Shouldn't club players rather model their game after female prfessionals?

Netzroller

Semi-Pro
Just a thought, that crossed my mind...

It is clear that the game is played differently on the ATP and the WTA tour.
Men usually use more topspin, one handed backhand and kick serves are much more frequently seen, the forehand is usually hit in a more whippy manner with a shorter backswing etc.

Now, whenever people discuss technique on this board or in my real live experience, the almost exclusively seem to take ATP players as examples.
However, even most female professionals do not try to play this way despite being much more skilled and trained than pretty much any club player. Why do then amateurs think that they should try to hit their forehand like Federer or Nadal?
Shouldn't they much rather try to imitate female professionals since the gap is somewhat smaller here?
 

Overdrive

Legend
tumblr_m8a7yv1AFW1rx6ay1o1_250.gif
 
The female professionals have the same fundamentals as the male professionals. The women have evolved slightly different stroke techniques because their bodies are built differently. For instance, ATP players brush up more on their forehands because the margin for error from heavy topspin benefits them. WTA players hit more through their forehands because the added penetration benefits them. They also take a bigger backswing because you can get more power with a bigger backswing if you're going to hit through the ball rather than brush up more. Real coaches know that players should be taught the proper fundamentals and evolve their own gamestyles, unlike some TT posters on here who obsess about how ATP technique is completely different from and vastly superior to WTA technique.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
Not sure what you're trying to insinuate here. Sounds like you are saying WTA sucks and closer to amateurs, hence the smaller gap. I can assure you that we amateurs can also butcher ATP techniques to crap just fine.

But I do agree with you that female pros should be models for many rec players out there. Just today my friend was finally convinced that she should learn to keep her racket at shoulder height, extend her left hand before taking a swing at the ball, a la Ivonavic. It was just beautiful!
 
I have seen lots of famous, success coaches such as Lansdorp, Macci, Dave Smith and others saying that when they are first teaching the groundstrokes, they think the eastern grip is a fine grip to learn with. The eastern grip allows you to get the feeling of contacting the ball cleanly and hitting through the shot. It's a somewhat simpler stroke than the modern atp forehand. Later on in development, players may experiment with slightly more extreme groundstrokes grips and turning the hand over and finishing around the body on the follow through, after they have already learned how to hit through the ball with a basic grip.

Too many people try to copy what they see on tv, before learning the basics. If you can learn to hit a clean predictable Tracy Austin type groundstroke with a long, follow through out towards your target, that is enough to beat 99 % of the players at your local club.

A common problem for juniors is the ball bounces up so high for them that an extreme grip feels more comfortable, but if the grip they learn with is too extreme as they grow in height, they will be stuck with their extreme grip and won't know how to hit through the ball.

One of the best guys I hit with was a nationally ranked junior player who learned with an eastern grip and catching his follow-through out front. As he progressed he shifted his grip over to what would be called either an extreme eastern grip or a semi-western grip on these message boards. I asked him about this topic the other day, because it intrigues me. He said he feels learning to hit with his hand behind the racket and driving the ball helped his groundstroke development.

I know excellent players who learned to drive their groundstrokes with continental, eastern, semiwestern, and extreme western grips. On the groundstrokes, there is some freedom to let individual style and preference take over.

I know there are coaches out their who think players should start right away with a semi-western grip and an open stance.

I know plenty of good players who started off learning a basic topspin drive from closed stance, or a semi opened stance, or neutral stance or whatever it may be called. Starting with an extreme open stance right away is tough because some players wont turn there shoulders and coil properly.

I personally learned to add and subtract before I learned multiplication and division. But, to each their own.

Look at youtube videos of Carolyn Xie, she hits what posters on this board would probably call "modern strokes". However, if you look at her background you will see that she is a Robert Lansdorp protégé who started off learning that driving through the ball is one of the basic fundamentals of the groundstrokes.

Modern strokes are great, but a basic topspin drive is all you need to beat everybody at your local tennis club.

Every day there are threads on here where people are claiming that Pete Sampras's forehand isn't modern enough, or that Ana Ivanovic and Serena Williams follow through too high on their groundies. These claims might be the norm on the talk tennis message boards, but in real life I think most skilled instructors and players only laugh at hyperbolic claims of this sort.
 
"The Baumer" has to be john yandel.

No. I think I am wrong. Read another Baumer post that didnt seem like the slo mo king.

nah, but he definitely remimds me of a guy whose name I can't remember from not that long ago.

Had some YouTube videos with some of his coaching advice, one in particular with an old school FH featuring an exaggerated 'catch' of the follow through up high and in front, looked for all the world like a golf swing..

That guy was all 'learn with an eastern grip first, hit through the ball etc etc'

wish I could think of his name, something with '10is' in it I think..
 

JennyT93

Banned
I agree with the OP.

Club players have physiques that are closer (not close) to female pros than male ones.

Deeper and flatter is the way to go. Spinny/brushy stuff is waist of energy.
 
I agree with the OP.

Club players have physiques that are closer (not close) to female pros than male ones.

Deeper and flatter is the way to go. Spinny/brushy stuff is waist of energy.

No offense, but which 'club players', exactly?

our club's teams include a half a dozen nationally ranked 14 - 17 year olds, 4 male teaching pros of >5.0 standard, two young guys in their 20s who both played DI college tennis on starting line ups and a guy with a highest ATP ranking of 87...

or are you talking about our lower grade teams full of middle aged hackers with TE and knee bracers?

sorry, but that's a foolish statement..

As for "spinny/brushy stuff is a waste of energy', well, I have lost count of the number of tradtionally trained players that have converted to modern FHs around here in search of both consistency and longevity..

but whatever, I guess, no doubt you can cite examples of 'modern players' that get beaten by eastern FH S& V all the time at your club, sigh...
 
Are Baumer and Jenny the same person? You've got RichieT and JennnyT who both signed up today or in the past couple days. And Jen seems to follow Baum around and parrot what he says.
 

TobyTopspin

Professional
I would think for the average club player, yes they would do better to model themselves after the women pros. I also think a great deal of players underestimate the power and consistency that these ladies hit with.

I've hit with sever women's All-American who currently play. They can hang with any man at our club with no problem. They can be overpowered by our big hitting servers, but in a game of 21 just playing ground stokes, it's very close and goes either way. I can hang with them and win once in a while, but I'm way past my prime and if they are 'on' then I'm just a good practice for these top women players.

There is nothing wrong with modeling after the women for most of the club members who frankly won't set foot on the court with our top junior women, much less some of our better womens players.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
If playing like a female improves your game, go for it.
Me, I hit flat first serves, sorta fast, high bouncing top/slice and twist serves, like to play net a lot, like to end points early because I can, so if a WTA style works for me, I would not hesitate to use it.
 
ATP forehand

I have lost count of the number of tradtionally trained players that have converted to modern FHs around here in search of both consistency and longevity..

but whatever, I guess, no doubt you can cite examples of 'modern players' that get beaten by eastern FH S& V all the time at your club, sigh...

Is that what talk tennis has become?? Criticize everyone who doesn't hit a semi-western grip topspin forehand because their game isn't "modern" enough? Yawn... Sigh... Boring...

If John McEnroe came to hit at your club, Timbo would you advise him to get rid of his outdated conti-grip groundstrokes because you have some ranked juniors and former college players at your club and none of them play that way?

Yawn... Sigh...
 
I missed the part where I said I would advise anyone to do anything..

I simply pointed out what I see. Some players continue with their classic style and some choose to change. Neither option is in any way 'wrong'

I doubt anyone has ever called JMac's marvellous game 'classic' before though!!

Surely you wouldn't teach anyone to play like that in any era? Notwithstanding both Borg and Lendl hit with 'modern FHs anyway..

Sheesh man, open your mind and don't be so defensive!

And, just so you know, our former ATP pro is a classic S & V player with his best results at Wimbledon, and nobody can beat him!

He has taught his top 20 nationally ranked son a modern game though...
 
Last edited:

Brian11785

Hall of Fame
There is truth to the OP. I think, more than trying to model your game/strokes after one or the other, people should see both as worthy of consideration.

Assuming that there is nothing to learn from watching women play because you're "a man" is pretty foolish, if improving is your primary objective. It's almost as foolish as watching one player and modelling your game singularly after him/her.

PS - Women's Tennis Tactics by Rob Antoun is a fantastic book with a needlessly market-segmenting title.
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
The question seems simple, but assumes too much.

I think there are certain fundamentals on all the shots that any player can develop. Some are evidenced by the men, some by the women, and some by both. And it varies with the stroke.

The women's forehands are moving toward the men's in many cases. And not just the issue of the backswing. More fundamental is the turn and the stretch of the opposite arm across. Henin had that with the compact backswing.

But a big part of Sharapova's forehand improvement was increasing her turn on her forehand--even though her backswing remained more circular than the optimum ATP model defined by Brian Gordon.

You can find similar issues on all the strokes. Almost all women hit with two hands. But many, many male club players are natural one handers. And even if you are a two-hander should everyone copy the dominant bent bent arm configuration of the women?

On the serve the women tend to hit flatter or with slice and hit hard, but struggle with kicking the ball and serving the backhand side. They use pinpoints and extreme body rotation.

Should club players especially men copy that? Could many women players profit from moving toward the male elements? Possibly. And in many cases likely.

You get the idea. Strokes can be fundamentally sound and not optimum. Or they can have "optimum" elements but lack underlying fundamentals.

Then there are the variations due to grip, spin and style. It's endlessly fascinating to study and understand but I feel sorry for club players who are bombarded by so much information to make sense of--and end up making decisions that don't always end up with the result they wish or could have had.
 

HughJars

Banned
The differences in technique between ATP and WTA professionals is not because there is a defined way they must hit the ball!!!! There's no coaching books written for men and woman exclusively....The reason behind the generalised differences is physicality.

No one says - "oh you're a professional female tennis player, you must hit the ball like this"...

So then, why would a male club player who shares atheltic attributes similar to that of many male ATP players (eg: 6 foot 1, athletic frame) be told to hit like an WTA player, and not optimise their hitting abilities????

Look at Radwanska. Plays a game of finesse and touch. It compliments her physical and athletic capabilties.

Then look at Serena Williams - same thing: her hard hitting game compliments her physical and athletic capabilties

This should hold true for everybody wanting to achieve their potential.

If you start thinking about and trying to copy the exact technical aspects of how to hit like a model WTA player (whatever that "model WTA player" is) and inhibiting yourself, then you're doomed to a life of paralysis by analysis...
 
Last edited:

Devil_dog

Hall of Fame
I like to watch WTA matches because of the parity in the players (besides Serena) and thus study the match play and strategy. Cannot say that I model my groundstrokes or serves after any of pro players - WTA or ATP - I have enough trouble figuring out my own strokes!
 

HughJars

Banned
Then there are the variations due to grip, spin and style. It's endlessly fascinating to study and understand but I feel sorry for club players who are bombarded by so much information to make sense of--and end up making decisions that don't always end up with the result they wish or could have had.

Yep, paralysis by analysis.

And fascinating, really? *snore*
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Most club players lack the fundamentals. So I think it is not very profitable for them to worry about ATP vs WTA styles. That would come beyond the 4.5 level.
 
Just a thought, that crossed my mind...

It is clear that the game is played differently on the ATP and the WTA tour.
Men usually use more topspin, one handed backhand and kick serves are much more frequently seen, the forehand is usually hit in a more whippy manner with a shorter backswing etc.

Now, whenever people discuss technique on this board or in my real live experience, the almost exclusively seem to take ATP players as examples.
However, even most female professionals do not try to play this way despite being much more skilled and trained than pretty much any club player. Why do then amateurs think that they should try to hit their forehand like Federer or Nadal?
Shouldn't they much rather try to imitate female professionals since the gap is somewhat smaller here?

I don't think so. to succeed with flat and hard balls you need tremendous practice time. girls like sharapova have played 8 hours a day since they were 8. those extra hitting hours are very hard to catch up to.


I don't think rec players have to use ATP strokes but a moderate topspin gives them the most consistency with their limited practice time.
 

Jay_The_Nomad

Professional
I agree with the OP.

Club players have physiques that are closer (not close) to female pros than male ones.

Deeper and flatter is the way to go. Spinny/brushy stuff is waist of energy.

Lots of cub players are out of shape. Are you saying that WTA players are similarly slow, unfit and overweight???
 
Last edited:

Netzroller

Semi-Pro
Thanks for the imput so far!

No offense, but which 'club players', exactly?

our club's teams include a half a dozen nationally ranked 14 - 17 year olds, 4 male teaching pros of >5.0 standard, two young guys in their 20s who both played DI college tennis on starting line ups and a guy with a highest ATP ranking of 87...[...]
If someone had a ATP rank of 87 he obviously can play like ATP professionals, that should be clear....
Those guys at your club don't come to this board to ask for advice so that is not what I had in mind.

I was talking about the majority of 3.0-4.5/5.0 (I'm not that familiar with this NTRP system) weekend warriors who practize and play matches but do not earn money playing tennis and it is not their life's top priority. Some of them are in shape obviously but certainly not ATP territory and all of them have some (at least minor) technical issues.

The differences in technique between ATP and WTA professionals is not because there is a defined way they must hit the ball!!!! There's no coaching books written for men and woman exclusively....The reason behind the generalised differences is physicality.

No one says - "oh you're a professional female tennis player, you must hit the ball like this"...

So then, why would a male club player who shares atheltic attributes similar to that of many male ATP players (eg: 6 foot 1, athletic frame) be told to hit like an WTA player, and not optimise their hitting abilities????

Look at Radwanska. Plays a game of finesse and touch. It compliments her physical and athletic capabilties.

Then look at Serena Williams - same thing: her hard hitting game compliments her physical and athletic capabilties
Alright, so it's physique what matters and I should look at pros who come closest to mine?

For instance, I am 5' 11'' and 141lbs. That are numbers you won't find on the ATP tour but they are not unusual for female pros.
So I would do best imitating someone like Caroline Wozniacki or Sorana Cirstea while those really athletic guys should go for Rafa & Co.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
Justin Henin was a fantastic player, and her footwork and serve return have worked their influence on me. I'm proud to say it.
 

Baxter

Professional
I agree with the OP, and have for 30 years. The men's game has been monster serves followed by big forehand putaways for decades, while the women actually play points. I know this view isn't popular with the macho master keyboarders here, but I it has worked really well for me.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Put it this way, even the WTA try to mimic the male pros but rarely pull it off.

Why would you look for inspiration from the group of players who cannot credibly say they own the benchmark example of a single stroke in the game? The men collectively own the best examples, and the various versions of, every stroke in the game.

I know people will say (like the above poster) that the males are big hitting beasts but, regardless of this, the best lessons for technique are found in the men's game - especially on the traditionally big shots in a person's game. The top servers on the ATP may by huge, strong guys but their serves are massive because they also have great technique, often with lots of common details that can be extrapolated and incorporated into a serve even if you don't base your whole serve on one you like. There are some nice serves in the women's game - Lisicki for example - but the foibles in her serve are not for mimicking. That's where it becomes a dicey deal - if you're at the level where you're trying to piece together a serve how do you know what is worth copying and just as importantly what not to copy.
 
Last edited:

bad_call

Legend
I like to watch WTA matches because of the parity in the players (besides Serena) and thus study the match play and strategy. Cannot say that I model my groundstrokes or serves after any of pro players - WTA or ATP - I have enough trouble figuring out my own strokes!

agree...and like yourself working on hitting a "better" ball.
 

fuzz nation

G.O.A.T.
I've never been big on the idea of modeling one's game after a certain player.

I don't think it's simply an issue of semantics, but I do agree that the technique of the lady pros can be especially illuminating when trying to figure out the strong mechanical components of one shot or another. I've thought more generally about this idea in recent years as I've worked on my golf game. The LPGA pros hit spectacular shots with sound mechanics, not the NFL linebacker builds on some of the male pros (who also have solid technique... and the occasional BIG belly!)

Standing court-side at the US Open and watching little peanuts like Iveta Benesova or Klara Zakapolova (two of my favorite WTA cutie-pies) pound the ball can seemingly defy reality. Some of these little spindles look barely strong enough to lift their bags, but they propel the ball like it's being shot out of a gun.

I watched Justine Henin up close playing a match at the Open a full year before she started to climb the ranks and it was the same case with her. Here was a tiny thing who could somehow SMOKE the ball. Behold the power of, well, legs, good timing, and ultra fast preparation.

If I'm teaching some aspect of a shot and my student has a favorite player or two, we might talk about whether he or she has seen how that player does this or that. Kim Clijsters used fantastic leg drive and trunk rotation for that big forehand, Federer hops forward into his split-step when returning serve, the Williams sisters have phenomenal early racquet preparation with their ground strokes... These observations can be very useful when working on an idea that needs some imagery to support it. Gender doesn't matter so much when the examples are especially good.

I even caught a big fat dose of reality over the past year when I struck up a friendship with a local lady who is "getting back up to speed" after starting a family. In her college days, she held the national #1 ranking for both singles and doubles. Talk about solid technique! Haven't made any time to hire her for some lesson work yet, but I'm definitely looking forward to it.
 
Last edited:

mightyrick

Legend
I agree with the OP, and have for 30 years. The men's game has been monster serves followed by big forehand putaways for decades, while the women actually play points. I know this view isn't popular with the macho master keyboarders here, but I it has worked really well for me.

The hacks on this board only dream they had anything even close to the game of someone like Sharapova, Lisicki, Williams, et cetera. These women would absolutely destroy anyone here with both their technique and their ability.

Even though I personally hit with a more ATP-style forehand, if people are looking for a style to mimic, I personally think the WTA-style would be better for the "everyman". Why? That style is more much efficient and easier to replicate. Also, for people with injuries or people who are overweight or people who aren't athletic titans... the style is safer. Also, the old-school forehand is much closer to the WTA-style than the ATP-style.

Most times, questions on here are answered presuming that the asker wants to be a 7.0. I really wish more realistic and constructive answers were given.
 

WildVolley

Legend
Let me posit a counter-example by discussing the 2hbh.

The ATP-style 2hbh has the arm behind the handle mostly straight at contact or in some cases both arms straight. The WTA-style has a bent-bent style (also conspicuously used by Ferrer).

Play with both and I think you'll find it easier to generate pace and spin by straightening out the arm and using someone like Djokovic as a model rather than say Serena. You have to slightly adjust distance to the ball, but that isn't a huge change.

Try it, you'll like it. ATP for the win and the club player.
 

syc23

Professional
If the OP thinks women and men are the same physically, I would worry if he is a doctor. Either that or he is blind.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
If the OP thinks women and men are the same physically, I would worry if he is a doctor. Either that or he is blind.

OP does not think women and men are the same physically. He is asking if weaker men should try to do what the stronger men do.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
There are far more doctors that treat the same things for men and women than doctors that treat the differences.

I think the OP thinks recreational hacks' techniques (an oxymoron) should extend to WTA area as well. I agree. Stupidity has no boundary.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Ha Ha....
Up until I was 35 years old, I was 5'11" and 132 lbs., up or down by 5, so closer to WTA size than ATP.... BUT....
I was strong upper body, surfing for over 20 years, and really skinny in the lower body, REALLY skinny in the legs, weak and little balance.
That is NOT the physique of most women who are that height and weight.
Yes, there might be differences besides just height and weight.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Also, male pros are generally a lot more precise and consistent with their stroke formation than females tour-wide. Their fitness and physique no doubt helps but they rely a lot on replicating their taught technique far more often so you know there's more of an element of trust that it has got to the point it has through trial and error.

Far too many WTA shots are hit and miss, an attempt at trial and error except failing to learn from the errors. Sharapova's serve would be a perfect example. Sure she can belt it like crazy, but she also is a double fault machine because she simply wont (or can't) be bothered (or doesn't care) to work out what works on her serve and where it goes wrong when it goes wrong.

There isn't a male pro in the top 100 that I recall who would let that sort of inconsistency with his serve stay like that. They may have their horror moments (Murray is know to at times) but they get back on track by going back to basics. IMO there's a lot more to be cribbed from the problem-solving approach the ATP has (more of) instead of the "that is good enough" theme you see way too often in the WTA.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
I do agree, but....
WTA mostly cares about groundies, while ATP places more stress and importance on serving.
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
If this were a Golf forum, I'd agree with the OP; learn to hit the ball straight (don't worry about driving distance - golf's serve speed!), then use your chipping and putting to score. You're not Dustin Johnson - you can't hit driver wedge on every par 4 and get on par 5's in two.

But to throw a net over all male amateur tennis players and say 'play like the WTA' (whatever that means - Samantha Stosur or Sara Errani? LOL!) - is ridiculous. Some of the males are much less coordinated than those ladies; other more.
 
the only reason i dont watch asmuch womens tennis as i do males is because of sharapova and azarenka if i watch them i have to have the tv muted.....

before the screamers came into existence i actually prefered watching the females play as it was a more controlled game.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Still, physiological differences between most mean and most women.
Most girls have better lower body strength, and less upper body strength.
Most girls, not all, have better lower body balance.
Feet size is usually, not always, bigger in men per body height.
Mental outlook is different between men and women.
Explosiveness favors men.
Endurance favors women. Generally.
 

hawk eye

Hall of Fame
Nietzsche was right with his notion of eternal recurrence. It never has become so clear as on this forum.

No need to force the issue here. Nietzsche knew his stuff. It's happening like he said. Like there are weak era's and strong era's and in the strong era's the uebermensch appears. Like now we have Nadal and LeeD.
Nietzsche dominated in a weak era, an he knew that. But he also knew there were gonna be strong era's again.
BTW he had an insane allcourt game, including sic passing shots.
 
Top