# Question for Will Hamilton (& others who promote laid back wrist on forehand contact)

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
No, I use SW for FH. I do a combination of pronating and a hint of radial deviation for the accross the body motion, ie rackethead on its way up.

I have said in another post that the serve is like the opposite of FH to me, ie conti vs sw, flip the racket ends 180 degree and hit the ball above the head.

I still think your grip is something like Federer. To support my statement I bring my old post here.

Let’s compare two players.

Figure 1 Federer and Nadal possible wrist motions

Federer has eastern grip. To increase the flat component of the racket speed by using the hand/wrist only, he has to flex it. The wrist ulnar deviation moves the racquet downward and can produce back spin only. The wrist radial deviation moves the racquet upward creating topspin.

Nadal has semiwestern/western grip. To boost power or change ball direction, he has to use ulnar deviation. The radial deviation moves the racquet away from the ball. The wrist flexion opens racket face, the wist extension closes it.

Nadal is using natural movement for heavy tools like hummer, ax etc. Federer technique is natural for light tools like surgical scalpel, artist brush.

1. The wrist flexion has angular range 180 degrees. It gives us too much freedom to generate errors. The ulnar deviation has just 90 degrees, that’s why SW FH might be more consistent stroke.

2. It looks like Nadal grips handle very hard, Federer doesn't. In this case Rafa still is able to produce fast ulnar deviation, but fast flexion would be practically impossible.

3. From safety point of view, I believe the semiwestern/western is the best grip.

When woodcutters chop trees by using heavy tool like ax, they always apply the wrist ulnar deviation. They practically never have wrist injury. In order to maintain a heavy ax, they should grip hard the handle of the ax. The ulnar deviation allows them to do so. The wrist flexion will never move properly if we grip handle very hard.

However, when a surgeons use a scalpel (light tool), they prefer to employ the wrist flexion. This is very delicate and frail motion, that’s why it is not good for heavy tools.

We should know first, is a tennis racquet heavy or light tool? Since the eastern grip is very rare, but the SW/Western grip is the very popular, I think we must treat racquet as heavy tool and apply ulnar deviation (not the wrist flexion).

IMO, eastern grip is good for genius (like Federer) only.

Last edited:

#### Limpinhitter

##### G.O.A.T.
tell me of some pros that doesn't rock back. you just rock forward ?? how do you transfer your weight then ?

Off the top of my head: Sampras, Ivanisovic, Lendl, Gonzales, Tilden, Budge, Kramer, Roche, Laver, Kriek! Tanner and Becker were neutral. Roche changed his wind-up after about 1970 or so.

Last edited:

#### Cheetah

##### Hall of Fame
This ''WTA push forehand sucks'' makes no sense, many of them have better forehands than most of us ever will.

This one more thing that only exists in TT.

Soderling hits with a push forehand.

I would say just about all of them have better forehands than 99% of the ppl on this forum.

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame

All these players are using wrist ulnar deviation Sharapova way, because there is only one way to do so.

are you saying the wrist moves from neutal to ulnar as you strike the ball?

or radial to ulnar?

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
are you saying the wrist moves from neutal to ulnar as you strike the ball?

or radial to ulnar?

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame

read it. still not clear.

are u saying?

(before contact)maxium radial to (after contact)maxium ulnar

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
read it. still not clear.

are u saying?

(before contact)maximum radial to (after contact)maximum ulnar
Yes, (before contact) maximum radial to (after contact) maximum ulnar.
The wrist should move racquet before contact and a little bit after contact. If ulnar deviation stops before contact, it means the wrist doesn’t move racquet anymore. Thus this motion would be completely useless from power production point of view, but it can be used to change ball direction.

Last edited:

#### Funbun

##### Professional
The wrist should move racquet before contact and a little bit after contact. If ulnar deviation stops before contact, it means the wrist doesn’t move racquet anymore. Thus this motion would be completely useless from power production point of view. But can be used to change ball direction.

I read 107. Are you suggesting that one should maintain that ulnar deviation throughout the swing with a conscious effort?

I sense that one should just keep the wrist loose from the takeback thereafter. If you see Nadal hit a forehand, he releases from his ulnar deviation almost immediately after contact in a slow motion video. Given his regular swing speed, that would be impossible for him to voluntarily release it. That would lead me to think that he just keeps his wrist loose during the swing, that's it.

#### rkelley

##### Hall of Fame
Possibly this is all getting too complicated?

At the end of the day you want the racquet to move through the contact zone at a constant angle. With a modern fh most of the TS will come from pronation of the wrist. Depending on the grip and the angle you choose for the racquet face, your wrist will likely have to move one way or the other side to side in order maintain the racquet's angle through the contact zone. Pick a grip and learn the motions.

Not trying to be dismissive, but I'm an engineer and this is starting to look over analyzed even to me.

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
The wrist should move racquet before contact and a little bit after contact. If ulnar deviation stops before contact, it means the wrist doesn’t move racquet anymore. Thus this motion would be completely useless from power production point of view. But can be used to change ball direction.

what is the wrist deviation before contact? and after contact?

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
I read 107. Are you suggesting that one should maintain that ulnar deviation throughout the swing with a conscious effort?

I sense that one should just keep the wrist loose from the takeback thereafter. If you see Nadal hit a forehand, he releases from his ulnar deviation almost immediately after contact in a slow motion video. Given his regular swing speed, that would be impossible for him to voluntarily release it. That would lead me to think that he just keeps his wrist loose during the swing, that's it.
There is picture of the Nadal very hard grip.

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
Possibly this is all getting too complicated?

At the end of the day you want the racquet to move through the contact zone at a constant angle. With a modern fh most of the TS will come from pronation of the wrist. Depending on the grip and the angle you choose for the racquet face, your wrist will likely have to move one way or the other side to side in order maintain the racquet's angle through the contact zone. Pick a grip and learn the motions.

Not trying to be dismissive, but I'm an engineer and this is starting to look over analyzed even to me.

Intense wrist ulnar deviation should be used for "flat FH" only. You still can brush the ball by swinging the racquet from low to high or use elbow flexion.
Nevertheless, if angle ϕ is near to 0° you don’t want to use pronation at all, because it closes the racquet face and you produce vary inconsistent shots.
You really must understand that.
I’m retired Electrical Engineer. Are you Mechanical Engineer?

Last edited:

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
Intense wrist ulnar deviation should be used for "flat FH" only. You still can brush the ball by swinging the racquet from low to high.
Nevertheless, in this case you don’t want to use pronation at all, because it closes the racquet face and you produce vary inconsistent shots.
You really must understand that.
I’m retired Electrical Engineer. Are you Mechanical Engineer?

hi toly

we should be clear

#### TennisCJC

##### Legend
I am confused still. Are you guys saying we should actually adjust the wrist position just before (say 6"-12"), during, or just after (say 6-12") contact? I don't think that's wise and think wrist should stay pretty inactive around the contact zone to reduce errors. I also think if you position the wrist properly on the initial pivot that you can hit almost all forehands with very little adjustment to the wrist throughout the stroke. The wrist should be relaxed and it may lay back a little as you rotate hips/shoulders into contact as the arm will pull forward and a relaxed wrist will naturally lay back a bit as the arm goes forward. Other than that I think people should think and work to keep a relaxed grip with a passive elbow and wrist thru contact.

Of course, the wrist and forearm may naturally roll over on the extension of a WW forehand forethru, but the ball should be long, long gone by that time. At least 6" before and at lest 6" after contact, the wrist/elbow should be primarily STILL. Those are my guess at reasonable MINIMUM numbers. In my stroke, I think the lay back in the wrist that occurs when the arm starts forward is over 12 inches before contact and is a minimal movement. And, the wrap after contact is over 12" beyond contact which result in about a 2+ foot window around contact where the wrist and forehand are STILL.

Are you really saying we should be perfecting wrist adjustments in the contact zone?

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
hi toly

we should be clear
Hi PW,
Unfortunately I don’t understand your question in post 160.

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
Hi PW,
Unfortunately I don’t understand your question in post 160.

sorry, maybe i wasnt clear

10 inches before you contact the ball, what position should the wrist be in?

same question for 9 inches, 8 inches, 7,6............point of contact

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
Toly, can you point out to me where in these videos you see significant ulnar deviation happening during the forward swing of the forehand?

No doubt the ulnar side of the wrist faces the ball during impact, due to the western grip, but that doesn't necessarily imply ulnar deviation is providing the power to hit the ball. If you can pinpoint a time interval that backets the ulnar deviation in one of the these videos, maybe we will be able to see what you mean. Right now, I don't understand how you even envision forehand mechanics. Thanks!

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
sorry, maybe i wasnt clear

10 inches before you contact the ball, what position should the wrist be in?

same question for 9 inches, 8 inches, 7,6............point of contact
Let’s analyze just “pure flat FH”. First, we keep the wrist in maximum radial. Thus the ϕ angle approximately should be equal 90°. Then racquet ought to travel 90° to get into ϕ=0° position. Thus the angular path of the racquet is 90°or π/2.
The average speed of the ulnar deviation=70rad/sec.
How long (T) does it take the racquet to travel π/2?
Assume we rotate the racquet by using shoulder joint only. Its maximum angular speed is 16rad/sec. The average speed would be 8rad/sec.
Then the racquet arc distance before contact is:
If we also rotate the torso with the same speed as shoulder, the distance would be around 16”.
Djokovic often uses bend elbow and can utilize internal rotation of shoulder. It also increases the distance maybe around 25”.

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
Toly, can you point out to me where in these videos you see significant ulnar deviation happening during the forward swing of the forehand?

No doubt the ulnar side of the wrist faces the ball during impact, due to the western grip, but that doesn't necessarily imply ulnar deviation is providing the power to hit the ball. If you can pinpoint a time interval that backets the ulnar deviation in one of the these videos, maybe we will be able to see what you mean. Right now, I don't understand how you even envision forehand mechanics. Thanks!
Nadal FH is very bad example of “pure flat FH”. He usually uses too much pronation and shoulder internal rotation to produce extreme TS. These very fast motions stop wrist ulnar deviation (and wrist flexion too) because of big centripetal force and gyroscopic effects.
IMO these videos are better.

Last edited:

#### 5263

##### G.O.A.T.
Nadal FH is very bad example of “pure flat FH”. He usually uses too much pronation and shoulder internal rotation to produce extreme TS. These very fast motion stops wrist ulnar deviation (and wrist flexion too) because of big centripetal force and gyroscopic effects.
IMO this videos are better.

I see it to an extent with Philip, but the others appear to be using radial to me.

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
Hmm... the main wrist movement seems to be flexion, and there is the usual rotation - but I don't see any ulnar deviation...

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
Let’s analyze just “pure flat FH”. First, we keep the wrist in maximum radial. Thus the ϕ angle approximately should be equal 90°. Then racquet ought to travel 90° to get into ϕ=0° position. Thus the angular path of the racquet is 90°or π/2.
The average speed of the ulnar deviation=70rad/sec.
How long (T) does it take the racquet to travel π/2?
Assume we rotate the racquet by using shoulder joint only. Its maximum angular speed is 16rad/sec. The average speed would be 8rad/sec.
Then the racquet arc distance before contact is:
If we also rotate the torso with the same speed as shoulder, the distance would be around 16”.
Djokovic often uses bend elbow and can utilize internal rotation of shoulder. It also increases the distance maybe around 25”.

what if your forearm is more pronated, thumb pointing up at the sky, in that case to achieve the 90 degrees, your wrist would be in extention and not radial. your wrist deviation depends on the position (pronation/supination) of the forearm. do you agree with that?

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
Hmm... the main wrist movement seems to be flexion, and there is the usual rotation - but I don't see any ulnar deviation...
This is one of the best examples (see photos) of “pure flat FH” with SW/W grip.

There is no wrist flexion. The wrist flexion/extension rotate the racquet around its long axis only. Thus, these motions basically cannot increase power, but they can change orientation of the racket face. If we hit very low ball we should open racquet face by using the wrist flexion very cautiously, otherwise boll flies out. If we hit high ball we usually prefer keep racquet face a little bit closed. We can use the wrist extension, but again very carefully. IMO passive whip actions of the wrist cannot do it and as result we produce very inconsistent FH strokes.

The wrist ulnar/radial deviation doesn’t change racquet face orientation (look at the pictures). In azimuth plane we have angular range around 30° (above this range ball flies out). This is very big margin for error. If we overdo wrist ulnar deviation, the ball would be directed a little bit to the left, if not the ball goes to the right. No big deal, because azimuth range is big enough. That’s why this FH routine can provide very good consistency, accuracy, power and etc.

There also no pronation at all, because ϕ angle is near to zero. If we want to add topspin we can use elbow flexion (see pictures) or swing from low to high. These motions also do not change racquet face orientation.

Sharapova very often follows this very good FH routine. That’s why this supermodel (not athletic girl) with 6’2” extremely fragile body without muscles is so successful in tennis. Nadal must learn these techniques from her if he wants to defeat Djokovic.

Last edited:

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
This is one of the best examples (see photos) of “pure flat FH” with SW/W grip.

There is no wrist flexion. The wrist flexion/extension rotate the racquet around its long axis only. Thus, these motions basically cannot increase power, but they can change orientation of the racket face. If we hit very low ball we should open racquet face by using the wrist flexion very cautiously, otherwise boll flies out. If we hit high ball we usually prefer keep racquet face a little bit closed. We can use the wrist extension, but again very carefully. IMO passive whip actions of the wrist cannot do it and as result we produce very inconsistent FH strokes.
The wrist ulnar/radial deviation doesn’t change racquet face orientation (look at the pictures). In azimuth plane we have angular range around 30° (above this range boll flies out). This is very big margin for error. If we overdo wrist ulnar deviation, the ball would be directed a little bit to the left, if not the ball goes to the right. No big deal, because azimuth rang is big enough. That’s why this FH routine can provide very good consistency, accuracy, power and etc.
There also no pronation at all, because ϕ angle is near to zero. If we want to add topspin we can use elbow flexion (see pictures) or swing from low to high. These motions also do not change racquet face orientation.
Sharapova very often follows this very good FH routine. That’s why this supermodel (not athletic girl) with 6’2” extremely fragile body without muscles is so successful in tennis. Nadal must learn these techniques from her if he wants to defeat Djokovic.

what if the power is all come from the lower body? frame "negative 5"

can't dispute the wrist movement there, but may not be a source of power. you are onto something. thanks for not ending our search too early.

gulbis hits a textbook sw-w fh, imo

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
what if the power is all come from the lower body? frame "negative 5"

can't dispute the wrist movement there, but may not be a source of power. you are onto something. thanks for not ending our search too early.

gulbis hits a textbook sw-w fh, imo
This is very nice video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBuJoSfvoKs

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
Hi toly, I see a lot of wrist flexion - see the difference in the angle between the long axis of the racquet and the forearm, going from frame 6 to frame 12. Note that wrist flexion in this case moves the racquet head upwards, due to the western grip. Shoulder/upper arm rotation is causing the racquet to be pulled across to the right (as Gulbis sees it), so any ulnar deviation looks exaggerated. It is a complex movement where the racquet head is flung upwards, forwards, and to the right. The resulting ball trajectory may be flat, but certainly, he is imparting a lot of topspin, IMO. I would say that the slight deviation in the ulnar direction is a motion dependent one, occurring passively, and is not intentional.

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
In fact, wrist flexion is also contributes to the forward motion of the racquet head, it seems, since the grip looks like it might be semi-western... if the hand were completely under the racquet, it would only contribute to upward motion. Not completely sure here, but my analysis stands in any case.

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
what if the power is all come from the lower body? frame "negative 5"

can't dispute the wrist movement there, but may not be a source of power. you are onto something. thanks for not ending our search too early.

gulbis hits a textbook sw-w fh, imo
Look at pictures 1 and 10. His body angular path is around 9°, from pic. 1 to pic. 10. Racquet rotates around wrist with angular range 90°. The wrist by itself rotates the racquet 10 times faster than body. It’s obvious the wrist action is more powerful (faster) than the body (torso). The hand/wrist is the most important.
It’s true the lower body can produce big force, but it creates a little speed. We can use lower body to move furniture around house, but tennis ball is too light for our legs.
Imagine that we connected racquet to elephant arm (leg). Can it hit powerful FH (foreleg)? Definitely not because elephant is very slow animal, but it can produce tons of useless force.

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
In fact, wrist flexion is also contributes to the forward motion of the racquet head, it seems, since the grip looks like it might be semi-western... if the hand were completely under the racquet, it would only contribute to upward motion. Not completely sure here, but my analysis stands in any case.

OK bhupaes. Please keep the racquet exactly like Robby Ginepri does. Then keep everything in stable position and rotate the racquet by using wrist flexion only as much as possible. This motion opens racquet face. The string bed will face a ceiling. After that, rotate the racquet back by using just wrist extension, again as much as possible. The wrist turns the racquet around its long axis about 180°. Thus racquet string bed should face the floor. The wrist extension/flexion are poison motions and must be eliminated.

Then again keep the racquet as Ginepri and rotate the racquet forward and back by using wrist ulnar and radial deviations only. Orientation of the racquet will be constantly vertical and motions very fast.

This is really so simple. I just don’t understand what you don’t understand. Looks like I’m very bad teacher, but everybody tells me quite opposite. Maybe they just want to be nice to me.

Last edited:

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
It is very nice video!!!
I’m absolutely sure that you are absolutely right.
Please explain that to bhupes. He is really very stubborn fellow.

I do see movement in the ulnar direction, toly - the issue is what constitutes the primary movement (that is, backed by intention) and which movements are motion dependent. I tried what you asked me to do, and true, what you are saying is one way of hitting. But it felt like if I did it consistently, I would have to have wrist surgery pretty soon...

But, to be fair, let me admit the possibility that I may be wrong and try it out on the courts next time I play. This discussion has given me a new insight into hand movements, thanks!

#### 5263

##### G.O.A.T.
I do see movement in the ulnar direction, toly - the issue is what constitutes the primary movement (that is, backed by intention) and which movements are motion dependent. I tried what you asked me to do, and true, what you are saying is one way of hitting. But it felt like if I did it consistently, I would have to have wrist surgery pretty soon...

But, to be fair, let me admit the possibility that I may be wrong and try it out on the courts next time I play. This discussion has given me a new insight into hand movements, thanks!

Man... I just dont see it in that clip...looked radial to me.

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
I do see movement in the ulnar direction, toly - the issue is what constitutes the primary movement (that is, backed by intention) and which movements are motion dependent. I tried what you asked me to do, and true, what you are saying is one way of hitting. But it felt like if I did it consistently, I would have to have wrist surgery pretty soon...

But, to be fair, let me admit the possibility that I may be wrong and try it out on the courts next time I play. This discussion has given me a new insight into hand movements, thanks!
I'm not a doctor and cannot recommend how to avoid injuries in sports. However, we know from the history that the woodcutters, blacksmiths etc have used the wrist ulnar/radial deviation for thousands of years. This technique is very natural for them and usually doesn't produce any problem. See also post #151.

#### bhupaes

##### Professional
Man... I just dont see it in that clip...looked radial to me.

Yeah, it's a complex motion, and the ulnar deviation seems to be a very small and incidental part of it, IMO. Actually, I don't see it in the clip of Berdych, but there seems to be a little bit in the Phil Kohlschreiber video, when I look at it closely. Since toly is being so insistent I will play with it next week and see what it feels like.

#### Geology_Rocks!

##### Semi-Pro
So Toly, in this type of forehand (Berdych) there is no pronation during contact because the wrist/forearm/racket would be straight and pronation would force the racket face close, correct? Here Monfils seem to be doing it too.

On the other hand in this Almagro clip he seems to pronate during contact.

And for that he must have his wrist bent. Am I still following? If so, what are the pros and cons of each style?

Thanks.

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
So Toly, in this type of forehand (Berdych) there is no pronation during contact because the wrist/forearm/racket would be straight and pronation would force the racket face close, correct? Here Monfils seem to be doing it too.

On the other hand in this Almagro clip he seems to pronate during contact.

And for that he must have his wrist bent. Am I still following?
Thanks.
Yes, you are in general right.
If so, what are the pros and cons of each style?

To simplify the matter let’s analyze FH with straight arm.
If we use wrist ulnar deviation extremely hard, inevitably we get ϕ=0°. Straight arm and racquet form straight line. The torso, shoulder joint and wrist move racquet in synchronized manner. All of these motions create their own linear velocity of the racquet independently and they are perpendicular to the string bed. The resulting vector also is perpendicular to the string bed. Thus, it cannot create spin and we don’t waste our energy for spin production. All our efforts transfer to translation motion of the ball and nothing to the spin. Hence, we can create the most powerful FH.

What happens if ϕ is not equal to zero (see pictures below)?

The wrist ulnar deviation still rotates the racquet properly, pic. 1. Velocity vector Vwrist is perpendicular to the strings.
The shoulder joint produces wrong motion, pic. 2. The vector Vshoulder is not perpendicular to the string bed. It has tangential component, which creates useless sidespin. As a consequence, we are losing power, but we can use pronation to create topspin.

Last edited:

#### rkelley

##### Hall of Fame
Intense wrist ulnar deviation should be used for "flat FH" only. You still can brush the ball by swinging the racquet from low to high or use elbow flexion.
Nevertheless, if angle ϕ is near to 0° you don’t want to use pronation at all, because it closes the racquet face and you produce vary inconsistent shots.
You really must understand that.
I’m retired Electrical Engineer. Are you Mechanical Engineer?

Yes, I am a mechanical engineer.

While it's true that " . . . if angle ϕ is near to 0° you don’t want to use pronation at all, because it closes the racquet face . . . ," I've never seen any skilled player hit a forehand with ϕ anywhere near to 0°. You have to lay that wrist back on the forehand to hit it properly, regardless of how flat you're hitting it. Go to youtube. Do you see any pro hitting a forehand where ϕ is near to 0° at contact?

Also, as Ash pointed out, the exact amount of ulnar or radial deviation used to maintain the racquet plane is very dependent on grip. I use a strong E. grip and ulnar deviation is not going to help me. For Western grip users however it would seem to be necessary in order to maintain the racquet plane through the contact zone.

But the point of my original comment was that it's probably better to just think about maintaining the racquet plane with whatever grip you're using rather than think about ulnar or radial deviation.

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
I've never seen any skilled player hit a forehand with ϕ anywhere near to 0°. You have to lay that wrist back on the forehand to hit it properly, regardless of how flat you're hitting it. Go to youtube. Do you see any pro hitting a forehand where ϕ is near to 0° at contact?

What can you say about these players?

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
What can you say about these players?

they are stretched wide except gulbis.

putting shapova and hewitt into the mix voids your theory. imo, they hit completely different fhs.

why are you focsing on the wrist?

the power u get from radial/ulnar axis is a lot less than extension/flexion axis. the power from a sw forehand come from the body not wrist devation.

muscles for the extension/flexion is strong than muscles for radial/ulnar??? flexion muscles associated with gripping muscles?? which are strong. i know i can lift a lot more weight moving the weight in flexion direction. i m only guessing at this.

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
why are you focsing on the wrist?
The wrist is in charge of angle ϕ and defines type of the FH.
There are a lot of advices, for instance: hit across the ball with good extension. They are completely wrong. If ϕ is near zero, we hit through the ball (not across). Look at Verdasco, there also is no so called “extension”.
If ϕ is around 90 degrees, we mostly produce useless sidespin and a little power, and should provide very big extension (additional angular path around 90 degrees compare to flat FH) to bring racquet face parallel to net. Than bigger ϕ than would be less power, but more sidespin. Do we really want a lot of sidespin?

Last edited:

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
The wrist is in charge of angle ϕ and defines type of the FH.
There are a lot of advices, for instance: hit across the ball with good extension. They are completely wrong. If ϕ is near zero, we hit through the ball (not across). Look at Verdasco, there also is no so called “extension”.
If ϕ is around 90 degrees, we mostly produce useless sidespin and a little power, and should provide very big extension (additional angular path around 90 degrees compare to flat FH) to bring racquet face square to net. Than bigger ϕ than would be less power, but much more sidespin. Do we really want a lot of sidespin?

yes it deviates ulnar. you have proven that. but it is a coincidental indicator, imo.

extension come from pronation.

body rotating counter clockwise. elbow moving clockwise from ponation. that gives extension. credit to ho for that.

Last edited:

#### rkelley

##### Hall of Fame
Toly, Pushing_wins said what I was going to say. The pictures show players stretched out trying to get to a ball for the most part. Every youtube video I see shows that when the player has time to set up that the wrist is laid back at point of contact. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

It's just concerning to me that give your opinions with such certainty, that you put all of these graphs and pictures up in an attempt to support your point, but I don't see anyone who plays or coaches at a high level agreeing with you.

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
Toly, Pushing_wins said what I was going to say. The pictures show players stretched out trying to get to a ball for the most part. Every youtube video I see shows that when the player has time to set up that the wrist is laid back at point of contact. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

It's just concerning to me that give your opinions with such certainty, that you put all of these graphs and pictures up in an attempt to support your point, but I don't see anyone who plays or coaches at a high level agreeing with you.
Look please at Agassi FH http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO-qhLTWPfc&NR=1 around 0:58. He is not stretched wide; nevertheless he moves racquet to ϕ around zero. Agassi often hit FH in this manner. That’s why IMO he was so successful. There are alot famous players who is/was using this technique, e. g. OP Federer video around 0:08.

Last edited:

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
yes it deviates ulnar. you have proven that. but it is a coincidental indicator, imo.

extension come from pronation.

body rotating counter clockwise. elbow moving clockwise from ponation. that gives extension. credit to ho for that.
I think, ho is wrong about straight linear motion or “piston FH”. See please http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=5792941 posts from 51 to 55.

Last edited:

#### rkelley

##### Hall of Fame
Look please at Agassi FH http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO-qhLTWPfc&NR=1 around 0:58. He is not stretched wide; nevertheless he keeps ϕ around zero. Agassi often hit FH in this manner. That’s why IMO he was so successful. There are a lot famous players who is/was using this technique.

I looked at the video. At 0:53 you can see Agassi's wrist is laid back at around 80°. After this point it's difficult to see ϕ, but I see no indication that Agassi has flexed his wrist anything close to 80° from this point to contact. At 0:56 it appears that Agassi's right arm is parallel to the plane of the camera but the racquet is still back. At 0:58, where contact occurs, his arm has swung through more and now the racquet is parallel to the plane of the camera. I don't believe this video makes your point.

Meanwhile look at the Rafa side of the video and look at how much lay back he has in his wrist.

Toly, maybe I should ask again what point you are trying to make? You seem to be saying that if you want to hit a flat fh then you want ϕ=0°. Is that correct? Or are you saying that all forehands should be hit with ϕ=0°? For flatter strokes I'd agree that ϕ is probably smaller than for topspin strokes, but ϕ=0° is really extreme and not good technique.

Do any of the pro coaches here recommend a ϕ=0° for any forehand?

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
I looked at the video. At 0:53 you can see Agassi's wrist is laid back at around 80°. After this point it's difficult to see ϕ, but I see no indication that Agassi has flexed his wrist anything close to 80° from this point to contact. At 0:56 it appears that Agassi's right arm is parallel to the plane of the camera but the racquet is still back. At 0:58, where contact occurs, his arm has swung through more and now the racquet is parallel to the plane of the camera. I don't believe this video makes your point.

Meanwhile look at the Rafa side of the video and look at how much lay back he has in his wrist.

Toly, maybe I should ask again what point you are trying to make? You seem to be saying that if you want to hit a flat fh then you want ϕ=0°. Is that correct? Or are you saying that all forehands should be hit with ϕ=0°? For flatter strokes I'd agree that ϕ is probably smaller than for topspin strokes, but ϕ=0° is really extreme and not good technique.

Do any of the pro coaches here recommend a ϕ=0° for any forehand?
You really don’t follow me. To clarify the main idea I bring my old post (with some corrections) from another thread, which we already discussed.

On the run we don’t have the luxury to use torso rotation to produce additional power. We only can rotate the arm and the wrist. We are forced to apply special forehand routine which could produce maximum power with restricted resources.

Hence, we have to realign arm and racquet to form straight line, ϕ=0°, during impact. But this technique has very big drawback. We cannot use arm pronation to produce topspin. If ϕ=0° and we pronate, we just close the racquet face completely.

If ϕ=90° we can apply pronation in the most efficient way, because in this case pronation cannot change the orientation of the racquet face with respect to ground (cannot close the racquet face). Nevertheless, this racquet positioning will significantly decrease flat (normal to string bed) component of the racquet speed, and hence the ball speed (see post 187 pic. 2).

Under normal circumstances we can use legs, core etc. to rotate the racquet and we don’t want very big flat component without topspin (pronation). That’s why, Federer, Nadal etc. usually maintain ϕ angle in range 30° < ϕ < 55°.

They sacrifice some amount of the translational ball’s speed to get topspin from pronation. Thus, they improve reliability of the FH.

But, if pros want to play very hard winner, they usually decrease ϕ, and ignore pronation at all, in order to maximize power (speed of the translation motion of the ball).

Last edited:

#### pushing_wins

##### Hall of Fame
toly,

what is the question you are trying to answer?

#### Swissv2

##### Hall of Fame
toly,

what is the question you are trying to answer?

some calculus question, if you ask me

#### toly

##### Hall of Fame
toly,

what is the question you are trying to answer?
I don’t know, got lost completely. I thought I already explained everything, but some people still don’t understand something!!!???

Last edited:

Replies
37
Views
6K
Replies
64
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
23
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
974