More Power for your Tennis Strokes

[Marius_Hancu]

You might enjoy this article.
Very good observations on the modern forehand.

More Power for your Tennis Strokes
by Kelvin Miyahira
http://www.hawaii.rr.com/leisure/reviews/kelvin_miyahira/2005-12_mpfytstrokes.htm

It brings in many known elements, but
something tells me I am going to read his continuation article scheduled for next month

I am making the assumption he might recommend the use of some chain-based training devices.
--------------------------------------
Miyahira is stationed in Hawaii and seems to specialize in Speed Training (for tennis, golf, you name it).

Have a look at his series of articles:

Speed Training by Kelvin Miyahira
http://www.hawaii.rr.com/leisure/reviews/kelvin_miyahira/default.htm

 

[Exile]

Marius, I want to marry you.
Canadians are soooo secksy...

 

[Marius_Hancu]

This must be a first in this forum.
And you people in UK have considerable wit.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Getting back to our sheep

Interesting quotes from Miyahira (top link above, check the pics there)
---------
Another change Federer, James Blake, Andy Roddick, the Williams sisters, Lindsey Davenport, Maria Sharapova and others are making is the flattening out of the forehand stroke.

On faster surfaces like the US Open and Wimbledon, they are able to swing their racquets on a more level plane rather than the low to high traditional stroke that is usually employed. These flatter forehands are much more penetrating and powerful than the heavy topspin shots of the past. Take a look at this follow through of Federer. It's much lower than the typical forehand of the past.

Yet, this is opposite of typical instruction given to the weekend player. They are told to get a lot of topspin and to keep the ball in play. Well the game is changing. Will you change with it?
----------

 

[bennieboi]

ooo, i've been hitting like that

 

[ShooterMcMarco]

Doesn't sharapova and davenport usually finish above the shoulder? Lindsay also finishes over her head on a lot of her forehands

 

[Jack Romeo]

when sharapova and davenport are rallying from the baseline, they usually finish above their heads. they want to hit very aggressive shots but still put topspin for some margin. when they get a midcourt ball that sits up, they will finish over the shoulder for a flatter stroke that results in a faster shot.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Doesn't sharapova and davenport usually finish above the shoulder? Lindsay also finishes over her head on a lot of her forehands

that's when they execute the Reverse Forehand, not the typical one.

 

[nononsense]

Thanks Marius.

 

[atatu]

I read this article and the others, then went to his website. One thing I've got to say is that he does his homework, he's obviously watched the Bolleteri videos and read the book also. I tried to see what products he sells for tennis, looks like a tennis handle with a chain on it....but couldn't figure out if he's selling them to the public.

 

[chess9]

Nice find, M.

Next month it will be sex with Swedish models. May not do much for your forehand, but you won't care.

-Robert
________
Zoroastrianism Dicussion

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Getting back to our sheep

Interesting quotes from Miyahira (top link above, check the pics there)
---------
Another change Federer, James Blake, Andy Roddick, the Williams sisters, Lindsey Davenport, Maria Sharapova and others are making is the flattening out of the forehand stroke.

On faster surfaces like the US Open and Wimbledon, they are able to swing their racquets on a more level plane rather than the low to high traditional stroke that is usually employed. These flatter forehands are much more penetrating and powerful than the heavy topspin shots of the past. Take a look at this follow through of Federer. It's much lower than the typical forehand of the past.

Yet, this is opposite of typical instruction given to the weekend player. They are told to get a lot of topspin and to keep the ball in play. Well the game is changing. Will you change with it?
----------

Marius,

Boy, does this article fly in the face of the Oscar Wagner lovers.

I agree that the pros are extending and that the "windshield wiping" motion is now executed on certain shots (for the most part), but I believe this flattening out of the stroke is a byproduct of how the arm is working in the swing through the ball.

If you noticed that some posters when executing a looser and more relaxed wrist (the dropping the racquet in the slot) throughout the motion complained that they hit a flatter ball. Or, a ball with less topspin. This is something that the looser wrist aspect does. It takes time for a player to learn to increase the angle of his swing path to create more topspin.

Although it was very generous of you to post this article (and it is a good one), I don't agree that pros are now hitting all their forehands like this. The so-called modern forehand has a variety of finishes and swing path/swing motions to compliment what the player is trying to do.

What the article failed to mention was when you watch Federer he uses pretty much the same grip for all the various swing paths and motions for his shots. He can windshield wipe, flatten it out, finish off to the side, reverse it, etc...

I am also getting to the point were I am considering to no longer use the words "modern forehand". The modern forehand is not something we can put in a box and say "this is what it is". There are aspects of "today's forehand" that are a little different but not much different from the past. I really dont think that today's forehand is so different. I think that a certain way to hit it has reached critical mass. This allows us to embrace it and create instruction around it. But things haven't much changed from the past, we just do things better and more people are doing it.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Although it was very generous of you to post this article (and it is a good one), I don't agree that pros are now hitting all their forehands like this. The so-called modern forehand has a variety of finishes and swing path/swing motions to compliment what the player is trying to do.

Fully agree with you here.
It's good to have pointed that out.

 

[Yassis]

Coming To The Rescue

Hello Everyone-

I could not help myself. I registered after reading a few posts from various postings and was amazed at the level of interest generated by some of the questions. I am ecstatic that so many people voice their opinions and back it up with some evidence. Many of the postings are funny, right, and wrong at the same time. I am hoping I can put in my two cents...

Before I get started, I need to explain where I am coming from. I am a D1 college coach, fresh off the tour after 2 years, Davis Cup experience, collegiate experience, and a national junior champion. Handful of wins over top 500 ATP players and recent NCAA champions. From my viewpoint, here is what I think...

I am going to agree with the previous posting. There is no one "right" way to play the "modern" game. Every player on the tour is unique in their own way, own technique, own style of play, mental attitude, physical strength, speed, etc. However, almost all the players on the tour share a couple common themes that fall into a framework of playing the "modern" game. It is your job to figure out how to apply these common themes into your own playing framework.

The most important theme of today's game that has changed from old skool tennis is fast racket head speed. I can't state this enough. Let me clarify what I mean by fast racket head speed.

1) Same racket head speed no matter what type of shot you are going to hit. Whether you hit an driving forehand, a rally ball, a high loop ball, or an angle...its all the same racket head speed. Very simple. The only thing that is changing is the trajectory of the shot over the net and the amount of spin.

2) Fast racket head speed means what it means. Swinging the tip of the racket from point A to point B fast. The TIP of the racket is the key. This is why small 12 year olds can hit harder than muscle men given a comparable skill level.

3) Fast racket head speed gives you increased control, consistentcy, and accuracy. Acceleration of the racket gives you the freedom and confidence to swing out on every shot. Hence, all the top men's ATP players can go from defense to offense in most defensive situations. This is why netplay is discouraging mentally at the highest levels of the game. Federer winning Wimbledon from the ground instead of net primarily.

4) To get fast racket head speed you need to be loose. More specifically, you need to hold the racket with a loose grip. A loose grip would constitute on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the tightest...I would hold a 2. The ultimate by-product of a loose grip is faster racket head speed which gives you greater feel and power. I firmly believe this is the reason Federer is at a whole different level from the rest of the field. Federer "hits" the ball when any other player would "guide" the ball. He trusts his stroke, racket head speed, and feel.

A second major theme I saw on the tour was players not standing on top of the baseline. I see many coach's still preaching standing on top of the baseline when the top players are playing well behind the baseline. Why is this?

1) Players are hitting with more spin and height over the net which equals depth. This forces players to either take the ball on the rise or back up. The remedy to this problem is provided by turning on any men's professional tennis match. They simply start their primary "ready" position farther behind the baseline to adjust to the "modern" game.

2) The modern game is "hit" or "be hit." This means that if you do not take a whack at the ball, your opponent will. Even the so-called "pushers" in the tennis world are playing extremely aggressive. Its just that their aggressive ball has far greater spin and heighth than an aggressive baseliner. Playing farther behind the baseline allows you for the time and leverage to hit a quality shot. If the ball lands short, you move in. If the ball comes deep, you are already standing there or might have to move a little backwards.

3) Standing on top of the baseline does not work against great players. Lets say Federer or Nadal "hits" two deep shots at your shoe laces that are rising to your strike zone...very tough shot. Any player would be forced to hit a half-volley type groundstroke and compromise the shot quality in terms of power and heaviness. Even though you cut off some of your opponents recovery time, you have given up time in terms of your shot quality. You will be toast on the next ball against a good player and find yourself moving farther and farther behind the baseline.

A third major theme is the use of the open-stance backhand on the backhand side. More and more players are adding this to their arsenal of weapons, for one-handers and two-handers alike. The concept is exactly the same as hitting an open-stance forehand and it gives you greater court coverage and leverage in defensive situations.

1) Not giving up ground. When you hit a closed-stance backhand on the alleys of the court, you are having to take an extra step after you hit the ball. You are losing time. However, when you hit that exact same shot with an open stance backhand, you can immediately take a crossover step and not lose any time. Agassi does this so well and this is what makes him play at such an old age. He does not waste steps. Roddick on the other hand gives up a lot of court as he will hit closed-stance backhands all day.

2) Defense to offense. Open-stance allows you to hit a quality shot from hopeless situations. Nadal does this very effectively. Rarely do you see Agassi or Nadal slice a ball, it is because they are hitting open-stance backhands. For one-handers a good exampe of someone who hits a lot of open-stance backhands is Guga and Gasquet.

I have limited time writing this, but this is a good "core" framework to begin with in generating a lot of power off the ground. The key does not lie in the gym or turning your shoulders or bending your elbow at a 45 degree angle or anything like that. The key lies in applying this core framework into your own individual technique and playing style. Nadal hits a totally different ball from Federer. Both are following my framework, but applying it in there own unique way. There is no "right" specific way to play the game or no "right" way to hit the ball. Its been proven a lot of ways can be winning ways.

Many of the people (club level professionals) who analyze the game have never played at a high level themselves. I guarantee the best players in the world are not thinking that mechanically or technically into every shot or detail...even when they were just beginning. I find it very funny when I read a recent posting about whether you start your backswing before or after the ball bounces....HOW STUPID!?!?! Ask any touring professional that and you will stump the crap out of them. They are not thinking that much.

Winning is something you can't teach. There are no quick fixes in tennis or short-cuts. Proper technique will not solve all your problems. Many touring professionals have major flaws in their games, but they still win. Tennis is a running game that brings along many other intangibles. On any given day you can win or lose no matter who you are playing. A top 10 ATP player can lose to a top 300 ATP player on any given day. This makes tennis so exciting at every level. You always have to prove yourself and the only way to get better at winning is to play a lot of matches.

Take my advice for someone who has experienced the modern game. Anyone can learn it and I encourage people to stop taking lessons from a coach teaching the old skool ways. Its an easier game to play and it allows for less injuries. You are letting the racket do the work. No more tennis elbows or rigid strokes. Tennis will be more fun!

Anyways thats my two cents....I am out.

 

[Yassis]

One More Thing

I totally forgot, but about Sharapova and Davenport and most of the WTA players...

In my previous posting I mentioned the ATP tour many times. I left out the WTA tour for several reasons.

1) Women play totally different from the men. Women hit much flatter and it might even be harder. However, they are playing high-risk tennis. They can get away with it because every girl on the tour plays almost exactly the same way! They hit hard and flat generally up the middle of the court.

2) Sharapova and Davenport finishing the racket above their shoulders every time. This would not be the case if they were to put men on the WTA tour. Higher balls over the net coupled with spin will produce many errors from a "drive" shot from the ladies. Every ball for Sharapova and Davenport is right in their strike zone, this allows them to drive everything. Men hit the ball up and away from the strike zone, making finishing above your shoulder everytime very difficult.

3) The WTA tour is learning quickly. A good example is Henin. She is small, hits big, hits spinny, hits angles, hits higher over the net...basically she plays like a guy. The women are learning the simple concept of "a rising ball to your opponent is a tougher than a ball in your strike zone." To prove that women are not learning fast enough is the fact that Lindsey Davenport is the #1 player in the world. She hits extremely hard and clean, but no one has the ability to make her move out of center of the court and out of her comfortable strike zone consistently.

4) The REVERSE forehand as Marcus likes to call it. A very effective shot that everyone needs to have. The girls do it well as well as Nadal on the men's side. The shot gives you the ability to get you out of defensive of situations and also gives you the ability to freeze your opponent (disguise your shot).

To say a girl can beat a guy in the top #500 in the world is not impossible, but almost entirely improbable for the time being.

 

[John Zheng]

Hello Everyone-

...

Anyways thats my two cents....I am out.

This is an awsome post. Looking forward to more of your postings.

I'll add an obvious thing to it. Tape a pro match, almost anyone, but preferably someone with solid strokes, like Agassi or Federer. Now watch the match, but only watch one of the guys, and rewind over the same segment. See what that person is doing, and immitate it! For example, I watched Federer's forehand here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1273724609613333533&q=roger+federer

I went out and hit later in the day and with his basic technique in mind, was able to hit a tremendous forehand and not aggravate my tennis elbow. It felt tremendously euphoric to be able to hit my forehand again the way I want to.

You can see in this shot his follow through ends up around his shoulder blade rather than above his shoulder. So it may be valid that these guys are flattening out their shots a little more now.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

I read this article and the others, then went to his website. One thing I've got to say is that he does his homework, he's obviously watched the Bolleteri videos and read the book also. I tried to see what products he sells for tennis, looks like a tennis handle with a chain on it....but couldn't figure out if he's selling them to the public.

Anyone using products by Vitesse?
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=79802

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Loose grip

4) To get fast racket head speed you need to be loose. More specifically, you need to hold the racket with a loose grip. A loose grip would constitute on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the tightest...I would hold a 2. The ultimate by-product of a loose grip is faster racket head speed which gives you greater feel and power. I firmly believe this is the reason Federer is at a whole different level from the rest of the field. Federer "hits" the ball when any other player would "guide" the ball. He trusts his stroke, racket head speed, and feel.

Yes, this is very important.
Would be great to have you continuing posting here.

IMO Fed's looser overall than the other guys, not just at the level of the grip. His conditioning coach (Pierre Paradis I guess) is doing a great job, he's not muscle-bound.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Men vs. Women

To say a girl can beat a guy in the top #500 in the world is not impossible, but almost entirely improbable for the time being.

Lindsay Davenport said recently in an interview that her husband Jon Leach
http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/playerprofiles/default2.asp?playernumber=L275
still beats her, and he was in the 800s when active.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Staying on the baseline

A second major theme I saw on the tour was players not standing on top of the baseline. I see many coach's still preaching standing on top of the baseline when the top players are playing well behind the baseline. Why is this?

Because of Agassi's influence.

Everybody thinks for 20 years now that they can play like him, forgetting that only he has that eye-hand coordination.

And because it's (just in appearance, of course) easier, you don't have to move, just sit at the baseline, big mistake as you mention.

3) Standing on top of the baseline does not work against great players. Lets say Federer or Nadal "hits" two deep shots at your shoe laces that are rising to your strike zone...very tough shot. Any player would be forced to hit a half-volley type groundstroke and compromise the shot quality in terms of power and heaviness. Even though you cut off some of your opponents recovery time, you have given up time in terms of your shot quality. You will be toast on the next ball against a good player and find yourself moving farther and farther behind the baseline.

Yes, but IMO they do it on varying degrees.

Fed is not more than 1-2 steps behind the baseline, on average of course (and even he's forced on some instances to do flick on-the-rebound saves, but he has great hands, so ...) , Nadal and Ferrero are much behind it (and this is why they will have I think more difficulty in winning on HC, even with Nadal winning Montreal shows that's possible at his level.)

But being too much behind forces Nadal to run a lot and might be a reason for his knee problems.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Coaching

I have limited time writing this, but this is a good "core" framework to begin with in generating a lot of power off the ground. The key does not lie in the gym or turning your shoulders or bending your elbow at a 45 degree angle or anything like that. The key lies in applying this core framework into your own individual technique and playing style. Nadal hits a totally different ball from Federer. Both are following my framework, but applying it in there own unique way. There is no "right" specific way to play the game or no "right" way to hit the ball. Its been proven a lot of ways can be winning ways.

Many of the people (club level professionals) who analyze the game have never played at a high level themselves. I guarantee the best players in the world are not thinking that mechanically or technically into every shot or detail...even when they were just beginning. I find it very funny when I read a recent posting about whether you start your backswing before or after the ball bounces....HOW STUPID!?!?! Ask any touring professional that and you will stump the crap out of them. They are not thinking that much.

Yassis,

You certainly have many good ideas in your postings here.

However, my 2 cents, in terms of teaching, you are one very talented player, coaching talented (D1) players, all which have hit millions of balls since say 6 years of age, for which the technique isn't a question (well, perhaps great volleying against tough opponents, which is something which even ARod isn't doing well), it's already a given.

The majority of the club players or posters here don't have this talent, or the opportunity to train this much as you did, and at your levels.

Also, most of them are adults, and they must approach the learning of the game from other angles, more rational ones, as part of the instinctive learning is many times lost together with the childhood, even if we try to instill it again in coaching.

To the adults, one must also give technical reasons and motives. Many times, they imitate less well than the kids, or they even go on a totally different tangent ...

Also, I feel that the gym work is just another part of the puzzle, not something to replace the tennis training at all. However, it's an important part, not to be neglected either.

And, btw, tell us your opinion about when to start that backswing, commit yourself

 

[bluegrasser]

Thanks Yassis, very interesting post, i have just two questions, if you don't mind:
1) How does this equate ( 3.0 - 5.0 ) into the club level, in other words what approach should us hacks pursue.

2) What about racquets ? What size, stiffness best fits into the modern game IYO.

 

[Yassis]

I Agree

Marcus-

I agree with all your counterpoints and explanations. I tried to give the "average" player a new prespective in the eyes of a top level player.

Saying that, I truly believe we need more coach's who have a passion for technical detail like yourself and other people who read the postings. This is why I am blown away. Being technical does not hurt, especially when it comes to being a coach. Now that I am on the coaching side of things, many coach's lack the ability to help their student when something goes wrong. They might suggest a few quick fixes like bend your knees, turn your shoulders, etc, but that does not fix the real root of the problem in many cases.

You are right that I might be oversimplifying things for the "average" player. The concepts I explained earlier do take a lot of practice and it does require to take a step backwards. However, if you put in the time and work, you might come out ahead. I do not think it would hurt to give it a try, what do you have to lose?

Since I am not around to give a clinic, I would suggest a website called www.moderntennis.com. I used to be coached by the creator of these videos and he taught me almost everything I know until I left for college. He talks about the main concepts and goes into good technical detail in how to accomplish a higher level of play. He comes from a relatively unknown background but he speaks at all the top conferences and is airing on the TennisChannel now. He understands how the professionals play and his real skill is his ability to explain it to the "average" tennis player.

-----

When should you prepare for your shot in relation to a bounce? I will have to hit a few balls, but my prediction is there is no one right way. Depends on the ball, the circumstances, court positioning, your own technique, etc. I'll get back in a few days.

-----

We should write a book with all the information on here. The knowledge that comes from some of the "best" coach's in the world is not that great. I am finding that coaching talented players is very easy, as in my case. It is definitely less technical and more mental, tactical, and phsyical training. Coaching to people who "want" it at the club level is a totally different story. I do not have much experience here, but its obviously a bulk of the tennis players out there.

I do know the majority of the teaching professionals do not understand the fundamental concepts and lack tennis experience. Tennis coaching is just a means to them. A lot of GIGO, garbage in and garbage out. I think a "good" coach can mold you from the start at any given talent level you will be a happier tennis player.

----

Off-court training is a big part of tennis at any level. Tennis is a running game and secondly a power game. Interval training is important with tennis with emphasize on short sprints, quickness, and changing diretions. At the same time, I feel tennis is a very physical sport and mental sport. Getting in the gym and lifting a few weights can be very beneficial to increasing your explosiveness and giving you a boost mentally.

 

[Kathy]

Thanks Yassis. I found your post really interesting.

I used to obsess about form, trying to to do everything the "right" way, till I learned that this was hindering rather than helping me. My own experience in coaching has reinforced the idea. I've been impressed by how quickly and naturally good athletes just pick up a tennis racket one day, and by getting a couple tips and just watching others, learn the game faster than those who take lessons. They play intuitively and move naturally, just letting it happen. They seem to trust themselves more and learn naturally. So, I'm not surprised that you say those who make it to the pros generally don't think about stuff like that. Your brain is as busy as a computer running a virtual-reality while playing a shot. If you ask it to also think (or to remember something), you're going to take real cerebral performance hit that will affect timing, ball judgement, coordination, vision, and so on.

I laughed when I read what you say about the women's game, because it's exactly true. The women's tour isn't as deep as the men's, so they can get away with things the men can't. For example, when the Williams sisters came along, nobody could handle their power. But, in time, because they were forced to, the other players learned to use and handle it better.

Kathy K
www.operationdoubles.com

 

[Yassis]

Bluegrass Reply

1) Give the modern game a try. Its worth a shot. Just be willing to make the commitment to change and the change will sometimes not be easy. Especially if you are currently "hard-wired" in playing old skool tennis. You need to "re-program" your brain and muscles with the modern game.

2) You need a real tennis racket. Anything that the pros use is a safe bet. To play the modern game with an oversized, extremely light, stiff racket is a no go. I can barely keep the ball in play with those types of racket.

Hope this helps!

 

[Bungalo Bill]

It is your job to figure out how to apply these common themes into your own playing framework.

After reading this ridiculous post, it sure sounds like one of our friends has resurrected themselves (Bottle, tlm???) What is most interesting is the way you spell "SKOOL", but spell all other words correctly.

Sounds like an Oscar Wagner fan is back…lol!

Every good coach knows that learning the fundamentals in any sport is extremely important. When you study pro film, they are not that different from each other that we can say "okay everyone, do what you want to do, it's a free-for-all!" That would be very irresponsible and literally stupid.

It would be a lot like saying "I have coached the Olympic Ski Team for 20 years, and I can tell you, when these guys are racing down those slopes, "they are not thinking about much, and neither should you, so just go do what you want to do and take on that DOUBLE BLACK DIAMOND", HUH?

The most important theme of today's game that has changed from old skool tennis is fast racket head speed.

Racquet head speed has always been important – where have you been? Also, the racquet speed needs to be in control for what the individual player can control and what is feasible for their current level.

2) Fast racket head speed means what it means...the TIP of the racket is the key.

Wow, sorry, can't get there. This makes me seriously doubt who you are. It is not the tip of the racquet that is the key - it is how the body is working. Without the bones and muscles behind the racquet, holding the racquet, the tip doesn't go anywhere.

3) Fast racket head speed gives you increased control, consistency, and accuracy. Acceleration of the racket gives you the freedom and confidence to swing out on every shot.

A fast racquet speed can also have diminishing returns. If I taught a player to swing as fast as Fernando Gonzalez and just try not to think of anything, what do you think we would see? Yes, a player losing their balance and swinging improperly at the ball.

4) To get fast racket head speed you need to be loose. More specifically, you need to hold the racket with a loose grip. A loose grip would constitute on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the tightest...

What is the biggest difference and has now hit mainstream is not the loose grip, it is what happens in the entire motion. No longer do most pros lay their racquet back from their own will (although at the club level this is still a viable way to do it). They now allow the forward motion and the looseness in the wrist to cause the wrist to lay back. It is like being in a Porsche on the passenger side and your buddy steps on it. Your head fly’s back and that is how the wrist lays back nowadays.

The ultimate by-product of a loose grip is faster racket head speed which gives you greater feel and power. I firmly believe this is the reason Federer is at a whole different level from the rest of the field.

Nope again, nearly every pro hits like Federer. Federer can just do it better then the rest. Plus, a player needs to maintain some firmness in the grip especially when they are learning this motion.

A second major theme I saw on the tour was players not standing on top of the baseline. I see many coach's still preaching standing on top of the baseline when the top players are playing well behind the baseline. Why is this?

Well I have only seen a few coaches, not many, preach stand on the baseline. Also some players stand further back then others. One of the trademarks of a pro is hitting on the rise. In order to do this, they need to be very close to the baseline to do so.

Additionally, the other reason why players stand back more is because of their conditioning. They are simply faster.

1) Players are hitting with more spin and height over the net which equals depth. This forces players to either take the ball on the rise or back up...they simply start their primary "ready" position farther behind the baseline to adjust to the "modern" game.

Players are hitting with more variety. They are hitting flatter balls with the loose wrist. They are hitting more topspin with the windshield wiping motion, etc...Positioning behind the baseline depends on the player tey are playing more than anything.

2) The modern game is "hit" or "be hit." This means that if you do not take a whack at the ball, your opponent will. Even the so-called "pushers" in the tennis world are playing extremely aggressive. Its just that their aggressive ball has far greater spin and heighth than an aggressive baseliner.

Well, I don’t know what "pushers" you have seen. But I have yet to see an aggressive pusher! Just saying this makes me seriously doubt your credentials. This is something Bottle or tlm would say. Pushers at the pro level or Division I level?

The game is turning to an "all-court" game which means a player needs to be able to play both OFFENSE AND DEFENSE. They also need to know when they are on OFFENSE or should take the offensive and when to play defense. This is very evident in nearly every professionals game - including Federer.

3) Standing on top of the baseline does not work against great players. Lets say Federer or Nadal "hits" two deep shots at your shoe laces that are rising to your strike zone...very tough shot. You will be toast on the next ball against a good player and find yourself moving farther and farther behind the baseline.

If someone is hitting two deep shots near the line, on purpose, he can hit their all day long. I am not playing Federer and my chances for my opponent to make an error (hit long) goes way up. Are you really a coach?

Staying on the baseline in the pros and club play is still extremely effective play. When I review film after film, mamny pros are stil hovering around that baseline! To this day, one of the best ways to take time away is to take the ball earlier.

A third major theme is the use of the open-stance backhand on the backhand side. More and more players are adding this to their arsenal of weapons, for one-handers and two-handers alike.

This is a bunch of BS. Film after film still shows the classic onehanded backhand with the step into the ball. I want all players that have access to John Yandell's site or Tennis One to prove me wrong on this.

Many of the people (club level professionals) who analyze the game have never played at a high level themselves. I guarantee the best players in the world are not thinking that mechanically or technically into every shot or detail...even when they were just beginning.

Well "Oscar", I know for a fact that this is not true and this is a sure giveaway you are not a coach. All players developing sound technique come from understanding the fundamentals.

I play with three x-Division I Top 20 players and all of them have had extensive training on their technique.

I find it very funny when I read a recent posting about whether you start your backswing before or after the ball bounces....HOW STUPID!?!?!

No, you are stupid or blind. When you look at pro film, nearly EVERY pro has prepared the racquet WELL before the bounce. You dont know this?????

Winning is something you can't teach. There are no quick fixes in tennis or short-cuts. Proper technique will not solve all your problems.

What? Actually, winning IS something you CAN teach. You can teach a player HOW to win! You can teach a player how to setup points, wait for their shot, to build a game plan, etc...

Proper technique may not solve all your problems but it will certainly solve a lot!

Many touring professionals have major flaws in their games, but they still win.

Yeah, like what? Name them.

Take my advice for someone who has experienced the modern game. Anyone can learn it and I encourage people to stop taking lessons from a coach teaching the old skool ways. You are letting the racket do the work. No more tennis elbows or rigid strokes. Tennis will be more fun!

Anyways thats my two cents....I am out.

Who is teaching rigid strokes? And anyone can learn tennis in just two hours, right? lol

Letting the racquet do the work, wow, now that is a new concept. Wow, “encourage people to “STOP” taking lessons from “old skool pros”? Then who would you suggest? Take them from Oscar?

I found this post with so many holes in it, I can't wait for your reply.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Bungalo Bill,

The majority of Federer's topspin BH clips at tennisplayer.net are closed stance, of course. However, they show several open stance under:

Backhand Running
Backhand Moves Back

probably a total of about 5.

Also, don't think Yassis's trying to sell Oscar here. He made mention of
another site, where the principals seem to be:

http://www.moderntennis.com/main/ourteam.php

Also, wrt the bounce stuff, it seems to me that for the time being he's reserved opinion.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Bungalo Bill,

The majority of Federer's topspin BH at tennisplayer.net are closed stance, of course. However, they show several open stance under:

Backhand Running
Backhand Moves Back

probably a total of about 5.

Also, don't think Yassis's trying to sell Oscar here. He made mention of
another site, where the principals seem to be:

http://www.moderntennis.com/main/ourteam.php

Also, wrt the bounce stuff, it seems to me that for the time being he reserved opinion.

Marius,

I reedited this post. At first I just simply went along with what you said about www.tennisPlayer.net.

I specifically watched each backhand video for Rodger Federer.

Total count on videos: 37 clips.

Closed stance (front foot steps across center line at an angle) backhands: 33 out of 37 clips.

Neutral stance (front foot is placed near centerline of body) backhands: 4 out of 37 (and I gave you some here. They could easily be considered closed.).

Open stance backhands: NONE!!!!

Surely, if the open stance onehander was on the scene there would at least be one clip?

POSITION BEHIND THE BASELINE: varied. He was deep on some and on the baseline on others.

There will be way more neutral and closed stance onehanders in any pros onehander then open stance. Open stance is something (for onehanders) to learn at a later point and is used primarily for service returns, not as a main stance. For the twohander, that is a different story.

When I did my Philoupussis (never can spell that guy's name right) article, one clip had him hitting from an open stance, he was on the run, hitting defensively, and forced to hit this way. All other shots, he did not use the open stance. He would step in and fire.

I am not buying his post at all - sorry! Anytime somene says "just go out and swing" after being a Davis Cup coach and a Division I coach is a red flag to me.

More debate needs to happen before I buy his stuff and I want to debate this guy!

Anyway, I am smelling Oscar Wegner all over the place. Sniff, sniff...lol So let's debate and see what happens!

Do me a favor take the quiz and answer the question. They show Agassi, Hewitt, and GOnzalez. They all finish differently for various kinds of balls. Isn't this what we have been saying here? But they missed the whole entire point! The modern forehand is not the finish necessarly. It is what happens BEFORE the finish that makes it more efficient. And that is how the wrist/hand lays back during the forward motion.

Geeez, I need to write a book.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

The REVERSE forehand as Marcus likes to call it. A very effective shot that everyone needs to have. The girls do it well as well as Nadal on the men's side. The shot gives you the ability to get you out of defensive of situations and also gives you the ability to freeze your opponent (disguise your shot).

As Marius likes to call it?

I thought that is what all "professional" coaches called it. Truly if you know this stroke you would know "who" called it the "reverse forehand" to begin with. Do you know? Do your search on the internet and give us the answer.

The reverse forehand has been around a long long time. It was popularized by Sampras. I will give you a hint: Davenport.

 

[Yassis]

Sorry

Sorry Everyone!

I guess I am a complete moron and have no clue what I am talking about. Buffalo Bill is GOD and nevermind my opinion. This will be my last opinion on this website. Disregard everything I said and listen to Buffalo Bill.

Take care!

Yassis

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Sorry Everyone!

I guess I am a complete moron and have no clue what I am talking about. Buffalo Bill is GOD and nevermind my opinion. This will be my last opinion on this website. Disregard everything I said and listen to Buffalo Bill.

Take care!

Yassis

Buffalo Bill? Surely a professional coach of your stature could easily overcome my knowledge on strokes. Why resort to name calling?

By the way "Oscar", "skool" is spelled "school".

Yassis, what a name. I got to admit that was pretty clever. You had me laughing. That was funny.

Can't believe you TW'ers fell for this one.

 

[sureshs]

As Marius likes to call it?

I thought that is what all "professional" coaches called it. Truly if you know this stroke you would know "who" called it the "reverse forehand" to begin with. Do you know? Do your search on the internet and give us the answer.

The reverse forehand has been around a long long time. It was popularized by Sampras. I will give you a hint: Davenport.

It was Lansdorp I believe.

The issue raised by Yassis is simliar to the debate in academics when I was a student and still goes on. Einstein almost failed his physics courses, Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard - hence is there any point getting a college education? The physicist and nobel laureate Richard Feynman said that teaching is effective only in the cases when it is redundant (i.e., the student is already brilliant). In spite of that, he certainly had his degrees and helped many a student excel in the field. My take on that is in tennis, or any other field, there will always be naturals who will shape their own techniques and rewrite the textbooks - but for the rest, proper training is a must. Having started tennis very late, I envy the natural strokes of youngsters who have been coached properly from the beginning. I even see that in older adults who return to tennis - you can make out at once that they had played in their younger days.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

It was Lansdorp I believe.

Very good! Correct.

I envy the natural strokes of youngsters who have been coached properly from the beginning. I even see that in older adults who return to tennis - you can make out at once that they had played in their younger days.

Even the naturals have to take refresher courses. Astronauts have to go through rigorous training. Olympic athletes are constantly working on their form, technique, and conditioning. Federer works hard on his footwork and strokes.

Accountants have to learn accounting, CEO's have to learn business, basketball players have to show up for "practice".

Sure a lot of them have surpassed areas we probably are still working on and a lot of them have soared to high levels because of their unique combination of discipline and talent.

But all of us have to learn and train hard to succeed and accomplish things to meet our goals - there is no such thing as a free ride. There are a lot of talented players who never amount to anything for whatever reason.

The bottom-line, if players want to get good, they have to work hard at it.

Very good post!

 

[PM_]

Sorry Everyone!

I guess I am a complete moron and have no clue what I am talking about. Buffalo Bill is GOD and nevermind my opinion. This will be my last opinion on this website. Disregard everything I said and listen to Buffalo Bill.

Take care!

Yassis

Yassis, why do you take one man's opinion of you so seriously?
Realize that these are the forums and one objective of it is to effectively debate your opinions.

Don't take everything literally-not everybody does.

 

[armand]

Buffalo Bill? Surely a professional coach of your stature could easily overcome my knowledge on strokes. Why resort to name calling?

By the way "Oscar", "skool" is spelled "school".

Yassis, what a name. I got to admit that was pretty clever. You had me laughing. That was funny.

Can't believe you TW'ers fell for this one.

So what did Yassis mean? 'You asses'?
And I don't understand what this person's motivation might have been. Misinform people? But why?

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Yassis,

If you're for real a D1 coach, etc, there's no point in not posting here, your input will be appreciated, at least by some.

Get used to criticism, and be relaxed about it, there are much tougher things in life, such as loss of health or a job. Every coach, all over the world, has had his methods questioned, and more than once, and many times by people very close to him, such as his pupils.

 

[arnz]

I learned tennis in a park, with friends, so I'm not qualified in any way to enter this debate. I do see people and their demeanor, and as a relative newbie to the intellectual side of tennis, I like to see the posters demeanor/behavior in here. The value of what they say means nothing to me if they come of as abrasive/know it all. I mean, after all, its a forum about tennis, a hobby for most of us I think. How many here are professional players? There is nothing earthshattering to me about somebody saying loose wrist vs firm wrist, I try both and see what works for me and what doesnt hurt me. Big deal, no need to shout about it

Marius, you have earned my respect in every way for the way you conduct yourself on these boards. Although I don't know you and may never even meet you, your personality shines through.

 

[chess9]

Yassis,

If you're for real a D1 coach, etc, there's no point in not posting here, your input will be appreciated, at least by some.

Get used to criticism, and be relaxed about it, there are much tougher things in life, such as loss of health or a job. Every coach, all over the world, has had his methods questioned, and more than once, and many times by people very close to him, such as his pupils.

If we didn't have a high level of dialectic tension here no one would come. We are mostly competitive people, and some of us have strong views with no foundation. Others have strong views with a strong foundation. I have weak views with a weak foundation, but I know I'm always right. It gets me through the night, anyway....

-Robert
________
IPAD CASES

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I was laughing so hard this weekend on the stunt Bottle pulled on us. This is classic and I would love to meet this guy just based on his sense of humor. I am still smiliing and (chuckling) with how many people on this board swallowed that garbage. It just goes to show you how gulible we tennis players are to anything that will provde us with the "holy grail" to us winning more matches.

Reread his first post and you will see Oscar Wagner "cultisms" all over the place. No high level coach would say stuff like that and certainly no high level coach would "defame" some mediocre coach like me!

There is nothing on this planet that is worth anything that does not require hard work and effort no matter how talented you are. The only difference is if a talented person works real hard, they tend to go farther.

 

[JohnYandell]

Did you figure that out for sure? That it is was pseudonym?

 

[Kathy]

I must have missed something. Dig two dogs pee on the same fire hydrant?

Kathy K

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Did you figure that out for sure? That it is was pseudonym?

I have no doubt. But I did get a good laugh and still chuckle about it.

Read his responses carefully and Wagner is written all over it. There is only one person I know that gets this bent out of shape and that is our friend Bottle.

We both know, no coach worth their salt is going to tell players to just go "do whatever they want" because pros "don't think". Or go fire your "old skool" coaches because they don't know what they are doing.

I just thought it was hilarious. He is one clever guy. Would hate to face him in a match! Probably one of those crafty senior players.

 

[AngeloDS]

You can also increase power by increasing body-weight, and effectively using your body weight into your shots.

I see a lot of skinny, lanky people playing tennis. Who are like under 10% of fat, and they don't seem to produce much power on their hardest hits. They have power, but a lot of effort is put into it.

 

[nViATi]

You can also increase power by increasing body-weight, and effectively using your body weight into your shots.

I see a lot of skinny, lanky people playing tennis. Who are like under 10% of fat, and they don't seem to produce much power on their hardest hits. They have power, but a lot of effort is put into it.

So you're advocating getting fat as a method to increase power in tennis...
And the reason those skinny people don't have much power is because they have less muscle mass than other people not because they weigh less.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

So you're advocating getting fat as a method to increase power in tennis...
And the reason those skinny people don't have much power is because they have less muscle mass than other people not because they weigh less.

Your main source of power comes from clean contact and timing. Everything you do to achieve this will translate into power. This means good wieght transfer, movement, etc...

 

[NoBadMojo]

I have no doubt. But I did get a good laugh and still chuckle about it.

Read his responses carefully and Wagner is written all over it.

The guy's name is Wegner..Oscar Wegner..not Wagner, and the Wegner methodology is all about being aware of where the racquet hand is positioned and not the racquethead (tip). Yassis was suggesting players should be aware of what the racquethead is doing not the racquet hand and that is contrary to the Wegner (not Wagner) methodology. The Wegner method works for many because beginners and low skilled players are rarely aware of where their racquethead is during key parts of their swings..being aware of where the racquet hand is makes it easier for many to make clean contact and to have better timing and control since the racquethand is closer to your body and eyes than the racquet head at key points of the swing...but to get to an advanced level, you really need to know what the racquethead (tip) is doing. Yassis clearly knows what he is talking about. it's a shame another knowledgable poster got assaulted and doesnt wish to post here anymore..I dont blame him.
So no kathy, this isnt a matter of two dogs piddling on the hydrant..it is a matter of one dog piddling and crapping all over a knowledgable poster...someone who this board could have learned from. I have no idea who Yassis is by the way, nor do I teach the Wegner method unless someone is really struggling with other teaching techniques as the Wegner method teaches tennis in a very robotic/sameness sort of way. Yassis was suggesting people learn tennis in a more individual natural sort of way. I dont see similarities connecting Yassis to Wegner at all and I dont think other knowledgable people would either. I suspect Yassis dropped in to promote the ModernTennis site which he mentions in one of his posts, which is not the Wegner site.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

The guy's name is Wegner..Oscar Wegner..not Wagner, and the Wegner methodology is all about being aware of where the racquet hand is positioned and not the racquethead (tip). Yassis was suggesting players should be aware of what the racquethead is doing not the racquet hand and that is contrary to the Wegner (not Wagner) methodology. The Wegner method works for many because beginners and low skilled players are rarely aware of where their racquethead is during key parts of their swings..being aware of where the racquet hand is makes it easier for many to make clean contact and to have better timing and control since the racquethand is closer to your body and eyes than the racquet head at key points of the swing...but to get to an advanced level, you really need to know what the racquethead (tip) is doing. Yassis clearly knows what he is talking about. it's a shame another knowledgable poster got assaulted and doesnt wish to post here anymore..I dont blame him.
So no kathy, this isnt a matter of two dogs piddling on the hydrant..it is a matter of one dog piddling and crapping all over a knowledgable poster...someone who this board could have learned from. I have no idea who Yassis is by the way, nor do I teach the Wegner method unless someone is really struggling with other teaching techniques as the Wegner method teaches tennis in a very robotic/sameness sort of way. Yassis was suggesting people learn tennis in a more individual natural sort of way. I dont see similarities connecting Yassis to Wegner at all and I dont think other knowledgable people would either. I suspect Yassis dropped in to promote the ModernTennis site which he mentions in one of his posts, which is not the Wegner site.

NBM, I am not going to fight you but you failed (once again) to clarify my position and left out some critical responses in my thread. Holding a grudge is going to do you no good. All that hatred and bitterness is going to eat you alive.

Now take a deep breath, calm down, no one is against you. Now read the following information as if I do know what I am talking about. We agree on way more things than we disagree on. Plus, the things we disagree on are very minor. We dont need to sweat the smal stuff.

Oh, yes, I do know how his name is spelled.

Advanced level players have a common swing pattern. They may not be identical, but they have very common elements. Nearly all pros are keeping the wrist loose or looser, the elbow bent, dropping the racquet back into the slot, and pulling or dragging the racquet forward which lays back the wrist.

This is evident in film after film. So there is a "common" forehand. Plus, I am glad you clarified "the tip" of the racquet being swung into the ball. It is not the "TIP" of the racquet pros and advanced players are more aware of, it is the HEAD of the racquet.

Additionally, although I will agree with anyone that the open stance backhand is considered and used on some shots or certain shots, it is hardly used as a main stream stance.

I examined 37 clips of Rodger Federer and not one of them was open stance. Not one. I can also pretty much say the same thing for Blake, Haas, and others. The percentage of them hitting open stance backhands is extremely small compared to closed and neutral.

Another thing that I know you support but didnt want to indicate it here is the role of the hand/wrist/arm. Because the wrist is relaxed throughout the swing, the racquet weight can be felt more as it is sent into the ball. We are not talking about the racquet tip here. Also, swinging faster and faster is not better.

Even Pat Dougherty's videos has already indicated that advanced players and pros are pulling the butt cap and allowing the head to come around like hammering a nail sideways. But this still needs to be in control. So you (Yassis) arent saying anything new.

Further, I disagree with the "anything goes" mentality. Sorry, but I know several top collegiate players and not one of them says they learned "their own way". They all had extensive technical training.

There are a lot of things I agree with Wagner (oh sorry for my quick typing "WEGNER"), there is only one major thing, I dont and it is because I haven't seen it yet"

- Pros wait for the bounce to perform their backswing.

And no kidding that Wegners teaching appeals to beginners. That is pretty obvious.

The other thing I know you dont agree with is swinging faster and faster. There is no doubt swing speed is important but it also has diminishing returns given the level of the player.

So,

1. It is not the tip - it is the head. The ENTIRE head of the racquet that the brain needs to reference. I dont know how many times in the past I have indicated the brains need to know where the head of the racquet is in relation to contact.

2. The hand is flung forward because of the looser wrist and the weight of the racquet. It is the looseness in the wrist that varies between players.

3. The grip still needs to be somewhat firm or have pressure on the handle, especially when learning how to keep a loose wrist motion and use motion to keep the wrist laid back.

4. The pros are hitting very similar strokes from a technnical perspective. But they do vary in style and preferences.

5. Open stance is not used as often as implied.

6. Professional players are taking their racquet back before the bounce.

7. Players can envision the butt cap sliding forward and across to achieve a sideways hammer motion which other may explain in a different way.

8. Learning tennis and playing at an advanced level still requires hardwork, good technical training, and should not be taken haphazardly.

9. It is not the followthrough that players should concentrate on, it is what happens before the followthrough.

10. Pros hit through the ball.

The other problem I see with "Yassis" post is the real loose grip. At a profesional level it is true that some players vary their grip pressure. But this can be devastating at the beginner/intermediate level. A real loose grip leads to "slapping" the ball.

By the way, if you truly want to get along as yo seem to indicate, it pays dividends to acknowledge that I do know what I am talking about and explain things very well. It also pays dividends to admit that you also try to stir up a fight or "put someone down".

If others seem to think I know what I am talking about, why are you so different?

 

[AngeloDS]

Yes, I am in favor of increasing body-weight to increase power. It's a good way of getting a stable base, lowering your center of gravity, and adding power to shots that use body-weight as a factor. The first two are fact -- increasing weight will stable a base and lower the center of gravity (improve balance). As we know these things are important into getting a clean contact point, and keeping forward into the shot and not moving back.

Now body-weight can be: fat or muscle. Muscle is more dense and can add considerable weight, but fat will help as well. Since those muscles require more energy and burn tons of calories. So a good mix of fat and muscle is good.

I don't think muscles play a role in power (on the offense). Other than the weight of the muscle. Muscles to me are like layers of armor; they are there to protect your joints and your body from destroying itself. Otherwise, Agassi would have the most powerful offensive shots.

Now on the defensive, I'm not sure if they do play a roll on power. They help stabalize those joints and make it a bit easier for the racquet to not be pushed back or such. As we see with Nadal, that muscular beast. His defensive shots are amazing.

Using your body-weight in shots is great for power. There's a reason why people use the open or the semi-open push off with their hitting foot. They put a lot of body weight, and create a lot of torque.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Notice how I said skinny and lanky people, then the next sentence was relating that to the 10%. nVIATI, you need to read posts more carefully.

I should have seperated it with a -- or a ;, instead of a period and making it two seperate sentences.

Those people are skinny and lanky and under 10% or so can benefit by adding on weight. Wether it be muscle, or fat. The best would be add more muscle, and some fat. Since muscle is more dense, and puts on more weight.

But I feel muscle doesn't play much a role in power. Their role is more to protect your body from getting destroyed. They are there as layers of armor so you dont rip your arm out of your sockets or do something to that extent.

AngeloDS,

You have a point about strength and adding a little weight. But this has diminishing returns. Having too much weight can also work against a player.

The best thing a player can do is learn to relax and improve their ability to go through the ball and make clean contact. Developing a consistent swing, developing their rally pace, can help a player add power.

The more a player learns to develop their racquet pace, they will be able to increase their swing speed over time. But as they grow, the stablizing muscles in the forearm, shoulders, etc. will get coordinated better and stronger so they can control the racquet during increased swing speeds.

 

[TommyM]

I like to use the inner game approach which works very well. If I have a player that wants to hit hard I feed his some balls and ask him to hit hard. So he does and usually uses a lot of muscle.

I also ask him to remember the speed of his shots.

After 15-20 shots I ask him if he can hit with same speed but less effort.

Most people get this and they just look for the speed with more loose muscles. Eventually they find out that you don't need to be very strong to hit hard, just relaxed and think about speed not hard.

You don't need to tell your body to stay low or to transfer weight. You need to know your outcome and let go and "listen to your feel".