Move Forward In Tennis And Don't Change A Thing

[fecund345]

I wrote this article a while back about attacking tennis:

When a larger object hits a smaller object, assuming the larger object outweighs the smaller object, the energy transferred at impact causes the smaller object to accelerate. The faster the speed at impact by the larger object the faster the acceleration of the smaller object, the more power it generates. Power equals force times velocity.
Most tennis players play statically as opposed to dynamically. On one hand, a true static player does most of her hitting with her shoulder and arm. Although the shoulder arm, and tennis racket outweigh the tennis ball, they are not as heavy as the players own body weight. Some semi-static players improve their power by rotating their torso in coordination with their shoulder and arm. The weight transfer helps increase a player's power. However, only a small percentage of the total body weight is transferred into the stroke.
On the other hand, a true dynamic player, actually transfers a larger portion of her body weight into the tennis stroke in comparison with both types of static players described above. The dynamic player takes one or more steps toward the ball before impact. This action helps to transfer more total weight into the stroke, thus producing more power.
In order to become a dynamic player, you have to learn two skills. Firstly, you have to learn how to move toward the ball before you hit it. It's like the difference between a base hit and bunt in baseball. To get a base hit you move your bat forward toward a rapidly moving baseball and to get a bunt you hold your bat still. Secondly, you have to learn how to hit a tennis ball on the rise, making impact right after the bounce before the ball reaches higher than your chest level. It is like short-hopping a baseball.
To learn how to properly move forward toward a tennis ball, you must stand at the baseline facing the net. Ask someone you know to stand behind you with a bucket of balls and instruct them to toss the balls approximately 2-3 feet in front of you toward the net. You will look backwards over your shoulder to track the path of the ball. Once the ball bounces, follow it and hit it with your normal stroke. You have just put more power into the ball with changing your stroke. After you get used to this skill, have your person go to the opposite side of the net from you and toss some balls back toward you. As the ball approaches, don't wait on it, take one or more steps toward it before you strike the ball.
The second part, hitting the ball on the rise, needs to be addressed. Most players hit a tennis ball after it has bounced, risen to it apex, and is on its way down into the desired hitting area. This is classic defensive tennis and you will find yourself constantly going backwards, generating very little power. To hit a ball on the rise, you must anticipate where the ball will bounce on the court and move at least one or more steps in that direction before the ball clears the net. This will allow you to be in position, moving forward, when the ball bounces and you will be able to strike it before it gets higher than your chest level.
So now your can hit a ball moving forward without changing your normal tennis stroke. In addition, you will put less stress on your shoulder and arm. Nothing has changed other than you are probably going to win more games.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Stanley_Clayton


Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7695529

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I wrote this article a while back about attacking tennis:

When a larger object hits a smaller object, assuming the larger object outweighs the smaller object, the energy transferred at impact causes the smaller object to accelerate. The faster the speed at impact by the larger object the faster the acceleration of the smaller object, the more power it generates. Power equals force times velocity.
Most tennis players play statically as opposed to dynamically. On one hand, a true static player does most of her hitting with her shoulder and arm. Although the shoulder arm, and tennis racket outweigh the tennis ball, they are not as heavy as the players own body weight. Some semi-static players improve their power by rotating their torso in coordination with their shoulder and arm. The weight transfer helps increase a player's power. However, only a small percentage of the total body weight is transferred into the stroke.
On the other hand, a true dynamic player, actually transfers a larger portion of her body weight into the tennis stroke in comparison with both types of static players described above. The dynamic player takes one or more steps toward the ball before impact. This action helps to transfer more total weight into the stroke, thus producing more power.
In order to become a dynamic player, you have to learn two skills. Firstly, you have to learn how to move toward the ball before you hit it. It's like the difference between a base hit and bunt in baseball. To get a base hit you move your bat forward toward a rapidly moving baseball and to get a bunt you hold your bat still. Secondly, you have to learn how to hit a tennis ball on the rise, making impact right after the bounce before the ball reaches higher than your chest level. It is like short-hopping a baseball.
To learn how to properly move forward toward a tennis ball, you must stand at the baseline facing the net. Ask someone you know to stand behind you with a bucket of balls and instruct them to toss the balls approximately 2-3 feet in front of you toward the net. You will look backwards over your shoulder to track the path of the ball. Once the ball bounces, follow it and hit it with your normal stroke. You have just put more power into the ball with changing your stroke. After you get used to this skill, have your person go to the opposite side of the net from you and toss some balls back toward you. As the ball approaches, don't wait on it, take one or more steps toward it before you strike the ball.
The second part, hitting the ball on the rise, needs to be addressed. Most players hit a tennis ball after it has bounced, risen to it apex, and is on its way down into the desired hitting area. This is classic defensive tennis and you will find yourself constantly going backwards, generating very little power. To hit a ball on the rise, you must anticipate where the ball will bounce on the court and move at least one or more steps in that direction before the ball clears the net. This will allow you to be in position, moving forward, when the ball bounces and you will be able to strike it before it gets higher than your chest level.
So now your can hit a ball moving forward without changing your normal tennis stroke. In addition, you will put less stress on your shoulder and arm. Nothing has changed other than you are probably going to win more games.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Stanley_Clayton


Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7695529

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Some points about the on-the-rise suggestion:
- It's a more advanced skill so I'd concentrate more on sound mechanics at the beginner/intermediate level
- It's frequently not possible to take the ball on the rise because of where it bounced [ie a few feet beyond the SL]
- it's possible to still get great weight transfer if one does not hit the ball on the rise by moving back extra distance in preparation and then moving forward; this applies whether one hits on the rise or decline [ie the way pros hit OHs when they let the lob bounce: they don't stand where they will contact the ball but several feet further back so they can get forward momentum]

When I watch a pro's rally ball, it usually does not involve moving forward before starting the swing unless the ball is low and/or short: one reason could be because of how quickly the incoming ball is moving; another could be because they can generate enough power by using weight transfer.

Here's a typical example of what I'm envisioning: notice that both players' position behind the BL doesn't change much longitudinally, only laterally. That means they are not moving forward to meet the ball.

 

[Knox]

"Weight transfer" in tennis is a myth that has been misinforming tennis players for decades.

1.) Its not how physics works.The only relevant mass in tennis strokes is the mass of the racquet. There is no special technique you can do to transfer your body mass into the racquet. Please stop misinforming players by spreading this false info.

2.) You dont see pro players using this technique. Doesnt that tell you a lot? Pros predominantly use rotation and pulling across to power their shots. Dont you think more pros would be doing what you're talking about if it truly led to winning more matches?

3.) The only semi-logical argument in favor of moving forward into shots for power is that it might increase racquet head acceleration if you have an extremely stiff wrist at contact. Except that's already been debunked and proven inferior to using rotational acceleration and utilizing the bull-whip effect by dragging the racquet and pulling across.

Again, please stop misinforming players by spreading this false information. Educate yourself on the mechanics of modern rotationally-driven tennis strikes.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

"Weight transfer" in tennis is a myth that has been misinforming tennis players for decades.

1.) Its not how physics works.The only relevant mass in tennis strokes is the mass of the racquet. There is no special technique you can do to transfer your body mass into the racquet. Please stop misinforming players by spreading this false info.

2.) You dont see pro players using this technique. Doesnt that tell you a lot? Pros predominantly use rotation and pulling across to power their shots. Dont you think more pros would be doing what you're talking about if it truly led to winning more matches?

3.) The only semi-logical argument in favor of moving forward into shots for power is that it might increase racquet head acceleration if you have an extremely stiff wrist at contact. Except that's already been debunked and proven inferior to using rotational acceleration and utilizing the bull-whip effect by dragging the racquet and pulling across.

Again, please stop misinforming players by spreading this false information. Educate yourself on the mechanics of modern rotationally-driven tennis strikes.

Agree with points 2 & 3 [for #3, another reason to move forward is because you want to approach the net].

But completely disagree on #1. If weight transfer was irrelevant, people could get the same power even if they jumped backwards before contact. No one does that [although there are other reasons as well: balance, court position, recoverability, etc].

I'd argue the opposite: the mass of the racquet is probably the least important variable. How they swing the racquet is much more important. Weight transfer is accomplished via the kinetic chain.

You and I are probably defining weight transfer differently. My definition involves shifting the center of gravity forward so that my body adds to the shot rather than subtracts from it.

As an analogy, what boxer deliberately moves backward while punching on the theory that the only relevant mass is the that of the gloved hand?

 

[fecund345]

Agree with points 2 & 3 [for #3, another reason to move forward is because you want to approach the net].

But completely disagree on #1. If weight transfer was irrelevant, people could get the same power even if they jumped backwards before contact. No one does that [although there are other reasons as well: balance, court position, recoverability, etc].

I'd argue the opposite: the mass of the racquet is probably the least important variable. How they swing the racquet is much more important. Weight transfer is accomplished via the kinetic chain.

You and I are probably defining weight transfer differently. My definition involves shifting the center of gravity forward so that my body adds to the shot rather than subtracts from it.

As an analogy, what boxer deliberately moves backward while punching on the theory that the only relevant mass is the that of the gloved hand?

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Curious]

The only relevant mass in tennis strokes is the mass of the racquet. There is no special technique you can do to transfer your body mass into the racquet.

@S&V-not_dead_yet
I think Knox has a point. You don’t agree but how do you explain what he’s saying? If the weight behind the racket(the player’s mass) added to the power, with simple logic if I and an overweight person swing the same racket at the same speed and we both move our bodies say 4 inches into the stroke, would the overweight guy’s ball go faster than mine?

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

@S&V-not_dead_yet
I think Knox has a point. You don’t agree but how do you explain what he’s saying? If the weight behind the racket(the player’s mass) added to the power, with simple logic if I and an overweight person swing the same racket at the same speed and we both move our bodies say 4 inches into the stroke, would the overweight guy’s ball go faster than mine?

All other things being equal [ie the kinetic chain], I'd say yes.

Measuring this would be difficult because how could you guarantee "all other things being equal"? I guess you'd have to set up a mechanical device which could move on wheels and run different experiments.

Mass is not the only relevant variable. Force [=mass*acceleration] is also a factor and acceleration, which is a component of force, has the element of time.

I look at it from the viewpoint of other sports:
- Baseball batters move forward as they are about to hit
- Baseball pitches move forward as they are about to pitch
- Baseball fielders move forward as they are about to throw
- Football QBs do likewise when they want to throw a long pass
- Javelin throwers take a running start
- Boxers use their body when throwing a punch

Now ask yourself: how effective would all of these be if the person did not move forward or even moved backward? To me the answer is obvious: less effective.

All of these are examples of weight transfer as I understand the term to mean. If weight transfer were a myth, none of these examples would be so consistent.

So my conclusion is that we are not defining the term identically.

 

[fecund345]

All other things being equal [ie the kinetic chain], I'd say yes.

Measuring this would be difficult because how could you guarantee "all other things being equal"? I guess you'd have to set up a mechanical device which could move on wheels and run different experiments.

Mass is not the only relevant variable. Force [=mass*acceleration] is also a factor and acceleration, which is a component of force, has the element of time.

I look at it from the viewpoint of other sports:
- Baseball batters move forward as they are about to hit
- Baseball pitches move forward as they are about to pitch
- Baseball fielders move forward as they are about to throw
- Football QBs do likewise when they want to throw a long pass
- Javelin throwers take a running start
- Boxers use their body when throwing a punch

Now ask yourself: how effective would all of these be if the person did not move forward or even moved backward? To me the answer is obvious: less effective.

All of these are examples of weight transfer as I understand the term to mean. If weight transfer were a myth, none of these examples would be so consistent.

So my conclusion is that we are not defining the term identically.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[FiReFTW]

Putting ur bodyweight into the shot means using ur whole body to power the stroke instead of maybe just ur arm.

I think this is making a bit of a confusion here.

 

[Curious]

All other things being equal [ie the kinetic chain], I'd say yes.

Measuring this would be difficult because how could you guarantee "all other things being equal"? I guess you'd have to set up a mechanical device which could move on wheels and run different experiments.

Mass is not the only relevant variable. Force [=mass*acceleration] is also a factor and acceleration, which is a component of force, has the element of time.

I look at it from the viewpoint of other sports:
- Baseball batters move forward as they are about to hit
- Baseball pitches move forward as they are about to pitch
- Baseball fielders move forward as they are about to throw
- Football QBs do likewise when they want to throw a long pass
- Javelin throwers take a running start
- Boxers use their body when throwing a punch

Now ask yourself: how effective would all of these be if the person did not move forward or even moved backward? To me the answer is obvious: less effective.

All of these are examples of weight transfer as I understand the term to mean. If weight transfer were a myth, none of these examples would be so consistent.

So my conclusion is that we are not defining the term identically.

Let’s attach a racket to the door of a truck and do the same on a small car. Drive them at 20mph and I’ll toss the ball so that the racket hits it. If the ball colliding with the racket on the truck doesn’t go faster your theory goes out the window lol!

 

[fecund345]

Putting ur bodyweight into the shot means using ur whole body to power the stroke instead of maybe just ur arm.

I think this is making a bit of a confusion here.

What is confusing?

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[user92626]

When a fat guy "weight transfers" to the racket, the racket becomes oversized.

 

[Curious]

The fat guy’s weight is not likely to be a factor if the grip is really loose. Something else to think about.
In my truck and car example above if the racket is firmly attached ( sort of becoming a part of the truck or the car) the ball might go faster with the truck. If rackets are just dangling with a very loose attachment I don’t think the truck’s weight will be a factor.

 

[fecund345]

"Weight transfer" in tennis is a myth that has been misinforming tennis players for decades.

1.) You don't know how physics works

2.) I just proposed that they move forward to add to the elastic collision with the (raquet/ person's body) and the tennis ball.

Wrong, even though elasticity and speed can generate massive amounts of energy. Full body transfer and personal body speed can increase the transfer of energy into a smaller object, the ball, thus increase the ball speed and power.
If I arm hit a person in the face quickly ...they might be ok..but if I transfer most of my weight into a hit on a person's head.. a person's brain will accelerate quickly up against the walls of a person's skull...it would be a bad thing...if I ran up on a person and hit them in motion it would be worse ...because a person's head doesn't weigh as much as my body...these are boxing references...not meant as threats...
Nothing has been debunked...they just don't do it .its doable...the only debunking attempt...is your attempt to debunk the laws of physics...it is really quite silly actually

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Kevo]

Let’s attach a racket to the door of a truck and do the same on a small car. Drive them at 20mph and I’ll toss the ball so that the racket hits it. If the ball colliding with the racket on the truck doesn’t go faster your theory goes out the window lol!

That's not the correct analogy. How about use one car. Fire the ball at 20mph with the car stationary, and then again with the car moving say 5mph. Then see if you can tell a difference.

It's going to be very hard to compare two different players, but it's easy to tell that weight transfer makes a difference and is not a myth. Now there may be some bad advice floating around claiming to be about weight transfer, so there is probably an element of truth to what Knox claims, but the concept as a whole is definitely not a myth.

There are plenty of obvious examples if you think about it. Some have been mentioned, but serve and volley come to mind. Also any shot hit off balance is weaker than the same shot hit on balance. Of course you could argue about other variables perhaps, but I think you'd have to come up with some very convincing arguments to make anyone with significant tennis experience, or many other sports, believe that weight transfer isn't a very important element of hitting a ball.

 

[sureshs]

@S&V-not_dead_yet
I think Knox has a point. You don’t agree but how do you explain what he’s saying? If the weight behind the racket(the player’s mass) added to the power, with simple logic if I and an overweight person swing the same racket at the same speed and we both move our bodies say 4 inches into the stroke, would the overweight guy’s ball go faster than mine?

I remember reading that the "effective mass" of the racket is the real mass + the mass of the lower part of the hand (to some point below the elbow). The rest of the body mass is not in the picture, but may indirectly be if it is correlated with the mass of the lower part of the arm.

 

[fecund345]

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[AlexSV]

You have to get that weight forward to rotate with power. Here you go:

Vigorous extension of the lower extremity in classic closed stance forehands creates greater axial torques to rotate the pelvis and hips than not using the legs (9).

Vigorous axial hip and upper-trunk rotation allow for energy transfer from the lower extremity to the upper extremity in the square stance forehand. The upper trunk tends to counter-rotate about 90 to 100°from parallel to the baseline and about 30° beyond the hip in the transverse plane (22) in preparation for the stroke.

The main kinetic chain motions that create racket speed in the forehand are trunk rotation, horizontal shoulder adduction, and internal rotation (4).

Link:

(PDF) Biomechanics of the Tennis Groundstrokes: Implications for Strength Training

PDF | THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE WAS TO SUMMARIZE RECENT RESEARCH RELATED TO THE BIOMECHANICS OF TENNIS TECHNIQUE IN GROUNDSTROKES AND THEN TO... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

 

[Knox]

Agree with points 2 & 3 [for #3, another reason to move forward is because you want to approach the net].

But completely disagree on #1. If weight transfer was irrelevant, people could get the same power even if they jumped backwards before contact. No one does that [although there are other reasons as well: balance, court position, recoverability, etc].

I'd argue the opposite: the mass of the racquet is probably the least important variable. How they swing the racquet is much more important. Weight transfer is accomplished via the kinetic chain.

You and I are probably defining weight transfer differently. My definition involves shifting the center of gravity forward so that my body adds to the shot rather than subtracts from it.

As an analogy, what boxer deliberately moves backward while punching on the theory that the only relevant mass is the that of the gloved hand?

Tennis isn't boxing. It's a false analogy.

Plenty of tennis players hit huge shots when they jump backwards. Moving back off the shot has been shown to assist the whip effect and increase racquet acceleration.

People claiming that moving into the shot "adds" something have not sufficiently bore their burden of proof. What is added,and how?

Please, spare me the pseudo logical explanations and false analogies to other sports.

F=ma.

How does moving into the shot increase the mass and/or the acceleration?

 

[Knox]

I remember reading that the "effective mass" of the racket is the real mass + the mass of the lower part of the hand (to some point below the elbow). The rest of the body mass is not in the picture, but may indirectly be if it is correlated with the mass of the lower part of the arm.

Got a source on that?

That would be interesting... next level of tennis being bodybuilding the forearms to go full popeye for maximum power. Lol

 

[Goof]

Got a source on that?

That would be interesting... next level of tennis being bodybuilding the forearms to go full popeye for maximum power. Lol

The old GOAT was over a half century ahead of you there.

 

[BallBag]

There is so much bad physics in this thread I don't even know where to start.

 

[Goof]

There's more than one way to swing a racquet or throw a punch, and difference in swings can use weight differently. A straight-arm running forehand winner from Rafa has no bodyweight behind it but goes incredibly fast due to the acceleration of the racquet head, just as a Felix Trinidad left hook had very little bodyweight behind it but incredible "snap". A bent-arm, elbow-tucked-in forehand from Thomas Muster had comparatively very low acceleration but was incredibly heavy with the bodyweight he got into the shot, compare this to old George Foreman's short right KO of Michael Moorer which had crap acceleration but a TON of weight behind it.

Now, if you can get BOTH into your swing, then you got something!

 

[Knox]

There's more than one way to swing a racquet or throw a punch, and difference in swings can use weight differently. A straight-arm running forehand winner from Rafa has no bodyweight behind it but goes incredibly fast due to the acceleration of the racquet head, just as a Felix Trinidad left hook had very little bodyweight behind it but incredible "snap". A bent-arm, elbow-tucked-in forehand from Thomas Muster had comparatively very low acceleration but was incredibly heavy with the bodyweight he got into the shot, compare this to old George Foreman's short right KO of Michael Moorer which had crap acceleration but a TON of weight behind it.

Now, if you can get BOTH into your swing, then you got something!

I ask again... HOW does the putting "weight into the shot" add mass or acceleration to the system?

People repeat this "weight behind the shot" phrase like it's an axiom... yet nobody has sufficiently explained how it actually works.

Putting your weight into the shot adds mass to the racquet head? How?

Putting weight into the shot increases acceleration? Again... how?

The lack of answers to those two simple questions is very telling.

 

[user92626]

The fat guy’s weight is not likely to be a factor if the grip is really loose. Something else to think about.
In my truck and car example above if the racket is firmly attached ( sort of becoming a part of the truck or the car) the ball might go faster with the truck. If rackets are just dangling with a very loose attachment I don’t think the truck’s weight will be a factor.

 

[fecund345]

I ask again... HOW does the putting "weight into the shot" add mass or acceleration to the system?

People repeat this "weight behind the shot" phrase like it's an axiom... yet nobody has sufficiently explained how it actually works.

Putting your weight into the shot adds mass to the racquet head? How?

Putting weight into the shot increases acceleration? Again... how?

The lack of answers to those two simple questions is very telling.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Curious]

Putting your weight into the shot adds mass to the racquet head? How?

As posted above earlier, if the racket is held very firmly the racket head and the player becomes a single unit/mass. Maybe.

 

[fecund345]

I ask again... HOW does the putting "weight into the shot" add mass or acceleration to the system?

People repeat this "weight behind the shot" phrase like it's an axiom... yet nobody has sufficiently explained how it actually works.

Putting your weight into the shot adds mass to the racquet head? How?

Putting weight into the shot increases acceleration? Again... how?

The lack of answers to those two simple questions is very telling.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Knox]

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

O...K?

Neither of those videos explain or support your claim that moving forward as you hit increases the power output of your shot.

You claim I don't know how physics works... yet when asked a very simple physics question you respond with irrelevant videos from high school physics classes and zero commentary. Is that how you demonstrate your understanding of physics?

Again, how does moving forward as you hit increase the mass of the racquet or increase the rate of acceleration?

You seem to be saying that moving forward as you hit transfers your bodyweight into the shot, which would imply that you think you can transfer mass from your body and into the racquet. That makes zero sense to me, please either correct my interpretation of what you're saying or explain to me how you think it works.

 

[Knox]

As posted above earlier, if the racket is held very firmly the racket head and the player becomes a single unit/mass. Maybe.

Maybe... but holding the racquet extremely firmly is the exact OPPOSITE of what we actually do, so how is that relevant?

 

[sureshs]

Got a source on that?

That would be interesting... next level of tennis being bodybuilding the forearms to go full popeye for maximum power. Lol

For Rod Laver's Tennis Opponents, Forearmed Is Forewarned
By DAVE ANDERSON


His left arm is so thoroughly developed that his right arm, at a quick glance, appears almost deformed.


His left wrist measures 7 inches, compared with 6 for his right. His left forearm measures 12 inches, compared with 10 1/2 for his right. Rod Laver is a wiry 5-foot 8-inch, 150-pounder, but his big wrist is an inch larger than that of Floyd Patterson, his big forearm equals that of Rocky Marciano.

"I used one of those squeeze things when I was young," Laver says. "I guess I still should."

For Rod Laver's Tennis Opponents, Forearmed Is Forewarned

 

[BallBag]

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Your videos are demonstrating that adding lead to the racket will increase the speed of the ball which is true if the racket is moving at the same speed as the unleaded racket. It would also require more force to get the racket to the same speed. If you applied that increased force to a lighter racket it would make it go faster which would also increase the speed of the ball.

So physics is saying that to hit a ball harder you have to hit the ball harder.

 

[Knox]

For Rod Laver's Tennis Opponents, Forearmed Is Forewarned
By DAVE ANDERSON


His left arm is so thoroughly developed that his right arm, at a quick glance, appears almost deformed.


His left wrist measures 7 inches, compared with 6 for his right. His left forearm measures 12 inches, compared with 10 1/2 for his right. Rod Laver is a wiry 5-foot 8-inch, 150-pounder, but his big wrist is an inch larger than that of Floyd Patterson, his big forearm equals that of Rocky Marciano.

"I used one of those squeeze things when I was young," Laver says. "I guess I still should."

For Rod Laver's Tennis Opponents, Forearmed Is Forewarned

Probably helped that he hit with continental grip on groundstrokes. Imagine the forearm strength required to play pro level tennis using a continental grip. Unreal.

 

[sureshs]

Probably helped that he hit with continental grip on groundstrokes. Imagine the forearm strength required to play pro level tennis using a continental grip. Unreal.

It was a weak era. Balls did not have speed or spin due to the small wood frames. It was like 3.5 tennis today.

 

[fecund345]

O...K?

Neither of those videos explain or support your claim that moving forward as you hit increases the power output of your shot.

You claim I don't know how physics works... yet when asked a very simple physics question you respond with irrelevant videos from high school physics classes and zero commentary. Is that how you demonstrate your understanding of physics?

Again, how does moving forward as you hit increase the mass of the racquet or increase the rate of acceleration?

You seem to be saying that moving forward as you hit transfers your bodyweight into the shot, which would imply that you think you can transfer mass from your body and into the racquet. That makes zero sense to me, please either correct my interpretation of what you're saying or explain to me how you think it works.

So are you saying that mass cannot be transferred into the racket? You are right. But a huge mass hitting a small mass transfer its momentum into the small mass...because it is smaller...the momentum causes the smaller mass to speed up

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[curly_2350]

It needs to be clarified whether we're referring to

• the body's motion relative to the court
• the use of the entire body in the production of the shot

I don't see much evidence of the first being important to producing power in tennis.

*If* the body's motion relative to the court is important, then you must be arguing young lad Rublev above, could significantly add power to his stroke by moving forward through his groundstroke. That seems unlikely to me.

 

[Knox]

So are you saying that mass cannot be transferred into the racket? You are right. But a huge mass hitting a small mass transfer its momentum into the small mass...because it is smaller...the momentum causes the smaller mass to speed up

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

So if mass cannot be transferred into the racquet, then how does moving forward as you swing increase the power of the shot?

 

[fecund345]

So if mass cannot be transferred into the racquet, then how does moving forward as you swing increase the power of the shot?

Did you skip the part about momentum?

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[sureshs]

Have you ever seen a male tennis pro with skinny arms?

 

[fecund345]

Have you ever seen a male tennis pro with skinny arms?

Because they are putting that body weight into it to generate momentum

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[fecund345]

If it was up to how fast you swing the racket then a skinny teenager could hit homeruns just like Frank Thomas

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[sureshs]

Because they are putting that body weight into it to generate momentum

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Yes but I think only the body up till the forearm, no more

 

[fecund345]

Yes but I think only the body up till the forearm, no more

You have just rewritten all the laws of physics concerning momentum

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Miki 1234]

You need to hit fast balls with the middle of the frame while swinging fast on the run random balls.You cant master tennis with any technic by definition.

 

[fecund345]

Put a tennis player in a harness where his feet can't touch the ground and he cannot shift his body weight. Even if he could swing his arm just as fast as if he were on the ground...he would lose tons of power...because all power starts with ground...and large mass acceleration of the legs transfers to the torso and thru roation transfers to the arm as momentum to accelerate it into the tennis ball

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Curious]

Maybe... but holding the racquet extremely firmly is the exact OPPOSITE of what we actually do, so how is that relevant?

I know but I was just speculating about the possibilities.

 

[fecund345]

I weigh 290 lbs and let's say you weigh 150 lbs. You run at me at 15 miles per hour. I run at you at 10 miles per hour. Who will wound up on their a*$ after we collide?
I think more of my momentum will be transferred into you as backward acceleration because of my larger mass.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

 

[Curious]

Isn’t there a physicist here to put an end to this??

 

[BallBag]

Isn’t there a physicist here to put an end to this??

Yeah, nothing he said is based in physics.

 

[sureshs]

I weigh 290 lbs and let's say you weigh 150 lbs. You run at me at 15 miles per hour. I run at you at 10 miles per hour. Who will wound up on their a*$ after we collide?
I think more of my momentum will be transferred into you as backward acceleration because of my larger mass.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Works only when the body acts as a rigid body, more or less. It is a principle in mechanics that a rigid body will maintain the direction of a force applied to it. In other words, if a force is applied on the north pole of a rigid sphere vertically down, it will be transmitted to the south pole vertically, and for something attached to the south pole, the force will appear to vertically emerge downwards from there. It is called the principle of transmissibility of force.

In a non rigid body with different parts attached to it loosely through different kinds of joints, this is not true. That is why an effective mass is calculated.

Take an extreme example. A fat man and a thin man are both given a balloon attached to a string which they hold like a pendulum. If both of them run and swing the balloon at a wall,, do you think the fat man will necessarily hit the wall harder with the ballon?

Here the additional mass contributed to the balloon by the body is probably almost 0.