Can someone explain exactly WHY watching the ball all the way through the point of contact is actually helpful? I know Federer does it, but most other pros I've seen pictures of don't look like they're watching the ball all the way to their racquet.
I guess to make a comparison, hockey players and soccer players don't look at their sticks, feet, ball, or puck when they're playing. They look to the TARGET when they are shooting.
Dart players don't look at their hands or the dart, they look at the board.
Basketball players look at the hoop. I suppose when they're receiving the pass, they look at the ball, but they're trying to catch it, not hit it.
Baseball is the only sport where I can think it's advantageous to watch the ball all the way to contact. But that's different than tennis, because you're not actually aiming at a spot on a court -- you're just trying to make good contact and hit through the ball as hard as possible (usually) in a somewhat upward/horizontal direction.
But with tennis, it would seem that the best compromise is to watch the ball until it gets within your "strike zone", then shift your focus to the court, so that you can get a sense for where you stand in relation to the net and the target.
Anyways, that's how it seems to me. I have never really tried to focus my eyes completely on the ball as it hits the strings, but I think I typically just get a "sense" for where the ball is, then shift my attention to my court positioning and distance to the target. I guess I never really FOCUS on the target, but I definitely don't watch the ball hitting my strings, either.
I've tried focusing on the ball until it hits the strings, but I never really noticed much of an advantage. It actually felt a little wierd, not being able to "sense" the court, with so much attention on the ball. But I must admit that the ball generally went over the net and went where I wanted it to.
But heck, if it's good enough for Federer, it must be good enough for us, right?
