MTM believers, what do you think of this FH model?

[Rubens]

Ok, I know that past discussions on the MTM here have led to many insults, deleted threads, tears, and maybe even some blood. But this is a genuine question!

Lately I've come across the videos from this coach who seems to be correct about many things. As far as I'm concerned this video is no exception. However I couldn't help but feel that some of his advice here would clash with the teachings of the MTM, notably about turning the shoulders 90+ degrees in Step 1.

So in an attempt to clear things up, could any of the MTM believers here tell me if there is something in this video that you disagree with? If you do, which element seems to be wrong?

I know this could sound like I'm trying to stir the pot, but I'm really just curious to see how the MTM model FH would differ from this one. Thanks!

Here's the video:

http://youtu.be/DbujG7FPnAk

P.s. FWIW, I'm not anti-MTM at all. In fact, I agree with some of their most controversial elements.

 

[TennisEnvy]

He keeps saying that he's rotating his hips 70 deg., but it's nowhere near that, it's closer to 30 - 40 degrees.

 

[dsb]

When I 'google' Clay Ballard, all I get is golf stuff... Is this the same guy? Is he a 'real' coach or does just play one on youtube?

 

[Rubens]

When I 'google' Clay Ballard, all I get is golf stuff...

Me too! I think it's the same guy. If this is the case, it could make him an easy target for the other coaches. They could simply say "he knows nothing about tennis! He should stick to golf"...

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

He keeps saying that he's rotating his hips 70 deg., but it's nowhere near that, it's closer to 30 - 40 degrees.

I'm seeing more than 45 degrees of hip rotation here; sometimes as much as 70-75 degrees. Not easy to tell exactly, particularly when his front foot points directly at the net. The bottom line is that there is obviously some hip rotation but it is, by design, less than the torso rotation. This offset creates tension (stored energy) in the core.

 

[Topspin Shot]

Meh. He's okay, I guess. I have more respect for coaches with a real background in tennis.

 

[Slothsicle]

Meh. He's okay, I guess. I have more respect for coaches with a real background in tennis.

Why? What is guy's credentials?

I don't think you should be too worried about if this guy was a tour level pro or not. Plenty of great coaches out there who aren't tour level players.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

This guy makes some very good points. Surprised we've not heard from the MTM crowd on this.


.

 

[julian]

What is the name of the author of the video?

This guy makes some very good points. Surprised we've not heard from the MTM crowd on this.


.

What is the name of the author of the video?

 

[Ash_Smith]

I've kind of skimmed through the OP's video, so I may have missed something, but what exactly is it that he has said/demonstrated that could be said to be at odds with the MTM approach?

 

[sureshs]

Sounds like a club player who discovered the unit turn and decided to make a video.

I see no connection with MTM or anything else.

 

[Rubens]

I've kind of skimmed through the OP's video, so I may have missed something, but what exactly is it that he has said/demonstrated that could be said to be at odds with the MTM approach?

Shoulders turned 90+ back in the preparation, and then the left foot seems to step into the court on contact. It's just an impression I get, and I could be wrong since I'm not MTM expert. As I said in OP, I just wanted to verify if there's anything at odds with the MTM here.

 

[sureshs]

Shoulders turned 90+ back in the preparation, and then the left foot seems to step into the court on contact. It's just an impression I get, and I could be wrong since I'm not MTM expert. As I said in OP, I just wanted to verify if there's anything at odds with the MTM here.

I doubt there are any "MTM experts." It is not exactly particle physics that you would want to become an expert on.

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ I don't think there's anything at odds with MTM instruction with regards the shoulder rotation - what he demo's looks pretty much like I see the shot building in MTM circles.

 

[Rubens]

Great! Thanks for clearing that out Ash.

 

[Topspin Shot]

Why? What is guy's credentials?

I don't think you should be too worried about if this guy was a tour level pro or not. Plenty of great coaches out there who aren't tour level players.

That's the point. He has none. He was a golf instructor who started playing tennis recently and decided to make instructional videos.

 

[Slothsicle]

That's the point. He has none. He was a golf instructor who started playing tennis recently and decided to make instructional videos.

LOL, my bad. I just watched the video, his forehand is worse than Sureshs'!

Good catch, I should really watch the video before commenting. And you're right, he has virtually zero credentials.

 

[julian]

You are trolling again

I doubt there are any "MTM experts." It is not exactly particle physics that you would want to become an expert on.

You are trolling again

 

[sureshs]

You are trolling again

I am saying each person interprets MTM in his own way, which may be quite different from what the wording says in a literal sense. Right in this thread, OP thought that unit turn is at odds with MTM. Why would that happen?

 

[Rubens]

I am saying each person interprets MTM in his own way, which may be quite different from what the wording says in a literal sense. Right in this thread, OP thought that unit turn is at odds with MTM. Why would that happen?

I'd say the MTM's wording is not the clearest that I've seen (find the ball, caress the ball), but that's just me.

 

[sureshs]

I'd say the MTM's wording is not the clearest that I've seen (find the ball, caress the ball), but that's just me.

That is why I said there is no MTM expert, even the founder. People read into it what they want.

 

[Rubens]

That is why I said there is no MTM expert, even the founder. People read into it what they want.

Maybe it becomes clearer if we take an actual lesson with them, who knows...

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ You mean like if the founder of this particular teaching method offered you a free lesson, despite the fact that you had been ****ging him off on an online forum for years... and you said no for fear of being proved utterly wrong and actually finding that it has many merits?

 

[Rubens]

^^^ You mean like if the founder of this particular teaching method offered you a free lesson, despite the fact that you had been ****ging him off on an online forum for years... and you said no for fear of being proved utterly wrong and actually finding that it has many merits?

Hmm? I certainly wouldn't say no to a free lesson with Oscar! I guess you were talking to resh-man?

 

[sureshs]

If you put out an online video, you should expect that to be considered as the material. Why ask people to show up in person after that? MIT now puts out a lot of lectures for free. If they are wrong or of dubious content, that is going to be pointed out. They cannot then come out and say why don't you show up in person and talk to the Professor first. Why the heck would anyone waste his time like that?

 

[Rubens]

If you put out an online video, you should expect that to be considered as the material. Why ask people to show up in person after that? MIT now puts out a lot of lectures for free. If they are wrong or of dubious content, that is going to be pointed out. They cannot then come out and say why don't you show up in person and talk to the Professor first. Why the heck would anyone waste his time like that?

Did Oscar really offer you a free lesson?

 

[GuyClinch]

MTM is not a real thing. It's like saying what does the FYB crowd think of this model? <g>

I think Clay's stuff is pretty on point - might only be a 5.0 tennis player - but that's what most teaching pros are nowadays anyway.

You think Will Hamilton or Ian from essential tennis can beat him? Maybe. But he can hit a pretty casual 110 MPH serve if you believe his little "what part of the body corresponds to serve speed video.."

Anyway if we want to pick on MTM - watching a lot of tennis..I'd say..:

1) Don't try to hit everything open stance. Semi open is the preferred stance of high level players - and yes its different.

2) Tennis players actually do not need to run around on the court just like a child. Do they run down balls - like a kid would - sure. But lots of the little movements are in fact tennis related. There is a lot of jumping, hopping, and shuffling going on that allows players to get into the right position without running.

Watch any generic high level tennis and you will see what I am talking about..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdY6Exc1_gQ

Watch Fed's feet as he hits his forehands here. Given ANY time he will almost always get into a semi-open or neutral shot on his forehand.
also watch how he moves around the court - a lot of shuffling, bouncing etc - not a whole lot of running.. Pretty obvious stuff that doesn't really match up with what MTM says..IMHO.

OP video doesn't really say one thing about MTM or another..

 

[julian]

Not everybody knows who Clay is

MTM is not a real thing. It's like saying what does the FYB crowd think of this model? <g>

I think Clay's stuff is pretty on point - might only be a 5.0 tennis player - but that's what most teaching pros are nowadays anyway.

You think Will Hamilton or Ian from essential tennis can beat him? Maybe. But he can hit a pretty casual 110 MPH serve if you believe his little "what part of the body corresponds to serve speed video.."

Anyway if we want to pick on MTM - watching a lot of tennis..I'd say..:

1) Don't try to hit everything open stance. Semi open is the preferred stance of high level players - and yes its different.

2) Tennis players actually do not need to run around on the court just like a child. Do they run down balls - like a kid would - sure. But lots of the little movements are in fact tennis related. There is a lot of jumping, hopping, and shuffling going on that allows players to get into the right position without running.

Watch any generic high level tennis and you will see what I am talking about..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdY6Exc1_gQ

Watch Fed's feet as he hits his forehands here. Given ANY time he will almost always get into a semi-open or neutral shot on his forehand.
also watch how he moves around the court - a lot of shuffling, bouncing etc - not a whole lot of running.. Pretty obvious stuff that doesn't really match up with what MTM says..IMHO.

OP video doesn't really say one thing about MTM or another..

Please specify the last name of Clay.
Or another way: what is his alias/user name?

 

[julian]

Shuffling ?

MTM is not a real thing. It's like saying what does the FYB crowd think of this model? <g>

I think Clay's stuff is pretty on point - might only be a 5.0 tennis player - but that's what most teaching pros are nowadays anyway.

You think Will Hamilton or Ian from essential tennis can beat him? Maybe. But he can hit a pretty casual 110 MPH serve if you believe his little "what part of the body corresponds to serve speed video.."

Anyway if we want to pick on MTM - watching a lot of tennis..I'd say..:

1) Don't try to hit everything open stance. Semi open is the preferred stance of high level players - and yes its different.

2) Tennis players actually do not need to run around on the court just like a child. Do they run down balls - like a kid would - sure. But lots of the little movements are in fact tennis related. There is a lot of jumping, hopping, and shuffling going on that allows players to get into the right position without running.

Watch any generic high level tennis and you will see what I am talking about..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdY6Exc1_gQ

Watch Fed's feet as he hits his forehands here. Given ANY time he will almost always get into a semi-open or neutral shot on his forehand.
also watch how he moves around the court - a lot of shuffling, bouncing etc - not a whole lot of running.. Pretty obvious stuff that doesn't really match up with what MTM says..IMHO.

OP video doesn't really say one thing about MTM or another..

It is very disputable whether shuffling is a preferable way of moving for an ATP player. You did not say that but it could be "read"this way.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

What is the name of the author of the video?

Clicking on SHOW MORE under the OP video reveals the name, Clay Ballard.

 

[julian]

Your are brilliant

Clicking on SHOW MORE under the OP video reveals the name, Clay Ballard.

Your are brilliant

 

[sureshs]

Did Oscar really offer you a free lesson?

Yeah he is a nice guy. When he lived down here, he was a coach at a huge public facility. Believe it or not, I have still not been there after 9 years in the city, even though it is only 30 mins away. That is just how I am. It took a monumental effort for me to drive 2 hours to IW and I have done it only once.

 

[sureshs]

MTM is not a real thing. It's like saying what does the FYB crowd think of this model? <g>

I think Clay's stuff is pretty on point - might only be a 5.0 tennis player - but that's what most teaching pros are nowadays anyway.

You think Will Hamilton or Ian from essential tennis can beat him? Maybe. But he can hit a pretty casual 110 MPH serve if you believe his little "what part of the body corresponds to serve speed video.."

Anyway if we want to pick on MTM - watching a lot of tennis..I'd say..:

1) Don't try to hit everything open stance. Semi open is the preferred stance of high level players - and yes its different.

2) Tennis players actually do not need to run around on the court just like a child. Do they run down balls - like a kid would - sure. But lots of the little movements are in fact tennis related. There is a lot of jumping, hopping, and shuffling going on that allows players to get into the right position without running.

Watch any generic high level tennis and you will see what I am talking about..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdY6Exc1_gQ

Watch Fed's feet as he hits his forehands here. Given ANY time he will almost always get into a semi-open or neutral shot on his forehand.
also watch how he moves around the court - a lot of shuffling, bouncing etc - not a whole lot of running.. Pretty obvious stuff that doesn't really match up with what MTM says..IMHO.

OP video doesn't really say one thing about MTM or another..

Yeah it is not a real thing but some observations were new at the time they were made. Tennis was being formally taught as a rigid sequence of actions and footwork, with detailed numbered diagrams of steps, and emphasis on hitting linear and flat and on the center of the strings. It was shaped by the wood era when uncomfortable low power small-head frames required precise technique and top spin was an advanced skill. The tennis of today is almost unrecognizable from those times, leading many to question the use of new technology. Whatever it is, it is here to stay but old coaches were reluctant to give up their teachings. So when MTM came in with an emphasis on natural flow and using topspin from day one, it was a revolutionary idea. Since then though everybody knows that now and has gone far beyond that.

PS: I like your clear distinction between OS and SOS. Too often, it is said that pros hit OS like MTM says, but in reality they hit SOS or Neutral most of the time, and it makes a huge difference.

 

[5263]

I'd say the MTM's wording is not the clearest that I've seen (find the ball, caress the ball), but that's just me.

I'm inclined to see your point about MTM wording. My theory is Oscar did this for 2 reasons. 1st is he intentionally departed from the terms used for decades in classic and traditional instruction. In a sense, using those same terms would have been more confusing Imo.

For example...someone brought up "unit turn" in this thread. Currently you see this old term used quite frequently about today's tournament tennis, but this new Unit Turn is quite different from the old classic Unit Turn in Traditional instruction. I doubt many using the term realize these important differences. Would it make more sense to use a new and different term to describe a new and different approach to this element of tennis? I agree with Oscar that it does make sense not to use the same old terms for a new meaning.

Second difference is that I believe that Spanish is Oscar's first language, so there may be some issues there. Not that he does not know English well, but actually quite the opposite. He is quite meticulous about terms and their documented meanings. Most of us, being native speakers of our version of English, can often have a much different feel for a word and what it suggests. Even parts of this nation often have different uses with our slang than other parts of the country.

So in the end, the terms of MTM Imo are to more accurately describe how things are different and also to spark questions about what is meant. When students have questions in their mind, they tend to remember the answers much better I think, don't you? You have questions here, and I think you will tend to remember the answers that you decide are best to your question.

 

[Rubens]

Thanks 5263. Makes sense.

For some time, I thought that the MTM was against the unit turn (which is the term most people would use to refer to what the guy in the video is doing), but in reality they just don't like to use that term.

 

[sureshs]

Second difference is that I believe that Spanish is Oscar's first language, so there may be some issues there. Not that he does not know English well, but actually quite the opposite. He is quite meticulous about terms and their documented meanings. Most of us, being native speakers of our version of English, can often have a much different feel for a word and what it suggests. Even parts of this nation often have different uses with our slang than other parts of the country.

I don't think it is that at all. His English is excellent and only his accent can hint that he is a native Spanish speaker. I don't see any usage of terms which fall into the category of slang. How many slang terms are there in tennis? I did not find any difficulty in understanding what he says and no one can say that he is not clear.

The barrier is somewhere else. It is in the way of thinking which has nothing to do with cultural issues but with some other beliefs, namely that some ideas from outside tennis can be used effectively in tennis. In some ways, he is the original pop psychologist of tennis.

 

[TennisCJC]

Yea, I think the video is pretty good. Maybe a bit mechanical but the basic concept of using core (hip & shoulder) rotation is solid. Yes, you should turn the core and load the weight back in prep and take back and yes, you should uncoil the hip/shoulder to start and drive the forward swing.

I will say there are times when the coil/load is delayed. When you are running a long way to get to the ball either to the side or forward, you first priority is to run to get to the contact area. As you near the contact area, you want to time your last few steps so you can coil and load the back foot if possible.

But, as far as basic rally balls, the concepts in the video are solid.

I do see some slight differences in the way he teaches it and some of Oscar's videos. He talks about turning the hips and loading while Oscar takes more about just taking the strings to the ball or catching the ball on the strings. Oscar does not stress coiling on the FH, at least not in the videos I have seen. I think Oscar knows that coiling/loading happens but my opinion is he wants to keep the instruction simple and let the player's athleticism come out. If you were arming the ball, I think Oscar would correct it.

 

[GuyClinch]

It is very disputable whether shuffling is a preferable way of moving for an ATP player. You did not say that but it could be "read"this way.

Well whatever you want to call it - tennis players don't just run to the ball. A bit of running on wide/very short balls but but some shuffing - some kind of hopping/jumping action, some shuffling with a karayoke step etc.

It's most similar to how a boxer moves if we want to compare it to other sports.

I feel like Oscar went out of his way to oversimplify things to 'contrast' with other teachers. But now with high speed video widely available we can see the truth..

It's the same with a lot of Oscar's little catch phrases..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk3rhvkqNck

Is Novak REALLY 'finding the ball' on this forehand.. Oscar would kinda aim the racquet near the ball and then push it through..

I don't think Novak is doing that.. I don't think MTM is a real "thing' anymore. We can just analyze video - find exactly what pros do and mimic that..

The whole 'find a cute phrase' and 'figure out what that means' era is pretty much over..

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Meh. He's okay, I guess. I have more respect for coaches with a real background in tennis.

It appears that this guy is well versed in anatomy/physiology and biomechanics. He indicates that he wasn't teaching golf instruction so much as he was teaching body movements. He has apparently studied elite tennis players and is taking the same approach with tennis strokes. He does have a knack for explaining concepts clearly. His is not necessarily an ideal approach for everyone, but many players should be able to benefit from his explanations.

... I feel like Oscar went out of his way to oversimplify things to 'contrast' with other teachers. But now with high speed video widely available we can see the truth..

It's the same with a lot of Oscar's little catch phrases..

Is Novak REALLY 'finding the ball' on this forehand.. Oscar would kinda aim the racquet near the ball and then push it through..

I don't think Novak is doing that.. I don't think MTM is a real "thing' anymore. We can just analyze video - find exactly what pros do and mimic that..

The whole 'find a cute phrase' and 'figure out what that means' era is pretty much over..

Great points but I suspect that many people would probably still benefit from an "Oscar-type" approach. Another, more technical approach, as you suggest, might be best for other players. OTOH, many players may very well benefit from studying more than one type of approach.

 

[5263]

I don't think it is that at all. His English is excellent

Yes, his English IS Excellent and maybe better than a native speaker in many ways, but you have not sat and talked tennis for hours with him in his home either, as I have, and discussed this very topic with him.

I'll use and example of "find the ball".

I was not crazy about this phrase at the beginning although I have learned thru the years how well it works in context on the court. The dictionary defines to locate or track (among other things) which work well in his context, but for me, a native speaker, it carries a meaning of something being lost or misplaced as part of the context. Maybe not in every use I have of "find", but that is sort of first in my mind and does not fit so well with the context that MTM uses it.

"Yank" is another term we have had some discussions on that I don't favor.

 

[5263]

Thanks 5263. Makes sense.

For some time, I thought that the MTM was against the unit turn (which is the term most people would use to refer to what the guy in the video is doing), but in reality they just don't like to use that term.

What he is doing there in the video is much more in line with MTM than the classic unit turn. In fact, he mentions not to do some things that are part of the classic unit turn.

 

[sureshs]

Yes, his English IS Excellent and maybe better than a native speaker in many ways, but you have not sat and talked tennis for hours with him in his home either, as I have, and discussed this very topic with him.

I'll use and example of "find the ball".

I was not crazy about this phrase at the beginning although I have learned thru the years how well it works in context on the court. The dictionary defines to locate or track (among other things) which work well in his context, but for me, a native speaker, it carries a meaning of something being lost or misplaced as part of the context. Maybe not in every use I have of "find", but that is sort of first in my mind and does not fit so well with the context that MTM uses it.

"Yank" is another term we have had some discussions on that I don't favor.

I don't see any problem with the use of find. The meaning is clear from the context - find here means to track.
Yank the racket seems to imply bringing it closer to the body with a sudden action, and that is consistent with how he claims that there is an abrupt movement across the body at impact. The problem does not seem to be the wording (but somewhere else )

 

[5263]

I don't see any problem with the use of find. The meaning is clear from the context - find here means to track.
Yank the racket seems to imply bringing it closer to the body with a sudden action, and that is consistent with how he claims that there is an abrupt movement across the body at impact. The problem does not seem to be the wording (but somewhere else )

If you think his wording is good or fine, then you are posting to the wrong subject. My comments were in response to a poster saying that he didn't get Oscar's wording.

I'd say the MTM's wording is not the clearest that I've seen (find the ball, caress the ball).

 

[sureshs]

He mentioned caress the ball. I don't see that as a wording confusion problem. It is more a question of what does it really mean, if anything. To me, it means don't slap or jab at the ball. But that is my own interpretation really.

 

[5263]

He mentioned caress the ball. I don't see that as a wording confusion problem. It is more a question of what does it really mean, if anything. To me, it means don't slap or jab at the ball. But that is my own interpretation really.

Sure, good that you get it, but this is more a discussion for those of us who see it a bit differently. I must say though, if you really got it better what he means, you would have less misunderstanding about his instruction.

 

[RetroSpin]

I'm inclined to see your point about MTM wording. My theory is Oscar did this for 2 reasons. 1st is he intentionally departed from the terms used for decades in classic and traditional instruction. In a sense, using those same terms would have been more confusing Imo.

For example...someone brought up "unit turn" in this thread. Currently you see this old term used quite frequently about today's tournament tennis, but this new Unit Turn is quite different from the old classic Unit Turn in Traditional instruction. I doubt many using the term realize these important differences. Would it make more sense to use a new and different term to describe a new and different approach to this element of tennis? I agree with Oscar that it does make sense not to use the same old terms for a new meaning.

Second difference is that I believe that Spanish is Oscar's first language, so there may be some issues there. Not that he does not know English well, but actually quite the opposite. He is quite meticulous about terms and their documented meanings. Most of us, being native speakers of our version of English, can often have a much different feel for a word and what it suggests. Even parts of this nation often have different uses with our slang than other parts of the country.

So in the end, the terms of MTM Imo are to more accurately describe how things are different and also to spark questions about what is meant. When students have questions in their mind, they tend to remember the answers much better I think, don't you? You have questions here, and I think you will tend to remember the answers that you decide are best to your question.

I think some of the confusion with Oscar is that he refers a lot to what elite players do but a lot of his online instructional videos are aimed at beginners. His advice about running like a child and finding the ball and yanking across it are examples. I am pretty sure he is addressing that at beginners, particularly adult beginners.

He has one online lesson with a very good age group player and it is totally different. I found the instruction there really eye-opening.

 

[5263]

I think some of the confusion with Oscar is that he refers a lot to what elite players do but a lot of his online instructional videos are aimed at beginners. His advice about running like a child and finding the ball and yanking across it are examples. I am pretty sure he is addressing that at beginners, particularly adult beginners.

He has one online lesson with a very good age group player and it is totally different. I found the instruction there really eye-opening.

A very good point you make. Seems that many struggle with the idea that you can use the general critical elements of the Pro strokes and improve your strokes/result, but without taking on a strong likeness to the appearance of a Pro player. Should be expected since even most of the pros use most of these same critical elements, while taking on a wide variety of appearances and a wide variety of results too. Really should be no huge surprise when an fella takes up the game later in life, using elements of modern stokes without taking on a very similar appearance to Pros.

 

[onehandbh]

He has one online lesson with a very good age group player and it is totally different. I found the instruction there really eye-opening.

can you post a link to that video?

 

[Raul_SJ]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=MxUPDHegz98#t=532

Here is Oscar feeding balls to a player. But I can't clearly hear what Oscar is saying... Does anybody know?

"Yes. Good... Pull across... No. Don't steer? the ball"

 

[5263]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=MxUPDHegz98#t=532

Here is Oscar feeding balls to a player. But I can't clearly hear what Oscar is saying... Does anybody know?

"Yes. Good... Pull across... No. Don't steer? the ball"

Yes, Pull and don't Steer.

Initially, you drag the hand (butt of racket) to find the ball in a slower rhythm, then once the good contact is assured, then you pull the racket across contact with an accel that is in tune for the power you intend.

Steering can be viewed from many perspectives and is something like aiming or pushing to some extent. Imo the key is that when you steer or aim the ball too much, that it comes from pushing the racket head around vs pulling it around with the change of direction. We can all see what many call "releasing the wrist", which Imo is a pretty good term. Release is what we do when the energy is already produced or stored, and can be metered a bit..... vs wristing the shot which would be using forearm power to bend the wrist for power. "Wrist release" gives power without steering, but "wristing the shot" can add power or control, but Imo, not good at doing both. So I'd say that the power should come from Loading to set up " wrist release", thus allowing any "wristing" of the shot to be for spin and control.