How to visualise the lag and whipping motion on the forehand and 2 handed backhand.

FiReFTW

Legend
screenshot20190531-18284.jpg


screenshot20190531-18304.jpg


screenshot20190531-18311.jpg


screenshot20190531-18320.jpg


screenshot20190531-18324.jpg


Look @ByeByePoly

Thiem, Nadal, Verdasco, Gonzales, Delpo

All the best forehand have quite a high takeback then they let the racquet dropdown before pulling it forward.

And infact feds forehand in particular used to have a bit bigger higher set point and after he made it smaller to take balls more on the rise his forehand was not quite as lethal as it was before.

You cant possibly believe that you can achieve the same racquet speed when pulling it from a standstill compared to building momentum beforehand like a runway.

Why would all the best forehands bother doing it otherwise, it makes the timing harder and it takes more time.

Go on court and try it I dare you haha

I did yesterday and its quite a difference, more power and more effortless while pulling from zero is jerky and feels like a pull on my shoulder.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
screenshot20190531-18284.jpg


screenshot20190531-18304.jpg


screenshot20190531-18311.jpg


screenshot20190531-18320.jpg


screenshot20190531-18324.jpg


Look @ByeByePoly

Thiem, Nadal, Verdasco, Gonzales, Delpo

All the best forehand have quite a high takeback then they let the racquet dropdown before pulling it forward.

And infact feds forehand in particular used to have a bit bigger higher set point and after he made it smaller to take balls more on the rise his forehand was not quite as lethal as it was before.

You cant possibly believe that you can achieve the same racquet speed when pulling it from a standstill compared to building momentum beforehand like a runway.

Why would all the best forehands bother doing it otherwise, it makes the timing harder and it takes more time.

Go on court and try it I dare you haha

I did yesterday and its quite a difference, more power and more effortless while pulling from zero is jerky and feels like a pull on my shoulder.

Nope ... drop helps timing.

If drop helps rhs, all high FH drives should be weak, and all low FH drives demonstrably faster. Go check that ... I have to go mow my yard. Trust me ... I would rather argue with my young friend. 8-B(y)
 

FiReFTW

Legend
How does the drop help timing, theres no easier way to time the ball than to set the racquet behind and just swing forward lol.

Of course high fh drives are faster many times, because they slap them flat down into the court lol.

Whatever tho, think what you want, but every coach has told me that a bigger loop and drop equals more racquet speed.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
How does the drop help timing, theres no easier way to time the ball than to set the racquet behind and just swing forward lol.

Of course high fh drives are faster many times, because they slap them flat down into the court lol.

Whatever tho, think what you want, but every coach has told me that a bigger loop and drop equals more racquet speed.

Just saw Goffin hit a 100 mph fh winner from shoulder height ... must have been that slap exception.

Drop offers timing adjustment on when they pull the trigger. Unit turn ... racquet dropping as ball approaches ... can pull trigger anywhere on way down. Most that stick the racquet back on 2hbh follow stick back with fairly immediate swing. Watch Radwanska ... that timing is not simple with less "adjustment window".

btw ... loop is the hand ... racquet head up because least effort to hold in that position in backswing.

Now I am really going to mow ... really, sure :eek:
 

FiReFTW

Legend
Just saw Goffin hit a 100 mph fh winner from shoulder height ... must have been that slap exception.

Drop offers timing adjustment on when they pull the trigger. Unit turn ... racquet dropping as ball approaches ... can pull trigger anywhere on way down. Most that stick the racquet back on 2hbh follow stick back with fairly immediate swing. Watch Radwanska ... that timing is not simple with less "adjustment window".

btw ... loop is the hand ... racquet head up because least effort to hold in that position in backswing.

Now I am really going to mow ... really, sure :eek:

Your wrong, 2hb is the only shot that some players set the racquet down and swing up and those 2hb dont have alot of racquet speed at all. A 1 hander can produce more rhs precisely because a larger loop.

Like I said, think what you want, your opinion, but every coach told me the same thing, and im sure any coach that you ask will tell you the same thing.
 

FiReFTW

Legend
I wonder why pros even bother having a loop on the serve, they should just set it in the drop position behind and swing from there.
Oh wait maybe it helps their timing lol.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
I wonder why pros even bother having a loop on the serve, they should just set it in the drop position behind and swing from there.
Oh wait maybe it helps their timing lol.

Serve is different... and I was wrong, you are more annoying than mowing the yard. :eek:

You hit too far in front ... we will work on that next.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
I figured out how to finally quit talking about FHs ... take two @FiReFTW s and call the doctor in the morning.

I had a linear take back. Similar to Mac. Was not even copying him. It's just what I found to be natural and comfortable.
But when I took clinics, the USPTA certified coaches said the modern fh requires at least a small loop. Generates RHS.
:(
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
Dragy,
I have never put much emphasis on trying to shape the backswing. It doesn't really add much rhs. That all occurs at the start of the forward swing. If the player has a clear idea of the extension point he will more than likely find the right point to start upward. So drop the racket head below the ball and that sort of advice isn't necessary. At most the racket is slightly below.
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
Kevo,
Yes practice! Time! But really it's not as difficult as this discussion would indicate. The two players in the article are just examples of the hundreds (could me more!) of players that have been able to develop solid, powerful, reliable, and yes, pretty forehands using the approach the article outlines. All this torture about backswing heights, shapes, lag, snap (which does not occur) are obstacles.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Dragy,
I have never put much emphasis on trying to shape the backswing. It doesn't really add much rhs. That all occurs at the start of the forward swing. If the player has a clear idea of the extension point he will more than likely find the right point to start upward. So drop the racket head below the ball and that sort of advice isn't necessary. At most the racket is slightly below.

Look up @FiReFTW
 

Dragy

Legend
Dragy,
I have never put much emphasis on trying to shape the backswing. It doesn't really add much rhs. That all occurs at the start of the forward swing. If the player has a clear idea of the extension point he will more than likely find the right point to start upward. So drop the racket head below the ball and that sort of advice isn't necessary. At most the racket is slightly below.
I was referring to that “racket head below the ball”. In your article you show end of backswing - higher than the contact, and extension point - higher than the contact. I’d say for some it’d be possible to end up swatting at the ball with a horizontal swing, or trying to pull it up from contact point. Isn’t the low-to-high swing, or at least low-to-high racquet head trajectory, a fundamental worth mentioning?
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
Dragy,
Sure if it's not happening. I had a student years ago who had a beautiful forehand--looked just like Ken's in the article. I told him it was a terrible idea but he was star struck and went to Vic Braden's for a week. Where he was told he needed a big circular loop to get the racket "below" the ball. When he came back he had the opposite a big loop that never got the racket to the start of the forward swing. He could only slice the ball and was hitting balls everywhere. Took us weeks to get him back to normal. But he was still convinced Vic was a genius and he had just somehow failed to get the gospel.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
ByeBye,
I am just going to stand by the truth...too exhausting to weed through all this impassioned confusion--not to mention unnecessary...

Your truth matched mine so I brought you in as my trump card (crap ... orange dude ruined another phrase for me :mad:) in my debate with young @FiReFTW. Yeah ... don't read these FH threads ... you might go blind. There is only so many things one can say about a tennis stroke ... so the same stuff comes back around on a loop. Kind of like the senior homes. 8-B
 

FiReFTW

Legend
You won't find a single good coach in the world not say that the loop adds momentum and a longer path to accelerate hence more racquet speed, but keep thinking it doesn't, im sure you know alot more about tennis


 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
You won't find a single good coach in the world not say that the loop adds momentum and a longer path to accelerate hence more racquet speed, but keep thinking it doesn't, im sure you know alot more about tennis



John knows a lot about tennis ... he just said what I did ... doesn't add much rhs. Did any of those instructors quantify the "how much more rhs"?

It's only a loop before the real forward swing starts. You can watch Fed, Agassi, Hewitt hit a FH from the side, and pick the point of forward swing because loop changes to linear ... hand travels on straight line from slot to contact (some exceptions on low balls). That is pretty much a change of direction ... so not started from standing still, but not a continuation of any loop or drop.
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
I think Fed's forehand is pretty good without a big loop. Conventional wisdom is not always wisdom. The 3D studies we did in fact show the bulk of all acceleration starts from the start of the forward swing and the speed on the loops are fairly constant. Obviously there is nothing wrong with a loop. But many of the pro versions are complex and really high. It's not a fundamental in a great forehand--and for what I can tell for the players on this board what they need are fundamentals.

You tube I think has done more harm than good. Did I say that before?
 
Last edited:

Kevo

Legend
You won't find a single good coach in the world not say that the loop adds momentum and a longer path to accelerate hence more racquet speed, but keep thinking it doesn't, im sure you know alot more about tennis

First, let me just say I am pro loop most of the time. However, my take on the loop is that it is more for spin rather than gathering speed. It's not that hard to gather enough speed without the loop so I would say it's not absolutely necessary.

I could say a lot more about it, but I'm practicing brevity today so I'll leave it at that for now. :)
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
If I understand Brian Gordon's point on generating racquet head speed (rhs), he's saying that the rhs speed is generated by a stretch shortening cycle (SSC) in the arm. I'm going to respectfully disagree with this. The high rhs in modern the fh is generated primarily by conservation of momentum.

As you initially swing the racquet into the ball it's NOT a fast, super high powered part of the swing. ........
......
I don't think there's much SSC in the wrist. You're allowing your wrist to extend and create the lag. It mostly a free hinge.

The trick here is that now you have create the whip that forces your freely hinging wrist to accelerate the racquet into the ball. @5263 talks about pulling the arm across back to the center. @a12345 was talking about stopping the shoulder rotation (which is more a result than a forced stop of the shoulders I think). The key is that you're changing the motion of the hand, and doing it in a way that the racquet has to accelerate forward in order for momentum to be conserved. It's a whip.
...........
When @JohnYandell talks about holding the wrist back I think that's a thing that's happening because it helps you control when the whip happens.
Very good explanations here. I've been suggesting for yrs that I also don't see the SSC at the initial lag as big for rhs. What allowing the wrist to lay back in the "Lag to drag" position does is help the hand to be more responsive to starting the forward swing, while creating a consistent use of lag as part of the swing timing and technique. As a player who learned traditional with no purposeful use of lag, I can attest to how at times I'd get unintended lag when I tried to hit harder or accelerate the swing to 'catch-up' when caught late on my swing. This unintended lag had a negative effect on the shots since it was not expected and accounted for in the timing of the technique. Not intending to Lag the racket also forced me to swing slower on avg because you just can't get that smooth easy accel when you don't lag.

Once I learned modern strokes with the intended 'Lag to drag' position, then I could account for the lag in my timing, accel the swing better, and hit more out front. Imo the idea with SSC of lag giving RHS would be akin to the "lag & snap" technique, which I find to be a very flawed concept. What you CAN do with the drag position, is to use the momentum created to allow the RH to flow out into position just to the outside of the ball, giving you more of a neutral wrist type position where the "holding back of the wrist" happens..... instead of letting that hinge just flop or snap on out. Since the hand has slowed down relative to the advancing RH, this along with some body shift due to the last part of the 'unload phase' is where that pulling back towards center you mention will happen. To pump up the spin rate, the wrist will turn that forward hinge action more agressively 'up and across' into a type of radial deviation, augmented by the body English on the last part of the hip/leg unloading (optimal situation).

I think I stated before that it seems that even though BG recognized the 'change of direction' you mentioned rk, he didn't seem to realize it's role as the primary acceleration mechanism it is. He seemed to highlight the "wrist Lag SSC" aspect more. Maybe it's just a communication issue. Also as I mentioned above, there is that initial accel move forward where the 'lag to drag' occurs that Imo is more of a timing aspect, but surely does contribute to the later primary accel mechanism of the 'change of direction' centrifugal or rotational power.
 
Last edited:

FiReFTW

Legend
Federer still has a loop even if its not huge, he does not stop dead at the low spot and then pull from zero.

I tested it out and hit my forehand aswell as my 1hander and I definetely seem to get more pop with a loop as oppossed to laying it low and exploding from there from a standstill.
Its not HUGE obviously its not the main source of power but it definitely seems like a fair increase so thats always positive.

And even more importantly it feels much more effortless and smooth and the arm feels very relaxed like no effort and also much easier to swing more low to high with little effort.

From a standstill exploding into the swing feels more jerky and pulls more violently on muscles and feels more forced and feels like it could be injury inhibiting in the long run (if swinging very fast always).
Less so if you swing completely straight but the more low to high then you really start to feel alot of effort and violent pulls on ur arm, while its much smoother and effortless if you add a loop.
 

FiReFTW

Legend
Fire,
There is no stand still! Look at the article.

Which article?

Im just saying if someone has a takeback where they go to the low position and then stop dead and accelerate, and even worse ive seen many rec players actually pull the racquet back straight and then accelerate forward instantly so basically changing the momentum of the back swing into a forward swing instantly.
 

a12345

Professional
The issue here is you are looking at the forehand from 2 different techniques.

If you have a loopy classic forehand a big loop will help with power. Because your swing is a loop.

If you have a Federer type forehand its just a turn the body and a pull straight forwards, like youve loaded a crossbow and go straight forwards. The down swing is basically just to match the height of the ball and doesnt really add power. The power comes from the Stretch shorten cycle, which is why they can generate RHS speed from such a compact and small distance.

If I take a massive swing with a racket starting position from behind my body like Osaka does and then I take a short swing with the racket right in front of me, theres no way the power can be similar unless something else is at play. And there is - its the snap and SSC.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
The issue here is you are looking at the forehand from 2 different techniques.

If you have a loopy classic forehand a big loop will help with power. Because your swing is a loop.

If you have a Federer type forehand its just a turn the body and a pull straight forwards, like youve loaded a crossbow and go straight forwards. The down swing is basically just to match the height of the ball and doesnt really add power. The power comes from the Stretch shorten cycle, which is why they can generate RHS speed from such a compact and small distance.

If I take a massive swing with a racket starting position from behind my body like Osaka does and then I take a short swing with the racket right in front of me, theres no way the power can be similar unless something else is at play. And there is - its the snap and SSC.

"If you have a loopy classic forehand a big loop will help with power. Because your swing is a loop."

I think neither loop or drop adds much ... if any ... rhs. I will use the Agassi fh as an example.

Note: Agassi's shoulders don't start rotating forward in fh below until around 00:29. I would say any (if any) momentum before shoulder rotation (before all that k-chain stuff if one believes in it) ... it is miniscule by definition. Half the words on this forum are about "not arming" ... so why take credit for arm/hand movements rhs prior to ground up yada yada yada?

1) Agassi is not accelerating backwards at the top of the loop, that would be weird ... swing fast backwards 8-B
2) Agassi is not accelerating as hand and racquet drop ... just relaxed gravity drop
3) Agassi is not accelerating before his shoulders start to rotate @00:29 ... that would be all arm without body ... the dreaded ARMING
4) Acceleration starts at around 00:29 (the slot ... @FiReFTW ... that was the answer to your quiz question where does the significant swing start).

So IMO ... everything before 00:29ish was foreplay ... rhs and $ made from 00:29 to contact.

The one caveat I would throw in is I think timing is a huge element of rhs. Both being on time at the slot, and then timing the arm/hand/racquet sequence into contact. If a loop gets a particularly player on time at the slot better than any other technique, logic would say they would avg better rhs with that technique. Rios timed his 2hbh with no loop or drop ... and dude had pretty good rhs. Of course ... the bigger rhs elements would be 1) big shoulder turn 2) late firing of arm into contact 3) late release of racquet lag (arm roll and any forearm/racquet angle release).

As Sir Yandell would tell you ... I have a bunch of Youtube aquired opinions. :eek:

 

Fintft

G.O.A.T.
Federer still has a loop even if its not huge, he does not stop dead at the low spot and then pull from zero.

I tested it out and hit my forehand aswell as my 1hander and I definetely seem to get more pop with a loop as oppossed to laying it low and exploding from there from a standstill.
Its not HUGE obviously its not the main source of power but it definitely seems like a fair increase so thats always positive.

And even more importantly it feels much more effortless and smooth and the arm feels very relaxed like no effort and also much easier to swing more low to high with little effort.

From a standstill exploding into the swing feels more jerky and pulls more violently on muscles and feels more forced and feels like it could be injury inhibiting in the long run (if swinging very fast always).
Less so if you swing completely straight but the more low to high then you really start to feel alot of effort and violent pulls on ur arm, while its much smoother and effortless if you add a loop.

Fire, without reading everything, it seems to me that:

a) You are right stating that with a huge loop you get more power.

b) The compact takeback (or even a smaller loop) is something my coach recommended to deal with fast incoming balls (saying that it is used a lot by male players).
And yes I can see why it could lead to injuries (just got over one myself in my rib cage).
 

Fintft

G.O.A.T.

Hi John,

Thanks for the article!

No disrespect intended, but maybe you should remove the old technique (and player) Ken and compare Ash (using a huge takeback) to someone even more modern then him, a third player that has a takeback at least as compact as Federer's...
So please compare Ash to Federer or to a third player who's racquet head points forward(towards the court) at the end of the backswing (not at the sky, not even at 45 degrees sideways).

Just my two cents, thanks.
 

ptuanminh

Hall of Fame
I think your 2hbh can get to the next level if you free up your arms. 8-B(y)
Of course everyone can say things like that about their game. However, it takes years to make those changes into muscle memory. It also has to come with fitness, movement, etc...
You see, i want to free up my arms, but my footwork is so bad i always scramble.
Most rec players don't have the time and resources to implement. I have regular hitting partners, mostly 4.0s some 4.5s. Surprisingly, none of those are capable of hitting a consistent mid pace down the middle feed. yup, some feeds are short, some long, some with too much angle, some go straight at you like a rocket. So as a rec player, how on earth you think you can change your strokes to the detail level (like you guys are discussing).
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
Fire, without reading everything, it seems to me that:

a) You are right stating that with a huge loop you get more power.

b) The compact takeback (or even a smaller loop) is something my coach recommended to deal with fast incoming balls (saying that it is used a lot by male players).
And yes I can see why it could lead to injuries (just got over one myself in my rib cage).

I don't even think that Fed has much of a loop. Unit Turn followed by Elbow Extension. Minimal loop.

giphy.gif
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
Fin,
I think you miss the point of the article. Ken was hitting 60mph forehands measured on my pocket radar gun. He never misses. Even though he is 65 I think he could give a lot of the players here a real challenge. He is a monster in his 3.0 and 3.5 league matches There is nothing "old" about his technique. He has the two key modern elements of coiling and extending. The obsession about the backswings is just so wrong headed. His backswing is more compact than Osaka. Don't think anyone here could win many games off her. We can certainly agree to disagree, but I stand by my points.
 
Last edited:

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Of course everyone can say things like that about their game. However, it takes years to make those changes into muscle memory. It also has to come with fitness, movement, etc...
You see, i want to free up my arms, but my footwork is so bad i always scramble.
Most rec players don't have the time and resources to implement. I have regular hitting partners, mostly 4.0s some 4.5s. Surprisingly, none of those are capable of hitting a consistent mid pace down the middle feed. yup, some feeds are short, some long, some with too much angle, some go straight at you like a rocket. So as a rec player, how on earth you think you can change your strokes to the detail level (like you guys are discussing).

You have to separate technical details from the drills one does to aquire muscle memory. You don't go drill these details ... but you may very well use the details to come up with drills to accomplish the technical details. For example John's old article on the 2hbh explained arm position options at contact. I decide I want bent/straight ... and grips x and y ... and go start my ball machine sessions trying to hit bent/straight. I read information about how the lag happens in a 2hbh (was not first year ... maybe two with me), and then go add drill to add new muscle memory on top of what you have. A great personal instructor of course is best ... but great information from great instructors and a lot of DIY can produce results, at least it has for me.

If we go very far with this, we will need to take the OT to your thread (although maybe not since the freeing up of the arms is part of OP's fluid stroke and lag release).

No ... stroke mechanics aren't fitness dependent ... being able to hit that repeatable stroke in a two+ hour match in the heat ... yep.

You might be surprised on the changes you can make with 2hbh without requiring a thousand hours once you can already hit a 2hbh. You have already done the hardest part ... learning to hit the 2hbh (any variety) in the court. At the 3+ year mark with 2hbh, I hit bent/straight ... but can toggle to bent/bent or straight/straight without starting back over with muscle memory. This ... from someone who read John's 2hbh article and headed to the court that first day with little doubt I would be hitting a Agassi straight/straight ... huge failure, balls cleared the back fence for a week. :eek: But same player ... tried to hit straight/straight for a laugh a couple summers later ... and no problem (with ball machine ... no doubt would have been more UE in matches).

Anyway ... enough OT ... more than happy to talk 2hbhs in your thread.

FYI ... part related to this thread ... 2hbh loose arms back, lag either at backswing (Ferrer) or lag in forward swing (Murray), loose arms flung forward, late getting after it with left arm/hand. Don't want a rigid flipper glued to torso ... free those arms up.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Of course everyone can say things like that about their game. However, it takes years to make those changes into muscle memory. It also has to come with fitness, movement, etc...
You see, i want to free up my arms, but my footwork is so bad i always scramble.
Most rec players don't have the time and resources to implement. I have regular hitting partners, mostly 4.0s some 4.5s. Surprisingly, none of those are capable of hitting a consistent mid pace down the middle feed. yup, some feeds are short, some long, some with too much angle, some go straight at you like a rocket. So as a rec player, how on earth you think you can change your strokes to the detail level (like you guys are discussing).

Sorry ... missed the main part of your post here. My answer was ball machine ... old Lobster Elite was given to me by a friend. A ball machine (old, used, just capable of feeding balls down the middle) is priceless for grooving strokes and initial muscle memory aquisition. Video your sessions ... we aren't doing what we think we are. That doesn't get you match ready (think ros) ... drills and playing matches after a functional stroke. Problem with matches early is very hard not to revert back to old comfort zone. I still revert back to 1hbh slice in matches 3+ years later ... even when I swear I won't.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Fin,
I think you miss the point of the article. Ken was hitting 60mph forehands measured on my pocket radar gun. He never misses. Even though he is 65 I think he could give a lot of the players here a real challenge. He is a monster in his 3.0 and 3.5 league matches There is nothing "old" about his technique. He has the two key modern elements of coiling and extending. The obsession about the backswings is just so wrong headed. His backswing is more compact than Osaka. Don't think anyone here could win many games off her. We can certainly agree to disagree, but I stand by my points.

Old vs modern definition questions:

Was McEnroe modern?

Didn't the old guys ... Laver, etc coil?

Seems to me we run into trouble trying to categorize strokes ... maybe more of a spectrum. Like all pros coiled at least "some", probably some of the Lavers extended forward to various degrees, maybe some of the Lavers had "some" lag/play in the wrist?

Just to my eyes ... the big new thing has been the big forearm/racquet lag and arm rolling (and Poly :p) ... agree that backswings are prep and not the big thing. I do find it impressive that the guys figured out how to shorten the backswing for the modern game.
 

ptuanminh

Hall of Fame
Sorry ... missed the main part of your post here. My answer was ball machine ... old Lobster Elite was given to me by a friend. A ball machine (old, used, just capable of feeding balls down the middle) is priceless for grooving strokes and initial muscle memory aquisition. Video your sessions ... we aren't doing what we think we are. That doesn't get you match ready (think ros) ... drills and playing matches after a functional stroke. Problem with matches early is very hard not to revert back to old comfort zone. I still revert back to 1hbh slice in matches 3+ years later ... even when I swear I won't.
Oh man, those machines are pretty expensive. I am trying to convince my hitting partner to go easy down the middle for 30 minutes every time we play to get the groove in, and i can implement some little changes. Maybe in a few months, i will post another video of my changed 2HBH.
You are right about having a decent foundation does make it a bit easier to implement changes. However, i am still not sure about how long to make those real muscle memory, so that you can pull some shots off in tough position.
 

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Oh man, those machines are pretty expensive. I am trying to convince my hitting partner to go easy down the middle for 30 minutes every time we play to get the groove in, and i can implement some little changes. Maybe in a few months, i will post another video of my changed 2HBH.
You are right about having a decent foundation does make it a bit easier to implement changes. However, i am still not sure about how long to make those real muscle memory, so that you can pull some shots off in tough position.

You don't need much of a machine just to groove strokes. I never use oscillation or spin ... just fast ball down the middle. I would think you could find one cheap used. I have a battery one.
 

sredna42

Hall of Fame
One thing that helped me recently. Alot.
The position your wrist is in at the end of your unit turn (with the racquet pointing up) should be the same as when you are about to swing

Starts at 2.00
 

Curiosity

Professional
In the Nadal video, I do see the legs and hips really not rotating at all through the ball until after the torso has rotated . But, I think that is an illusion. The huge leg muscles must have transferred energy to the torso, forced to rotate and the arm went along. I do see that at the moment of impact his shoulder are wide open basically parallel to the baseline. It seems that the shoulders begin their opening up way before impact.

Nadal, even in the video posted above, does something most players don't: When hitting a forehand he typically pushes his right hip back by extending his appropriately-positioned right leg. In the video you'll see that extension and hip rotation, just in a different form than you are used to. The active right-leg muscles are very obvious, too.
 

Curiosity

Professional
A lot of the lag is just external rotation


Agree. In most pro forehands I'd argue that almost all the lag is from ESR from an appropriately-positioned (using one of the standards..) forearm and racquet. The next addition, smaller, comes with the push-out of the grip until it points approximately at the expected contact point. That's it. After that push-out (as, laugh, part of the pull-out butt-cap first) there is no possibility to increase lag: it has maxed.
 

Curiosity

Professional
the difference between arm chair coach and a real player is simple. if you have an idea, go out and try it. if it makes your forehand and backhand better (in this case), then great. if not, then stop doing it. don't go directly from videos to instruction. see if the idea you gained from watching videos actually work in real life before posting it as universal truth here. and whether the above idea is true or not is not that relevant to its value as instruction. there are plenty of instruction that are not factually true. but they have value because they work to make the player (not all players) better.

If posters would just learn to implement the form of one good top-ten player fully (if slowly and badly)...if only as a brief experiment, they would know, learn by feeling what each motion does, (in many cases) that what they think they are seeing is not what they were seeing. As an example: Federer isn't just "letting the racquet drop" until he's ready, re timing, to initiate forward racquet motion. Rather, he is, at the top of the back-swing with upper arm high enough, pulling the upper hitting arm into tension with the shoulder joint. From there he's descending to the moment at which he'll straighten the arm, immediately begining forward motion initiating it with a slight forward/outward push of the grip....at the same instant initiating UB/shoulder rotation. His backswing is shaped to several purposes.

The height of back-swing has a lot to do with the demands brought on by high-level opponents and diverse surfaces: With an average of one second to get to the incoming ball contact when in a high-speed rally, there is no time or ability to relaunch a forehand. It's design has to accommodate the possibilities of odd or high bounce and surprise type and amount of spin. These only become clear as the ball rises from the bounce: Watch Federer (or your choice of player) to see exactly when he launches the forward motion of the swing. Typically it comes just as his off-arm has swing inline with the ball's rise. Only then does the player know reasonably accurately the nature of speed, spin, and bounce. That is exactly the moment he pulls in the swinging off-arm for rotation boost, performs final leg extension/hip rotation/UB first rotation: These happen very quickly almost in one instant. Misjudgments at that instant are fatal to the hit's quality, usually. The best ATP players are, it seems to me, best at making the call. Their forehand back-and-down-swing can accommodate perceived changes well just up to that forward launch.

There are, obviously still a few adjustments that can be made (arm bend, wrist locking angle, steepening the path upward) but these are secondbest to hitting the shape they want for the given ball...from the start and at full speed. JMO
 

Curiosity

Professional
It's a similar problem to watching high-level servers and noticing their back leg kicks up around waist-height and concluding that I need to work on my leg kick. No, I need to work on driving up into the serve so that the consequence is the leg kick. The leg kick is an effect of a good serve, not its cause.

Yes. And there are many parallels "is it cause or is it effect" analytic errors on these pages. One is particularly relevant, going to the OP's thesis. It is true that if you watch super-high-speed video you often will see what appears to be a "stop," a pause in forward rotation just into final extension out to contact with the ball. This sudden loss of UB rotation speed isn't a design element, but just a result of several factors, depending on the player: If he is a semi-open or open-stance player and takes the ball well in front (this often describes Fed) then the sudden fast extension of the racquet and forearm from the " lagged back" to the "lagged but know out to the side-and-forward extension just slows the torso rotation suddenly, by lengthening the lever-arm of the arm/racquet combo. Another reality is that hip/torso rotation looses freedom to rotate when it hits the foot-and-hip end of travel. Another reality is that the very important shoulder extension out toward contact changes the vector of momentum for a big chunk of the upper body. Yet another action that is used to slow the torso is, of course, to lift or extend quickly the off-arm that you previously pulled inward for UB rotation speed, and this technique is taught for complex reasons, none of which is stop torso rotation completely, or cause whip. (The main reason is to thereby have the back muscles on both sides kick in, the lats on both sides, synergism –untangling these factors for a given player and shot is difficult.
 

Curiosity

Professional
This is really my point. I'm not sure how helpful it is to load up with a lot of biomechanical minutiae when you're essentially trying to imprint a behaviour.

Coaches love to peddle that thought, that just shaping through "suggestions" and causing self-organization through drills will achieve the needed result. To this I would say, "do you really think teaching what ESR and ISR are, and when they are used... and teaching the near-universal actions that lead to a powerful forehand launch-and-hit, if properly synchronized...will befuddle the student?" What? Are the smart kids all sent to golf academy?

I personally have been running a fun quiz to determine whether the various local coaches I meet, briefly work with (in the US East Coast, Southern Spain, etc.) actually know the basic near-universal sequences themselves. They general only have a vague idea of the elements, the most universal synchronizations, the muscles recruited by the major actions, etc. Not minutia, but the spare essentials. Aside from the fact that the reality shocks me, it leads me to conclude that coaches don't teach the technical essentials because they don't know them. Astounding reality. They think "these don't matter if you're hitting a good forehand!" False. And most of them don't hit an extremly good forehand. Adequate? Sure. Send your kid off for a terminally adequate forehand. I wouldn't pay for one, or play with one. Peter Carter knew all the key essentials, and taught them, and pointed out why each is important. So have a number of other premier coaches. Most coaches do not, at least in large parts of the US. The ITF's instructional materials cover all the core essentials of the advanced forehand. I don't believe most coaches ever read these publications, or read them carefully.

More than 3/4's of the coaches receiving my stealth evaluation mistakenly identify a forehand hit with current heavy ISR into contact...as "very wristy." They can't tell the difference between old-school wrist flex up in the direction of the thumb...vs. ISR from the shoulder. This has included a few highly-certified coaches. EOR.
 
Last edited:

Curiosity

Professional
What did Curisoity say about the off arm? Forehand?

I'd be shocked to find I'd ever written that "the tuck of the off arm is to impede rotation." It's the opposite, and I've made the point repeatedly. In fact I just when through it in a comment a page back:

The off-arm is extended sideways in synchrony with the hitting arm reaching full-back with the hitting upper arm sufficiently raised from the side (for lock with the shoulder). The hitting arm is briefly pulled back for final tensioning against the shoulder (which lowers the hitting forearm and racquet a bit, as well). As the hitting arm/racquet is lowered, the off-arm is swung leftward to gain momentum. At the instant the UB rotation is to be started, which is sync'd with the initial rotation into ESR, grip push-out, the swinging off-arm is pulled in (elbow pull-in) to kick momentum back to the UB to boost rotation...supporting both rotation timing and power, needed to help the UB rotation get that hitting upper-arm going.

Just up into contact the lats power ISR....and flipping the off-arm forearm up and out a bit at that moment synergistically helps recruit muscles key to the ISR, while slowing the UB rotation velocity a bit. There are several very good coaches who teach this refined move. I actually first heard James Blake explain it, though I'd seen it in the forehands of many players going back to Lendl, who had a killer topspin forehand.

Knowing the off-arm swing and pull-in is more important than getting to the sync'd lift.
 
Last edited:

Cashman

Hall of Fame
Coaches love to peddle that thought, that just shaping through "suggestions" and causing self-organization through drills will achieve the needed result. To this I would say, "do you really think teaching what ESR and ISR are, and when they are used... and teaching the near-universal actions that lead to a powerful forehand launch-and-hit, if properly synchronized...will befuddle the student?" What? Are the smart kids all sent to golf academy?

I personally have been running a fun quiz to determine whether the various local coaches I meet, briefly work with (in the US East Coast, Southern Spain, etc.) actually know the basic near-universal sequences themselves. They general only have a vague idea of the elements, the most universal synchronizations, the muscles recruited by the major actions, etc. Not minutia, but the spare essentials. Aside from the fact that the reality shocks me, it leads me to conclude that coaches don't teach the technical essentials because they don't know them. Astounding reality. They think "these don't matter if you're hitting a good forehand!" False. And most of them don't hit an extremly good forehand. Adequate? Sure. Send your kid off for a terminally adequate forehand. I wouldn't pay for one, or play with one. Peter Carter knew all the key essentials, and taught them, and pointed out why each is important. So have a number of other premier coaches. Most coaches do not, at least in large parts of the US. The ITF's instructional materials cover all the core essentials of the advanced forehand. I don't most coaches ever read these publications, or read them carefully.

More than 3/4's of the coaches receiving my stealth evaluation mistakenly identify a forehand hit with current heavy ISR into contact...as "very wristy." They can't tell the difference between old-school wrist flex up in the direction of the thumb...vs. ISR from the shoulder. This has included a few highly-certified coaches. EOR.
“Some coaches are crap” doesn’t equal “students need their heads filled with biomechanics minutiae”.

Smart or stupid, students learn physical movements best when they have as little to consciously focus on as possible.
 
Top