5263
G.O.A.T.
It will take a while all right since at least a 1/3 is wrong. Ex.. speed of incoming ball has little if anything to do with hitting a ww Fh. It can be done on a soft sitter just as well as a 90 mph bullet.
Just can't get the Windshield Wiper FH Right.
- Thread starter holytennis
- Start date
It will take a while all right since at least a 1/3 is wrong. Ex.. speed of incoming ball has little if anything to do with hitting a ww Fh. It can be done on a soft sitter just as well as a 90 mph bullet.
Problem here is application.
While most of YOUS can hit modern technique and make it work, some of us older, more injured players might have to modify our swings to allow us to see tomorrow from anywhere besides a hospital bed.
After 2 collarbone breaks my left side, and 4 shoulder separates, and 2 dislocates, the parts aren't all working that well anymore.
Couple that with 3 pins in the pinkie finger, and one in the ring finger of the hitting hand, sometimes the old grip isn't all there.
I"m not all that physically impaired. There's guys on the court much worse off than me, who still swing like the '60's, and move not two steps, ever.
But still, my shoulder provides the pronation, on serve and on groundies.
While most of YOUS can hit modern technique and make it work, some of us older, more injured players might have to modify our swings to allow us to see tomorrow from anywhere besides a hospital bed.
After 2 collarbone breaks my left side, and 4 shoulder separates, and 2 dislocates, the parts aren't all working that well anymore.
Couple that with 3 pins in the pinkie finger, and one in the ring finger of the hitting hand, sometimes the old grip isn't all there.
I"m not all that physically impaired. There's guys on the court much worse off than me, who still swing like the '60's, and move not two steps, ever.
But still, my shoulder provides the pronation, on serve and on groundies.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Sober up, Sensei. The topic is WW forehands.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Another casualty of misinformation.
Last edited:
tlm
G.O.A.T.
Exactly right i have noticed that many times on sitters a lot of the pro players will use a WW forehand to put the short weak ball away with, so his point about not using a WW on a slow ball is totally incorrect.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
The antithesis of "LEFT."
5263, the distinction I believe that you are trying to make is that one isn't "flexing" the wrist on the modern forehand, at least intentionally. Do I understand your meaning? If so, no argument. One shouldn't try to flex their wrist to hit modern forehand.
But it should be clear from context that when folks talk about "pronating the wrist", they are not talking about flexing it, but rather they're talking about rotating it about an axis formed by the forearm. I admit that it was incorrect to use the term "pronation" wrt the wrist. It's the forearm that pronates. Nevertheless, even though the posters (me included) were not correctly using the term pronate, the clear intent of what they were saying was correct. You need to pronate your forearm to hit a modern forehand.
Do you agree with that statement?
I would say that if your shoulder is having issues, you may want to look at using a more modern forehand to alleviate further stress on the shoulder.
In addition, it depends on how you serve now but a more modern serve could help with any back and shoulder issues you may have too.
Cheetah
Hall of Fame
in what way would a 'modern serve' help back and shoulder issues?
Wuppy
Professional
These days I can't do a non-WW-forehand. I tried, last time I was playing, to use an eastern grip and a flat, shoulder-first forehand a la Federer and I ended up hitting each ball literally over the back fence. I even pulled my wrist in a weird way and felt some pain. It was awful.
crosscourt
Professional
Fine -- but I'm not talking about cause and effect. The OP asked how to hit the WW forehand. The best insight I have come across is wrist pronation. It works for me and while I understand the attention to detail/cause and effect paid by some posters in this thread most of the posts are unhelpful because they fail to address the OP's question.
cc
Ok, here is my question, would a older guy (like myself) with injured elbow be better of learning WW forehand rather than using his old school one?
Also, trying to stick with OP's question here is another one. Is there a simplified version of WW, that would be easier to learn first? Maybe a video?
Also, trying to stick with OP's question here is another one. Is there a simplified version of WW, that would be easier to learn first? Maybe a video?
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
On the more recent version of the kicker movement, you follow-through down and across your body which does relieve stress in the shoulder. Formerly, as players inevitably literally hit sideways on kick serves (their elbows never come forward) and pronate, the method which used to be taught in the 70's had players finish around their back...
With that said, I see virtually no difference between Rod Laver and Rafael Nadal when they serve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogJMaP1GRmA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xEb6nTrZ_k
If anything, Laver probably served better than Nadal -- of course, better than Nadal in most instances... For the short summer season he enjoyed a service correction by a coach he ungratefully insulted publicly later, he was serving as well as a human could be, but, if not for that, there's nothing that is fundamentally different in how they swing their serve. The flat serve has been played the same since decades; you even see Laver supinating his arm on the forward swing to exaggerate the pronation later on like the best serves all tend to do nowadays.
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
I feel no stress from using it and I never hit anything else, except reverse forehands. Of course, I am 21, nearly 22 and I never injured myself really bad, so I can't tell for weaker joints by experience, however as I understand the movement, you should be able to relax your forearm a lot more than if you controlled it to hit with your more traditional swing. It should also help you capitalize a lot more on body rotation which does tend to relieve stress in your inside leg knee. I know that, for the legs and timing, it's a little easier; for the forearm, technically, a good swing should also be easier to achieve without pain. But then, if you do that, I wouldn't advise using a super heavy racket... a heavy frame is nice for a more traditional movement as it helps you get a little more plow-through, but unless you're facing ultra big hitters, a 300-320grams frame will be plenty enough and should also lessen the stress in your joints.
***Also, by the way, I'd thank Limpin' for his insights on my thread last week as it changed the way I hit my forehand... I never had as much ease controlling the stroke at such a high power level -- and against a super big hitter like my bro!
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
Federer hits a WW forehand all the time... his racket face fans a the whole 180 degrees on well over 90% of his forehands. He does finish high, but that's what happens when you take the ball so far out in front. Even when he ends up over his shoulder, the forearm has still fully pronated and he's gone from an ulnar to a radial deviation.
Even when you see him run and hit a closed stance flat forehand, he's still doing that. The thing is that putting his arm this far away and with the grip he uses forces the racket to fan in a more narrow manner vertically speaking. If he'd swing like Roddick or Djokovic, you'd see it more clearly but since the body movements are the same except that he extends his arm a lot more before hitting, it's the same stroke he hits -- and the results are also quite a bit similar. He's the slowest hitter among them on average, but I think that's a tactical choice: he purposely hit with less pace and spin to be more penetrating and to allow himself stand further in-close to the court. When he takes a crack at it, he still nail the three digits just as much as the other two -- although we could argue that even at nearly 31, a crack from Federer is more dangerous because more accurate.
You no longer see players using the same movements the Sampras or Becker used in their era... on the forehand side, it has radically changed. On the backhand side, it also have seen some modification: we see fewer players hitting their two handed backhand like former one handed backhand players (Agassi is an example of that); and one handed backhand players tend to supinate a lot more on average -- not that the other pros wouldn't have been able to; it's again a tactical decision here, I believe. But nothing changed as much as the forehand in the game of tennis.
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
Yes, you could hit with only two fingers on the handle... but the wrist joint would still be exploited. It's bound to happen. It's not a properly speaking a wrist movement as no movement is provoke by a joint. All these movements (supination/pronation; flexion/extension; ulnar/radial deviation) are caused by forearm muscles, but no forehand can be played properly without involving some of these.
One of the major cause for inconsistency in even top pros is often the absence of certain movements and not the pointless presence of hitches. A high performance coach even wrote on his blog that he spent more time adding stuff into good forehands than at suppressing stuff to clean the movements...
Do you know why? Because regardless of how you swing your racket, your string must come at a precise angle and be facing the ground by a fairly well determined bit for your shot to do anything useful at all... you either learn to get your racket there by positioning yourself right when you're moving rather slowly or you learn to change your movement midway through your swing -- the vast majority of pros are doing the second option. Just imagine, they're playing Federer, Nadal, Verdasco, Berdych, Cilic, Djokovic, Tipsarevic, etc., who all present the appropriate preparation, but they can't match their opponents and need to work their movement each time a ball comes... they can't and never will be able to generate nearly as much power as the above on average and they can't rely on the extra control or the extra spin everyone of the above can tap into at will.
How are you supposed to win a match against these athletic phenomenons when they also benefit of an unfair technical edge over the rest of the crowd? The ridicule is that many of these little tweaks could be achieved by amateurs and they could too benefit of a totally unfair edge over their opponents. Your wrist is a cause for mistake ***IF*** you don't position your arm joints properly upfront; if not, that joint and the movements it allows is a source of pace, spin, control and consistency.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Some pretty good stuff above, but I think some important points are missed.
Like when you hit a modern Fh using 2 fingers, it takes the wrist out of it (the whole reason to demo it) and the finger connection now becomes the hinge (which is controlled by stroke, not muscles).
Shows how you don't have to actively use the wrist for modern strokes.
Also the crossing action tends to mitigate the requirement to some slight extent on how precise the racket face position has to be. While it is slight, these slight improvements can be just the edge to make more shots.
Also at the higher pro levels, the game is decided more tactical, not technical on avg.
There are top 25 guys with better Serves and Fhs than Dj and Murray.
A good example is how Dj moved to #1 over legends with no advancement in technique,
but dialing back slightly and becoming more patient and tactical.
I really like what you say about how rec players can learn to use many of these advancements in their games and get excellent improvementss!
Last edited:
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
Actually, Djokovic and Murray have excellent forehands and the only players in the top 25 who can out-power them consistently off the forehand wing happen to be players who use the same technique... Technical wise, it is subtle, but if you can make reliably more damage with your stroke than your opponent, you have more options and over a large population of strokes, you will inexorably have the upper hand, assuming both players are well coached and thereby already approach an optimal play selection.
The difference between Nadal and Djokovic isn't tactical... for one. Nadal can't serve as well as Djokovic right now -- Djokovic since about 12 to 14 months has been service a super high percentage of first serves in big events and barely ever double faults unlike before. Nadal has again fell back into missing the synchronicity on his leg drag and he doesn't reach as good a trophy position as he did in the USO 2010 -- AO 2011 sequence; meanwhile, Djokovic has change a bit his arm placement during the trophy pause and it shows in his ability to hit reliable serves. That single difference is big in points and it has absolutely nothing to do with what they decide to do with their serves... it has to do with how they serve and it got points away from Nadal -- the five sets last time were tight; with his 130-135mph serve back, Nadal would have one more AO to his trophy list. But the main issue between the two is that Djokovic plays a slightly better backhand than Nadal; of course, tactically, he makes a good job of getting into these down the line rallies more often, but the reason why Nadal used to lost most of his encounter with Djokovic since 2011 is for his backhand not to be good enough to push Djokovic back off his backhand wing. He adjusted himself tactically, yes, but the match-up issue here is technical.
Same with the Federer-Nadal confrontation. Technical improvements in Federer's backhand would have meant more victories because the whole match is played exactly off that specific diagonal. Every time the match-up seems involved deeply, technical improvement can even go up to nullifying the whole disadvantage.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Well we will just have to disagree.
I agree that Dj has a better Bh, but Nadal has a better Fh and hits it more often.
Key is DJ has always had better strokes overall than Nadal (except serve during the DF probs), but remained behind him in the rankings for years until he adjusted tactically.
I never said that DJ or Murray had bad Fhs, but just there are several better in the top 30 or so. Sorry if you can't see that. In fact when DJ was struggling a bit to hold the 3-4 spot, I was one of the very few who felt he had the best overall stroke packages on tour. I wrote that imo he just needed to be more patient by not hitting quite so deep and hard as frequently, along with working his opponents over more between his vicious attacks.
Last edited:
5263
G.O.A.T.
Murray's Fh deal is more complicated as he switches his technique back and forth between modern, classic and hybrid during his matches. I doubt he even realizes when and how he does it. Mostly a feel thing for these guys and this is likely why he can't get a confident feel going on his Fh side.
I think this also makes it odd you would say that lower ranked players have his same technique, since his is not very set.
I think this also makes it odd you would say that lower ranked players have his same technique, since his is not very set.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
IMO, Djoko's jump to #1 followed shortly after his discovery that he had Celiac disease and eliminated gluten from his diet. I agree that Nadal's FH is the better shot, but, not by much.
Isolate pronation, remove the arch back, minimise lift. Essentially do more with less. I've helped a few older gentlemen improve pace and consistency.
Utilising modern techniques gives you similar pace and power but actually reduces the bodies wear and tear.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Someone posted some stats showing that Murray hit with about the same topspin as the other top forehands in the game. I don't buy it. I've seen him play up close at court level. His typical forehand is noticably flatter than the other top forehands with a lower arch and a lower margin for error. When he wants to, he can hit it bigger than anyone, but, he seems to make more UE's than they do when he goes for it. I also think he has too much independent arm swing and not enough unit turn on the backswing which probably results in some relative inconsistency.
Last edited:
5263
G.O.A.T.
Yes, that is when it happened, leading to him being in better shape on court.
Maybe that is what gave him confidence not to pull the trigger so soon?
IMO, these things are all tightly related.
Players will go for it much quicker when under physical duress; especially if they
have the goods to do it pretty well like Dj does.
Yes splitting hairs looking at top Pro Fhs like DJ and Rafa, but I see the Fh edge as
pretty solid for Rafa. Just a little more in every department imo.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Good points about Murray and points to the problem of collecting meaningful data on things like this.
He changes it up at times, and no telling what he is going to do against the big 3 in the late rounds.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
OTOH, IMO, Djoko's edge is even bigger on the BH side than Nadal's on the FH side, which makes his ground game more balanced.
5263
G.O.A.T.
THE Important point and I agree.
Thanks mate, you made me feel better
. I'll try to work on it as soon as I get my hands on the racket again.crosscourt
Professional
Just going back to the original question, the other thing that is important (beside wrist pronation (however you want to describe it)) is to think about which part of the ball you are going to make contact with. Sometimes the top of the ball is the right play, other times it is the middle or the bottom. That decision will affect how you use the WW forehand.
CC
CC
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
If your racket is slightly titled forward -- as it should be -- there's only one place you can make contact with... the top. That's physical; you can't argue with that. What can vary is where the ball touches your string bed.
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
I think you need to go through reading my post anew... I said that every single player who hit better forehands than these two present the exact same technical twitches. The point which was made was simply that you cannot call out the technical advantage and that it can make a big difference when points are tight.
A technical advantage plays on the stroke match-up during the rally. And where does Nadal's forehand lands? Into Nole's backhand. He can't break it apart with pure power like he does with most players and he doesn't have the penetration he'd need to force Nole to be more honest with his backhand (i.e., not play so many down the line backhands during their matches).
This whole discussion started when I mentioned how the specific movements the best forehands achieve give their players an unfair edge over their opponents -- and that's still true. You answered there are guys who hit better forehands than these players which is true, but the point I made was about the technique... and it happens every player who presents super high consistency, high power and high control over ball placement always play their forehand following the same key points and every player who fails in this regard doesn't.
When you can play 30% more top spin than your opponent without reducing pace, nor exerting more effort, you can hit much more threatening balls -- and you'll do it while remaining relatively conservative and safe. Of course, HOW you will use it will change everything, but having the extra option is literally unfair. Well, 30% more top that's Federer versus Hewitt, forehand side. In every of their rallies, Hewitt started playing with a minus sign, knowing going to Federer's forehand meant loosing most of these exchanges. I don't know how you compute that, but having a substantial edge over your opponent in any of the two diagonals means a lot in the end.
I perfectly understand what you mean to say by highlighting the impact of tactics... I never said it never has or doesn't have a huge impact. It's that one of the things you consider when making up tactics and strategies is the stroke match-up. I'm just saying the players who play their forehand optimally versus those who don't will always start the match with free points.
1HBH Rocks
Semi-Pro
I am looking at one single movement in his whole swing, period. If it's there, it means he can achieve a consistent contact of the type required to play with high pace, high spin and great placement. If it's not there, inexorably, he'll be wasting some power which will either limit his spin or pace potential and he'll have trouble controlling his racket face at contact, which means less consistency. Players who don't show this movement can hit well and hit hard, but they will all show a similar tendency to ride roller coasters, being one day wonderful and the other awful or just suddenly breaking down during a match.
crosscourt
Professional
I don't follow this at all. Do you mean if you lead with the top edge of the racket? If you do then you are normally intending to hit the top of the ball. But if you don't lead with the top edge - and depending on the shot you are trying to hit you may or may not -- you can also hit the back or bottom of the ball.
CC
5263
G.O.A.T.
the thumb and one more of your choice, lol.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Ok, have you shared this magic moment with us and I missed it or
are you going to keep it as a house secret?
Last time I asked, I don't think you answered.
If you are not going to show it, I guess we won't know if you have something or not.
You say Murray and DJ use it?
If they have it, ...and the players with better Fhs have it,... then why do you think you have
something so important.
I think most of the top players hit the important checkpoints to one extent or another; generally
its just that some do it better.
you said "The difference between Nadal and Djokovic isn't tactical... for one."
Well I think there are many differences and most of them are tactical. Their strokes
are not what separates them and Nadal will likely whip him if they play at RG; due
to tactics.
Last edited:
