Which gives more power when you've time to set up, the open or the nuetral? According to Vic Braden the linear momentum contributes to ''just'' 6mph... (bear with me please ) http://www.vicbraden.com/vics1.html#step Which I think is quite a lot, we aren't told how fast each forehand is, but just to get an idea of the difference imagine if time henman's top serve jumped from 133mph to 139mph. I think that would be very noticable, and he must know this, so why is knocking the nuetral stance? This website... http://coachesinfo.com/category/tennis/184/ (^^very intersting, well worth a look) Goes into a biomechanical analysis of both stances It finds that their is an increase in angular momentum peaking at the momet of impact with the nuetral stance ,(as opposed to the open stance which slows down before impact), and there is the added benefit of linear momentum with the nuetral stance,(that six mph).Overall a more powerful, higher velocity,(which means greater spin potential) stroke. It also states that the closed stance is significantly more accurate. Also, I find myself wondering if those giant leaps into the air by pros while using open stances are just the body trying desperately to move it's weight forward through the ball and get some linear momentum and/or an attempt not to fall to their left as all that left over angular momentum has to go somewhere, and without the left leg in front to absorb it and add to the linear momentum, (a possible increase to Braden's mph?) they would go careering to their left if their feet hadn't left the ground) As all running forehands must be hit with a closed stance to prevent falling over, what is the benefit of the open stance? This isn't a manifesto btw, this is a genuine question, I'd be very grateful if the people who really know what they're talking about,(no offence to anyone, I wouldn't include myself in that group), could explain this to me.