Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by plum, May 11, 2012.
you are right that is below center.
So you think it's just coincidence that when he hits the ball in the lower half of the stringbed it produces more topspin?
I think the contact point is part of what's giving him more topspin.
but to be honest... when you were saying "aim low on the stringbed" in my mind i was picturing / thinking you meant even lower that the last image which is why i brought up the framing.
but even still w/o hi speed vid it is difficult to tell where exactly the ball was on collision because for example in that image he could have hit the lower half of the ball which means most of the ball would be above those lines appearing dead center. or he could have hit top half of the ball etc.
here is one of john yandell's hi speed videos of nadal. on first glance it looks like he hits pretty close to the top edge of the racquet. but if you drag the thumb and advance the video one frame at a time you can see the exact point of contact.
this was discussed in this thread: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=421162
that image was from the swing where he had the lowest amount of spin and was using a horizontal swing w/ no knee bend and not much pronation etc.
his next forehand in that video had the high amount of spin where he came from under the ball with a steeper low to hi and used a windshield wiper motion on the swing.
and i agree with you that lower on string bed produces more spin. there is another thread on tt here where i was defending that while most ppl were saying it wasn't true and i was asking ppl in the thread to try it for themselves but noone did and reported back.
This graphic shows average Rpm's and the racket position after impact. A low contact further closed the racket face; a high contact opened it and a centered contact didn't change the angle of the racket. Each contain samples of at least 60 forehands. Again, from blog.tennisspeed.com.
Apparently, you are right and this is a fact: a lower contact apparently favor top spin greatly. But people are caught in thinking that pros swing low to high with a perpendicular racket face... well, no. Angled racket face, low contact, proper wrist action and an almost horizontal swing path from the slot position up to contact. That's how they do it and there's no discussion to have: the data is clear at 200 frames or more per second.
And where do you think the contact point is in this vid of Rafa?
right here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=6494019&postcount=28
Sorry but that looks to be right before contact. The actual contact is when you can see the ball compressing which is right after where you are showing in your still shot.
that pic is 1 frame after contact. in fact i purposely picked one frame AFTER the point of compact so that you could see that the compression has started. look at the ball shape. it's already starting to flatten out.
that video is 500 frames per sec. i'm not interested in debating whether contact was made at frame 238 or 239 or if the contact was made in between frame 238 or 239.
you can see john's claim here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=6536967&postcount=5805
this subject comes up occasionally in that thread
if we accept that contact with the racquet head tilted forward (closed) produces more spin (as shown by 1HBH) we can assume that contact on the lower portion of the string bed also would because it would automatically close the racquet face further (if held with a loose grip). Same as high contact opens the racquet face. (if you dont believe that, hold your hand out flat and relaxed and hit the top and bottom of it with you other hand and see how it closes and opens) Now it can be debated as whether or not pros hit it lower on purpose, if they already tilt the racquet, there's no need for it to tilt anymore so they would prefer contact in the sweetspot, as suggested by others.
300 is a small sample size, plus I'd imagine this technique is used more by forehand styles like Fed, Nadal, Verdasco, rather than the WTA, roddick, and murray style.
So, if he took examples from pros who didn't have this type of forehand it could skew the results. Also, he could've neglected to take video with many ,what he thought of as, "mishits".
You know, John Yandell and Tennis Speed don't necessarily have contradictory positions. In the Fed video alone, we see that only two of shots are hit on the lower part of the strings, it would make sense that they wouldn't always be trying to impart maximum spin.
Has John measured the RPMs that result from different contact points? I think that's the most interesting finding that shows contact point on the racket has an effect.
The racquet tilt seen when the ball hits the lower part of the strings is not pronation! The tilt happens immediately after contact. No way pronation could be timed so precisely. The tilt is due to racquet twist, not pronation. I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone like Fed varied spin by different contact points.
i'm not sure if he has or not. sorry.
most of the guys in that thread don't think hitting lower produces more spin. but oscar himself thinks it does.
Thats not what it shows when you slide it frame by frame, your still shot is right before contact. At contact the ball is compressing and is slightly below center.
This really seems to contradict Yandell from what I can tell - and that blog writer goes after him pretty hard. I have long felt that Federer's stroke contradicted what FYB said about hitting WW forehands but Will though that was just Federer's unique greatness.
This totally makes sense to me - the idea that a closed racquet face is part of what generates the topspin is really very interesting stuff.
What is really important is that if you want to hit balls kinda like the pros do - ya know shots that aren't like moonballs - but more like sinkers you have to at least attempt to mimic their form..
It's great stuff.. I actualy have a very different mental idea about how to hit good topspin drives now. The blogger makes a good case that alot of video teaching pros are getting this wrong and paints a different picture about how to hit heavy topspin drives.
It's up to us to try it out and see if he is right..
You can drive the ball in seemingly two different ways. You can hit like Hewitt, Roddick which is keeping racket face quite vertical and swiping across the ball's back. Or, hit alot through the ball from low to high with racketface slightly tilted forward. Not difficult at all to go out and try both.
Most people just hit somewhere in middle of these two ends.
Agree with you Cheetah.
I don't know where these people getting these bizarre idea of hitting below center. I believe that pros intentionally close racquet face slightly at contact, not by hitting below center.
try adjusting your hip movement, it may allow you to cut across the ball quicker. shoulder placement before hitting can help. go through your form again, and have someone take a look.
Very interesting discussion/debate here.
1handbhand/Cheetah/ others... I've got a question if it is relevant.
Is there any attention paid to if the shot was taken on the rise vs as it drops?
I know this "seems" to make a difference to me as I feel I close my racket face
more when taking a well hit ball on the rise and open more for a sitter dropping ball.
If this seems to be accurate, then it could be important related to rec tennis where the ball is often
dropping at contact vs often rising when playing big hitters.
You little nerds are all overlooking something:
Luxilon is a slippy string, the ball slides down the string. All top professionals use luxilon or some other slippy polyester.
Babolot says the strings slide on each other propelling the ball and show with a vid I believe.
i don't think any of us were taking that into consideration.
When you say you 'feel' your racquet face close are you saying you unconsciously close it to handle the rising ball?
or are you saying the rising ball actually closes your racquet more?
I'm saying I do it on purpose by feel, but can't say if where it actually stands.
I think I normally hit slightly closed on at top of bounce, more closed for on the rise, and
vertical or even slightly open for a descending ball.
Not sure if that is accurate, but it's how it feels
and works with my intentions.
Racquet angle is not the issue, upward stroke path is. There are two ends of that path, start, which needs to be low, and finish, which needs to be high. Unless monitored, most players developing a stroke either fail to get their racquet back to a truly low racquet-back position, or fail to finish high over their non-dominant shoulder. They often are actually coming down at the beginning of their forward motion, when they should have a one-directional path (low to high) during the entire forward stroke.
I'm thinking you did not read a big part of this thread??
True, I did not read a major part of this thread. In a way I'm sorry for intruding, if I did, without knowing what everyone is discussing. But in another way I did what my intuition came up with, which was to respond to the OP blind, without any preconception.
This brings up the unique way I teach, for my unique situation. I don't focus on what anyone else has ever told any of my students. I sometimes only get them for 10-15 mini privates as I juggle groups of up to 10-12 around 3 courts. I see what I see, give them a customized checklist of what's going on with one or two strokes and then send them on their way to work on it. Amazing things can happen in a very short time. I know many "richer" teaching pros who can suck students for much more cash for a very long time.
Once again, sorry for not being as up on the thread contents as I could have been, but that was my very superficial statment on topspin, based on what I have seen a thousand times.
No need to apologize, just thought it was worth noting based on your post. I do exactly the same thing sometimes; just read the OP and comment. I don't
see a problem with it. In this case there was some evidence cited that was
quite contrary to the info you posted and that was being discussed heavily.
That's what I do. the same.
Separate names with a comma.