leg, while Fognini with his front (left) leg. I remember Andy often loads with his back leg, not just when he's pressed and hitting late.

Also Fognini's elbow is much more closer and tucked in than Andy's.
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
Interesting to see how Andy loads more with his back (right) leg, while Fognini with his front (left) leg. The left leg style of loading shows Fognini as being more upright. Andy's back leg loading happens slightly earlier during his racquet take back, while Fognini's right after he finished his "pat the dog".

Andy pushes off the ground with his back (right) leg, while Fognini with his front (left) leg. I remember Andy often loads with his back leg, not just when he's pressed and hitting late.

Also Fognini's elbow is much more closer and tucked in than Andy's.

You covered few key elements there.

Front foot loading and pushing up generates faster hips.

Close to body elbow is reducing the radius, thus the hand weighs less at speed than further away from the torsion center of the trunk.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
You covered few key elements there.

Front foot loading and pushing up generates faster hips.

Close to body elbow is reducing the radius, thus the hand weighs less at speed than further away from the torsion center of the trunk.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
What's the reason front foot loading generates "faster hip"?
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
What's the reason front foot loading generates "faster hip"?

The effort pushes front hip back, and generates a post - a counter force to your natural movement forward. And woun’t let the hips slide forward stalling the hip rotation. Instead of trying to rush your back hip forward, you generate the same or even bigger leverage to twist the trunk without moving forward.

Double the result with same effort. Pushing up, while racket going down, and horizontal torque is generated instantly to the opposite side of your playing arm.

Basic stuff from golf swings of the top players today. But has only lately become part of offensive groundies. And it is quicker to push that front leg, than loading your back foot.


View from behind, but it can be spotted here too. Fede even push sometimes so hard with the fron leg, that it takes off the ground. But nearly every shot (fh) show, how his front foot is straightening as his arm swings forward.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 120290

Guest
How does Fognini gets so much Spin on his FH?

Simple answer: Cuz he's Fabio and we are not.

Whenever I try to hit like Fabio, I play my worst matches ever. I wind up hitting 1 spectacular shot for every 4 mishits and find myself fluent in Italian cussing.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Simple answer: Cuz he's Fabio and we are not.

The guy is a beast. In those matches when he showed what he's capable of, it's monstrous stuff. It's not a problem if we're not Fabio, of course we aren't; a good deal of the ATP is not Fabio either... :)
 

Curiosity

Professional
The mechanics of creating spin in its base is quite simple, mostly it's RHS plus racquet's tilt on contact (relative to racquet's head trajectory). The rest is string bed and racquet's physical properties (head size, string spacing...). So, yeah, it's closing the racquet (plus racquet trajectory). Contact time has nothing to do with it, it's consequential anyway, just racquet's tilt plus trajectory plus RHS.

RHS: All other things being equal, more RHS, velocity, does mean greater spin. A large racquet head size does reduce framing errors when top spin is hit. It's "really quite simple:" -that acceleration in the plane of the stringbed is a critical measure, since in the brief time the ball is sliding across the string bed, but before the strings have grabbed the ball, a greater amount of friction will occur. Once the strings have grabbed, no further spin can be created. Racquet tilt changes the effective angle of incidence of incoming ball to string bed. ISR into contact causes (1) the racquet face to tilt forward; (2) the racquet to accelerate up in the plane of the string bed; the RH to accelerate forward. Ergo, more spin from two sources, and more RH velocity in the direction of the swing. What's not to like?
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
Not quite sure on this, but I think, the deformation of the ball does not allow it to roll on the strings when grabbed, but at departing the back of the sphere is getting pushed faster upwards than the center of mas.

The hit is basically going past the center of mass and creates torque within the radius, how far off the center of mas the force is applied. Spinloft is different from the face angle compared to vertical, cause both the ball trajectory and the face path alters the angle.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
Last edited:

Curiosity

Professional
Not quite sure on this, but I think, the deformation of the ball does not allow it to roll on the strings when grabbed, but at departing the back of the sphere is getting pushed faster upwards than the center of mas.

The hit is basically going past the center of mass and creates torque within the radius, how far off the center of mas the force is applied. Spinloft is different from the face angle compared to vertical, cause both the ball trajectory and the face path alters the angle.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer

I've only added a few sentences to this post. Everything in quotes is from Technical Tennis by Rod Cross, assumig you don't have a copy, touching on what you all have been discussing:

"In fact, the racquet slides for an inch or so, and then the strings grip or grab the ball, pulling the back of the ball up with the racquet until the strings shoot the ball out..." One the strips grab, the amount of spin is set. The greater the angle of incidence, the tilt, the approach angle of swing, the farther past 1" the ball can slide before the roll-and-grab, i.e. the more spin that can be generated. Yes, the distortion of the ball is a vital event in the sequence.

"You create more or less spin by altering the speed, angle (vertical velocity), and tilt of the racquet. Chapter 3 discussed how altering these variables changes the angle of incidence. When you change the angle of incidence, you are also affecting the magnitude, duration, and direction in which friction will work on the ball, which determines the spin of the ball."

"In order to change the amount and/or direction of that spin with your racquet, the ball has to be incident at an angle to the strings. That way the ball slides across the strings and then bounces off with spin due to the rotation generated while it was on the strings."

"To prevent skying the return of a high bouncing topspin serve, you can do two things. One is to hit the ball harder, and the other is to hit the ball downward (ed: tilt) attempting to hit it horizontally or slightly up over the net. If you hit the ball harder, it will tend to go where you want it to go—that is, in the direction the racquet head is going. The vertical motion of the ball off the strings due to the incoming ball spin and the kick off the court is unchanged, but it becomes a smaller fraction of the total outgoing ball speed."

"Rolling is just an instantaneous transition between sliding and biting. When the ball bites, not only has the ball come to rest relative to the surface, it also becomes stuck to the surface. In the case of a racquet, that means that the bottom of the ball moves with the racquet as in Figure 4.6c. This happens when the contact part of the ball is moving at the same speed as the strings. At that point the strings “grip” the ball, and the contact point between ball and strings does not change." The ball has already been distorted, assuring spin coming off the strings.

"So spin depends only on the speed of the racquet head in a direction parallel to the string plane (ed: gained by approach angle of the swing, boost in ISR, and tilt). That’s so because it then takes friction longer to bring the ball to bite, during which time more spin is generated."

Cross, Rod. Technical Tennis: Racquets, Strings, Balls, Courts, Spin, and Bounce . Independent Publishers Group. Kindle Edition.

Angle of incidence matters a lot, altered mainly by tilt. But tilt by itself isn't sufficient. Thus:
"Five degrees of tilt by itself is not enough to generate topspin. However, if the racquet head is rising at 30 degrees and is also tilted forward by five degrees (Figure 4.10d), then there is a big increase in the amount of topspin compared with Figure 4.10b. The trajectory is also five degrees lower. Most of the work is done by swinging the racquet upward, which changes the spin from -3,820 rpm to +159 rpm. Tilting the racquet five degrees changes the paltry 159 rpm into a more respectable 628 rpm of topspin."

A sample Fed swing is under discussion next (and the .4 factor below is the balls coeffient of restoration): "It is clear from these measurements that the outgoing ball speed depends mainly on the speed of the racquet head. The bounce off the strings also contributes to the outgoing ball speed. If the ball was approaching a stationary racquet at 29 mph, it would bounce off the strings at about 0.4 x 29 = 12 mph. If the impact point on the racquet head is traveling at 70 mph (the tip travels a bit faster) and strikes a stationary ball, then the outgoing ball speed will be about 1.4 x 70 = 98 mph. However, Roger’s racquet was traveling upward at 31 degrees to the horizontal and so had a forward speed of only about 60 mph. So the expected forward speed of the ball is about 1.4 x 60 = 84 mph if the ball is initially at rest. Adding a rebound speed of 12 mph, since the ball was approaching at 29 mph, gives a predicted outgoing ball speed of 84 + 12 = 96 mph, exactly as measured." And in the ISR at contact the tilt became 8º, the final acceleration took place, and the vertical velocity in the plane of the string bed was substantially increased... (from earlier in the text...)

Cross, Rod. Technical Tennis: Racquets, Strings, Balls, Courts, Spin, and Bounce . Independent Publishers Group. Kindle Edition.

I would guess most players find that gaining tilt via ISR is easier to produce by a repeatable amount than tilt via wrist or pronation. (If you don't normally approach contact with ISR, try it with shadow swings. ESR to give yourself comfortable room for the ISR later. People are often surprised by the instant provision of tilt, RH velocity, and vertical acceleration which is easy to see yourself even in a slow shadow swing. It really is what the pros and well-taught kids do.) The ISR adds tilt, but also upward velocity in the plane of the string bed and velocity in the direction of the swing, which is good, because swinging faster makes the incoming spin less determinative. (That's also true for aim: Taking an incoming cross-court topspin ball and hitting up the line the ball will deviate a further 12º toward the sideline. Hit it harder and the deviation goes down to ca. 5º.

I would have jumped in to the Andy Murray v. Fognini comparison, but I didn't have time. At the moment I'm up till 4 am EST to make a call to Málaga. So...laugh: Andy takes much weaker ESR at the start, and less ISR into contact, hits flatter when compared to Fognini. Of course intense ISR isn't used in every shot...but is essential for high-speed forehands (cross-court, down the middle). Only the best dare go full speed and full ISR on a down the line ball off a cross-court ball, etc. Players eventually learn "less and more ISR" to mix power and control shots.

Well, you needed some reading, no? laugh
 

Curiosity

Professional
This is why Fabio is one of the better ball-strikers out there.

What blows my mind is how little he bends his knees. He just like walks over to the ball and just cranks it.

Given good hip-to-shoulder separation angle, only a bit of leg extension is needed to launch fast torso rotation. Much knee bend isn't needed to get the hitting hip going, according to reputable sources. If you need to get airborne to take the ball at your prefered contact point, that's different.
 

Curiosity

Professional
The guy is a beast. In those matches when he showed what he's capable of, it's monstrous stuff. It's not a problem if we're not Fabio, of course we aren't; a good deal of the ATP is not Fabio either... :)

We can be Fabio (or Fed or whomever), just slower and worse.
 

Curiosity

Professional
It’s been reported poly strings snap back before ball completely departs adding on to the spin.

Yep. I use Lux Alu Power regular at 44 lbs. I'm not sure how true that is, even with a fast swing. But I'm always hoping it helps. I am sure the poly gets back in position better, or the gut if we only have poly crosses.
 

Curiosity

Professional
You covered few key elements there.

Front foot loading and pushing up generates faster hips.

Close to body elbow is reducing the radius, thus the hand weighs less at speed than further away from the torsion center of the trunk.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer

Nadal for years has launched his forehand of his right foot, but has his left foot well apart, planted, and loaded. Big rotation, but "in place."
The hitting arm: So much in tennis seems about shortening or lengthening the hitting (and even off-arm) arm during rotation. The hitting upper arm is well out to the side at launch, but comes closer during the main (first 45%) of UB rotation, sapping it less. Then the opposite: the hitting arm is moving away, effectively lengthening the lever arm, just as rotation effectively slows/stops just into contact....then starts again for follow through.

It's there on the serve, the backhand, everywhere, like ice skaters doing spins by swing the arms, then pulling them in. More or less...
 

Dragy

Legend
Of course intense ISR isn't used in every shot...but is essential for high-speed forehands (cross-court, down the middle).
Just jumped off my memory, our fellow tt contributor @5263 mentioned at least 2 types of forehand execution in the latter part of the stroke: hooking and fading. What do you think on this topic and how ISR intensity (and timing?) participates here? I'd guess hooking takes more ISR into contact, however, fading is claimed to be more aggressive/power delivering...
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
Just jumped off my memory, our fellow tt contributor @5263 mentioned at least 2 types of forehand execution in the latter part of the stroke: hooking and fading. What do you think on this topic and how ISR intensity (and timing?) participates here? I'd guess hooking takes more ISR into contact, however, fading is claimed to be more aggressive/power delivering...

I think it is more of a timing issue, than the amount of ISR. Realeasing early will turn the face more along the swing and late will hold off the release till contact leaving the face ”open” to the play hand side.

Horizontal deviation is relative to ”sideways” tilt ie. ”making contact on the outter or inner side of the ball”.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
RHS: All other things being equal, more RHS, velocity, does mean greater spin. A large racquet head size does reduce framing errors when top spin is hit. It's "really quite simple:" -that acceleration in the plane of the stringbed is a critical measure, since in the brief time the ball is sliding across the string bed, but before the strings have grabbed the ball, a greater amount of friction will occur. Once the strings have grabbed, no further spin can be created. Racquet tilt changes the effective angle of incidence of incoming ball to string bed. ISR into contact causes (1) the racquet face to tilt forward; (2) the racquet to accelerate up in the plane of the string bed; the RH to accelerate forward. Ergo, more spin from two sources, and more RH velocity in the direction of the swing. What's not to like?
It’s been reported poly strings snap back before ball completely departs adding on to the spin.
Not quite sure on this, but I think, the deformation of the ball does not allow it to roll on the strings when grabbed, but at departing the back of the sphere is getting pushed faster upwards than the center of mas.

The hit is basically going past the center of mass and creates torque within the radius, how far off the center of mas the force is applied. Spinloft is different from the face angle compared to vertical, cause both the ball trajectory and the face path alters the angle.

I've studied this for myself, and there's hard to get a definitive answer, but my conclusion is that the mechanism of creating spin with poly string bed is the same one as with any other string bed: ball gets deformed and the string bed grabs it. The intensity of grabbing will determine the amount of spin from the string bed perspective, and larger spacing between strings will allow more deformation and better grabbing. What's different between poly and, say, full gut, is a mechanism of how spacing between strings increase. Nat gut in a full bed doesn't slide but it elongates a lot, so natural elasticity of the gut will allow bigger spacing between strings. On contrary, full bed of poly has minimum elongation, however sliding of mains will allow big spacing gaps. There's both scientific and empirical backup that bigger spacing enhances spin generation. There's also scientific back up that spin generation was never proved to be corellated with the dwell time. So, does snap back give some additional moment of force to further enhance the spin? It's possible but IMO even if it does it's marginal. The main mechanism is grabbing the ball by ball deformation and spacing between strings in the point of contact/grabbing. String friction from how I understand it plays a little role in mechanism - yea, there are profiled poly strings that further enhance spin generation...but minimum contact area between strings also enhances sliding, which translates to bigger gaps. So again it doesn't have to do anything with string to ball friction, since grabbing is ensured by string bed deformation, but it might be a lot corelated to string to string friction since sliding of strings lives on that. Anyway this also theoretically explains what was scientifically proven, that natgut mains + poly crosses provides biggest spin generation. Because this como has it all: poly will provide string sliding but gut mains will elongate at the same time, so even if string to string friction is higher, elasticity of natgut mains will allow more displacement, hence bigger gaps. The biggest gaps between strings will provide the best grab and the consequence is natural. The mechanism also explains the correlation between spin generation and the RHS: bigger RHS will deform the string bed much more so grabbing the ball will be significantly better.

As for the racquet head size, a science will say that a perfect centre-of-mass hit will generate the same power (energy return) regardless of the head size. But. Player firstly never hit with the COM, but instead with their usual 'sweet top', a spot in the string bed they aim to hit for. And second, there will be dispersion of less perfect hits...and a bigger head size provides much more power on less perfect hits. Not just because of steeper change of energy return from the string bed itself, but also because of steeper twist weight distribution change, relative to distance of hitting spot from the centre axis. And this will happen at the ATP level as well. So the thing with bigger head size is forgiveness and predictability of power from the string bed in realistic match conditions. Small head sizes are not much forgiving.
 

Curiosity

Professional
Just jumped off my memory, our fellow tt contributor @5263 mentioned at least 2 types of forehand execution in the latter part of the stroke: hooking and fading. What do you think on this topic and how ISR intensity (and timing?) participates here? I'd guess hooking takes more ISR into contact, however, fading is claimed to be more aggressive/power delivering...

I haven't seen that post. Hooking and fading are golf terms. I only WISH I could fade with a racquet the way I (most people) can fade with a 3 iron.
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
I think it is more of a timing issue, than the amount of ISR. Realeasing early will turn the face more along the swing and late will hold off the release till contact leaving the face ”open” to the play hand side.

Horizontal deviation is relative to ”sideways” tilt ie. ”making contact on the outter or inner side of the ball”.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
yes, timing for wrist positioning and timing for contact....Imo, the straight arm forehand uses more Adduction (horizontal flexion) vs ISR (or medial) with more heavily bent arm
 

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
I find the studies hard to believe. It puzzles my thinking very much, that they seem to claim no spin will be generated past grabbing.

I’m thinking, if you had a ball, that would not change form and you’d push it above the COM very sharply with a pin either on an angle upwards or horizontally, the ball would start rotating, cause the force was applied off the center of mass and would create a centripetal force of which strength were depending on the radius between the point the force was applied and the center of mass.

There must be something, I am missing within the deformation of a tennis ball and strings giving in.

However, if you had an egg frying on a pan, you can flip the egg or a pancake by throwing the pancake in the air with flick of the wrist and apply a ”closing face angle” on the ”ball”. The overall movement applies force that gives the egg rotating force and velocity to depart from the pan face.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
Last edited:

zalive

Hall of Fame
I'm not sure on definition, but as long as tennis ball is in the string bed, it's partially deformed and it's grabbed. Spin must be generated while ball is on the leave from the string bed, but the ball is still there and it's still grabbed. At that point it's grabbed only with the side of the string bed which is closed towards it, and this creates a moment of force needed to generate spin. At least this is how I visualize this, whether it is more or less correct lol.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
I haven't seen that post. Hooking and fading are golf terms. I only WISH I could fade with a racquet the way I (most people) can fade with a 3 iron.

And I remember a term 'cusping', was it 5263's as well? Not sure from where I heard that one before ;)
 
Top