Unmyth Of The Wrist Snap

L

larry10s

Hall of Fame
So there we have it, you've been right all along. There is a wrist snap, or a snap of the wrist, and it's done on purpose; it is real, it is added to the pronating arm and hand. Tennis is simple to understand, though it can be hard to do per your wants and desires. Temper those desires a bit, i.e. relax, and you'll surprise yourself by doing better than expected. http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/wrist_snap_evidence.html
 
gzhpcu this thread is for you. from revolutionary tennis. i think you will agree he is revolutionary and does not always agree with conventional wisdom. as an aside i did not read anything on hitting down on the ball or hitting the other side of it either but that has already been discussed in another thread.
 
This has been discussed to death in previous threads. While Mark P of Revolutionary Tennis brings up some interesting, thought-provoking ideas on his web site, I would not buy into everything that he has to say. Yandell and other experts have done research that indicates that some of what Mark says is off the mark (unintended pun).

For some players, "wrist snap" can be a misleading, even dangerous, terminology while, for others, it may elicit the proper response. I do not particularly like using the phrase "wrist snap" when teaching. Even with proper demonstration, some students will use an excessive amount of wrist flexion when instructed to "snap the wrist".
 
I wouldnt agree at all.....you can CLEARLY see in the high speed footage that there is NO wrist snap.......
 
Go ahead and try to forcibly add the wrist snap to your serve and not allow it to be a part of the natural kinetic chain and watch your serve suffer in consistency, your racquet face will be all over the place sometimes open, sometimes closed at contact,there are already a lot of variables involved in having a great serve and a conscious effort to wrist snap is not one of them, imo.
 
larry you might as well have posted a source from wikipedia. while i have read Mark's instructions and found them useful to an extent you have to read things off the internet with a grain of salt, and after a while his literature seems to be more propaganda and anti-establishment.

this topic is disputed a lot... answer will come in the distant future or maybe never.
 
A lot of mumbo jumbo without anything substantial to back up his claim.

What he is basically saying, is that one cosciously snaps their wrist from the laid back position to the neutral position. I wouldn't call that a wrist snap, and I would argue that at high speeds, if one is consciously doing the aforementioned, it would be impossible to purposely stop your wrist at the neutral position exactly at contact (as he states) with all the force being generated by the force of the swing.

He also contradicts himself, where he says at one point the "wrist snap" is responsible for racquet head speed, yet his precentages show it plays a small role.
 
In June we have an ATP challenger tournament here in Lugano which our tennis club is hosting. I intend asking the players what their view is, and will post the result of the survey.
 
i never type in caps but i think this is an important point:

MY COLLEGE CLASS TENNIS COACH TOLD ME TO SNAP MY WRIST ON SERVE, I FOLLOWED HIS INSTRUCTIONS FOR TWO WKS AND DEVELOPED WRIST TENDINITIS. WHEN I TOLD HIM WHAT HAPPENED, HE AVOIDED ME LIKE THE PLAGUE AS IF I WAS GOIN TO SUE HIM. MY WRIST HEALED AFTER 10 MONTHS BUT I STILL HEAR THE BONE POP.

wrist snapping should always be a result of the follow through motion of your swing, not isolated as a separate entity. like you're throwing a ball. if you try to snap it, it will literally snap off.
 
What I find hilarious is the author states the wrist snap is 'responsible for racquet speed".

Now, if this is true, one would be able to do the following:

Put their arm straight up in the air, lay the wrist back, and without moving any other part of the arm, snap the wrist forward only to contact, enabling to get 100??? mph serve.

However, I guarantee one would not be able to get more than 5-10 mph.
 
Lsmkenpo said:
Go ahead and try to forcibly add the wrist snap to your serve and not allow it to be a part of the natural kinetic chain and watch your serve suffer in consistency, your racquet face will be all over the place sometimes open, sometimes closed at contact,there are already a lot of variables involved in having a great serve and a conscious effort to wrist snap is not one of them, imo.
Click to expand...
There's the answer above; let it happen and don't force it....never 'force' anything.
 
Obviously, this will remain a controversial subject. However, every biomechanical study of the serve, points out the contribution of wrist flexion/ulnar deviation to overall speed.

This is about 30% of overall speed.

Here is an example:

http://neon.byu.edu/~seeleym/exsc365(seeley)/Term_project/tennis_example.pdf

IMHO, all that remains to be seen is whether or not the wrist movement involves a conscious willing of it, or occurs naturally. And iif willed, how you go about executing it. If you omit ulnar deviation to the movement, it will most probably result in injury.

So just experiment, and do what works for you, and is biomechanically healthy.
 
if john yandell or brian gordon have read some of these threads there opinion would be appreciated. in spite of all the above i do find revolutionary tennis revolutionary and usually anti conventional wisdom although his powers of presentation are strong. deep deep down inside its hard for me to give up yandells analysis that that the wrist motion is a result of what came before. if there is any concios snap it would analagous to you being propelled out a shute you hit the ground and start running at the speed your at then you try to run faster. some may conciously snap at the very end to try to get more "oomph". but it must be times correcly or i feel the effect would be detrimental. like serving "waiters style"
 
What I am beginning to think now, is that it is not the reaction (for example, pronation or flexion) which is conscious, but the action preceding it (for example, supination or extension).

If we want pronation on the forehand, it will occur naturally, if you set the shot up properly. But if you want strong pronation, you must consciously supinate at the bottom of the backswing.

Wrist flexion and ulnar deviation on the serve will also occur naturally (again assuming the correct setup to allow it), but if you want to accentuate it, then consciously stretch your wrist backwards.

It is all about the stretch-shorten cycle IMHO.
 
larry10s said:
if john yandell or brian gordon have read some of these threads there opinion would be appreciated. in spite of all the above i do find revolutionary tennis revolutionary and usually anti conventional wisdom although his powers of presentation are strong. deep deep down inside its hard for me to give up yandells analysis that that the wrist motion is a result of what came before. if there is any concios snap it would analagous to you being propelled out a shute you hit the ground and start running at the speed your at then you try to run faster. some may conciously snap at the very end to try to get more "oomph". but it must be times correcly or i feel the effect would be detrimental. like serving "waiters style"
Click to expand...

Both Yandell & Gordon have replied in other threads on this very subject:

tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=2898059
tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1201639
.
 
Oh god, not again... When I helped start this whole debate by writing the wrist snap was a myth in a Tennisplayer article like 4 years ago, what I meant was that the wrist does not "snap" forward past the neutral position at contact. That was the central point and I haven't seen a piece of video or other evidence that shows otherwise.

What I was trying to point out was that a lot of teaching pros were teaching "wrist snap" in the sense of the wrist breaking forward at contact. And they still are. There is a guy doing the exact drill right now on the tennis channel. The motion he demonstrates is the "wave bye bye" with the palm facing the net and coming directly forward and down.

My point was that this didn't happen in the actual serve, and tended to keep people from the rotational move with the arm and shoulder that is critical to the movement. You didn't see people bent on snaping pronating in the finish because it is difficult if not impossible to do both at once.

Now, there is no doubt that the wrist moves in the upward swing. And I never claimed it didn't. It goes from a laid back position at the racket drop up to netural and this happens as the hand, arm and racket are rotating into the hit as well.

At about the time the article came out I met Brian and he started writing for us and he convinced me that this wrist motion was bascially a passive motion, caused by the "motion dependent torque" of the hand and arm rotation. He says that in the first article he did for us. But as his work and others showed, this flex to netural contributed a big part of the racket head speed. No contradiction there, and I have always accepted that.

So that all made sense and I adopted his argument into mine. Subsequently Brian changed his view somewhat as his research led him to the conclusion that there was actual muscle contraction in the flex to the contact. He now thinks it's conscious and can be trained. Other students of biomechanics disagree and say that contraction is actually something that happens naturally, again as a result of other forces.

Personally I don't have the expertise to adjudicate that one, and furthermore don't think it's necessary. Where I have modified my own position is to say if you want to call that move a snap great. And if consciously flexing your wrist--or your belief that you are--helps your serve, great. My own experience and belief is different--that you want your wrist as loose as possible and that trying to snap will tighten things up and restrict your motion and racket speed. But different keys work differently for different people.

I just go back to the positions in the video. That's the bottom line for me. The upward swing on the serve is complex and happens so very quickly. But what the video shows is that the wrist remains in the neutral position at contact and post contact, well out into the pronation when the ball is long gone and any "break" forward is a consequence that happens in the followthrough if it happens at all. To me it's compelling that sometimes you see this in the finish and other times you don't.

So part of the problem can be semantics, or coaching cue related. But if anyone tells you to snap your wrist down and forward at contact, then that advice doesn't match what happens in a good serve at any level. We could film that tennis channel guy and see that it's probably true for his serve as well.
 
Last edited:
I get probably 30% better serves when I use the wrist snap.

But on ground strokes, I think it leads to inconsistency and over-hitting.
 
thanks john for responding. i trust your your comments more than 95% of the posters here who think they are "experts" but only want to hear themselves talk. again thank you. every one should subscribe to tennisplayer.net if you want to learn.
 
Since this subject seems to have a life of its own and my work is often quoted (for better or worse) I’ll attempt to clarify my position (once and for all) for those who give a rat’s *ss (if you don’t – stop now!):

1) Some of my early work on the serve looked at the contribution of various joint rotations to racquet head speed – one conclusion was that both ulnar deviation and wrist flexion were important contributors – ulnar deviation in the mid portion of the upward swing and flexion near contact – as John stated, some of these peer reviewed published findings confirmed findings by other scientists.

2) Contribution does not imply cause and effect – in other words HOW the wrist motion was generated from a kinetic perspective was not investigated in this study.

3) The joint motion can be CAUSED by shortening muscle-tendon complexes spanning the joint, or by forces placed on the end of one segment (the hand/racquet) as a result of motion of another segment (the forearm). The former being referred to as a “joint torque” and the latter being referred to as a “motion dependent torque”. I say or, but most often joint motion is a complex interaction between the two sources.

4) In writings on John’s site rehashing my joint contribution research (those referenced in part by Mark P.) I speculated that it was perfectly plausible that wrist flexion could result from motion dependent torque – indeed it is perfectly plausible, and seems to be a position taken by many in tennis including on this board – understandably so.

5) In making the afore mentioned speculation, I noted more research would need to be conducted to determine the kinetic cause of the wrist motion. In subsequent work using 3D analysis tools and techniques I have found that the late flexion component is caused by shortening muscle-tendon complexes in all players I’ve analyzed. In other words it is caused by joint torque.

6) This is in agreement with all peer reviewed 3D biomechanical work I have seen. An exception is a magazine article by a physicist that seems more a theoretical exercise (not directly measuring the forces and torques involved in 3D) – and again, in theory it is perfectly plausible the late wrist motion is NOT caused by muscle/tendon shortening.

7) That I say the flexion is caused by shortening of the muscle-tendon complexes should not be construed to mean it is necessarily consciously controlled by the brain. The shortening of these complexes can be caused by at least:
a. Contraction of muscle due to commands from conscious brain centers.
b. Contraction of muscle from spinal reflex loops.
c. Contraction of muscle from proprioceptive supra-spinal loops.
d. Elastic return from tendon or muscle constituents.

8- The fact is that while non-invasive 3D analysis techniques can (relatively) easily distinguish between, and calculate, joint torque and motion dependent torque, they cannot definitively distinguish between the individual sources of joint torque derived from muscle-tendon shortening. My assertion that it is primarily (a) is based on other quantifiable and related evidence such as the implications of the intermediate ulnar deviation between wrist extension and flexion, and other evidence beyond the scope of this posting, that would preclude (b), (c), and (d) from playing a major role.

9) I am not an advocate of the term “wrist snap” – I don’t use the term – it is far too simplistic. I, like John, don’t really care which kinetic source causes the wrist joint motion – but I simply desire to know the appropriate answer as a guide to teaching my players. Based on what I do know, I’ll continue to have my players train to be able to generate contractile force at higher contraction velocities (shift the force-velocity curve) while building the mechanical prerequisites to derive any possible benefit from the other potential sources.

10) Finally, I will continue my search for ALL the answers. Because I consider myself a coach and player first, and researcher second, I will provide the results of my work to any of John’s readers who can stomach them. This I try to do without bias such that those so inclined can use my findings to draw their OWN conclusions.
 
JohnYandell said:
But if anyone tells you to snap your wrist down and forward at contact, then that advice doesn't match what happens in a good serve at any level. We could film that tennis channel guy and see that it's probably true for his serve as well.
Click to expand...
An early researcher, Stanley Plagenhoef, pointed this out almost 40 years ago, in his classical book Fundamentals of Tennis. He said that extreme hand flexion "does not occur when serving, but occurs on an overhead smash when the lob is struck well behind the head".

Thanks to both John and Brian for clarifying their positions, as they are the most credible sources out there IMHO.
 
Last edited:
gzhpcu said:
If we want pronation on the forehand, it will occur naturally, if you set the shot up properly. But if you want strong pronation, you must consciously supinate at the bottom of the backswing.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I don't believe that you can consciously achieve the maximum amount of supination, racquet drop, whatever. I think you need to let the arm be totally loose and allow it to lag.

When I look at the high speed video of my serves, my maximum racquet drop is past the bottom of my shorts, almost to my knee. Standing here im my office racquet in hand, just trying to put it in the drop position, I am lucky to get it below my waist.

J
 
J011yroger said:
I disagree. I don't believe that you can consciously achieve the maximum amount of supination, racquet drop, whatever. I think you need to let the arm be totally loose and allow it to lag.

When I look at the high speed video of my serves, my maximum racquet drop is past the bottom of my shorts, almost to my knee. Standing here im my office racquet in hand, just trying to put it in the drop position, I am lucky to get it below my waist.

J
Click to expand...
I agree with most of what you say. Not totally sure yet about the supination, however. Supination does not determine the extent of the racket drop. It has to do with increasing the distance between the racket head and the body during the racket drop. It is not a forcing of the racket down, this occurs naturally. You might be right, however.
 
With the passive supination I was thinking more of the FH where you pull the racquet out of the loop.

In my observation, bad things happen when you start thinking about the wrist or racquet during a FH.

J
 
J011yroger said:
With the passive supination I was thinking more of the FH where you pull the racquet out of the loop.

In my observation, bad things happen when you start thinking about the wrist or racquet during a FH.

J
Click to expand...
I agree you must not think when executing a shot. The thinking part is creating a mental image and thinking about doing it, prior to doing it, not while you are doing it.
 
want to reemphasize the thanks to john and brian for contributing their thoughts and findings on the subject. clarification based on science is the way to properly understand. thanks again john and brian
 
What I was trying to point out was that a lot of teaching pros were teaching "wrist snap" in the sense of the wrist breaking forward at contact. And they still are. There is a guy doing the exact drill right now on the tennis channel. The motion he demonstrates is the "wave bye bye" with the palm facing the net and coming directly forward and down.
Click to expand...

So you don't agree with the tennis channel guy? I had wanted to ask about this..
 
Uh, no. I think that is pretty clear in the post above...That exercise might strengthen your wrist and like I said some people really seem to respond to that cue, or believe they do. But that's not what actually happens.
 
Steady Eddy said:
What's 30% better? Does it mean that if you get 40% in, 30% better means 70% in? Or are they 30% faster?
Click to expand...

It *feels* 30% faster (I know it probably isn't really), if not more. But it also goes in a much higher percentage of the time (let's say 70% instead of 30%), because the wrist snap helps to bring the ball into the court (according to Tennis Channel...).

My first serve is better now than it's ever been since I started snapping the wrist.
 
Nanshiki said:
It *feels* 30% faster (I know it probably isn't really), if not more. But it also goes in a much higher percentage of the time (let's say 70% instead of 30%), because the wrist snap helps to bring the ball into the court (according to Tennis Channel...).

My first serve is better now than it's ever been since I started snapping the wrist.
Click to expand...


video please.

Thanks in advance.
 
i can say that the wrist provides some power but not as much as you are suggesting, definitly not a "snap" as you would call it, and you cant just hit a static serve using only your wrist "snap", you need to build momentum with your legs, body, arm, etc so i dont see any prof here
 
My .02,

Jolly makes a strong comment when he says, "the arm is loose & allowed to lag". Thats the key to pronation and wrist snap! Good pronation/wrist snap is the following result of proper mechanics.

Lag or extent of racket drop is the SAME thing as lag in a golf swing. Abo****ely the same thing. You cannot focus on that specifically, you have to have the mechanics ahead of that motion in order for the lag or drop to work FOR you as opposed to against you.

I would say that anyone here that confesses that they are manipulating the "snap" in their serve, they are leaving something on the table in the form of racket head speed. I believe that the "snap" or breakover of the racket from full extension is a result of upward forces. If you try manipulation this with the hand, this is all fine and good, but it costs you racket head speed you otherwise could create with better mechanics.

All in all this is really a simple thing caused by some complex motion.
 
This photo of Roddick after impact, looks like wrist movement to me:

ulnardeviation.jpg
 
No Wrist Snap

Roddick's hand and arm are working as a unit, there is n o "bend in the wrist there. I disagree strongly with the Tennis Channel guy. The key to the serve is hitting up, addressing the ball with the outer edge of the frame, opening the racket face at the last possible instant and coming across the ball from left to right (for a right-hander). That is what you see in the Roddick photo. For more kick toss the ball more to the left and come across even more. In the video and the Roddick photo note how the back of the right hand turns inward, toward the server's ear - this is the essence of pronation (inward rotation). Too bad we don't se the entire serve motion in that clip. If you want details and drills on this, PM me and I'll provide sources for more data.
 
Roddick's serve is somewhat unconventional, so I don't think it's really a worthwhile comparison to what we should be doing.

I find the extra power (from more racquet head speed) and downwards hitting is a huge benefit, personally. But when I 'snap' the wrist it's not to say it's bent at a 90 degree angle when I finish, it's a slight movement that helps the racquet get to speed.
 
gzhpcu said:
This photo of Roddick after impact, looks like wrist movement to me:
Click to expand...

Yes, there is wrist movement but no evidence that he flexes is past neutral. We can see that he has pronated the wrist (the forearm, actually). Assuming that his wrist was laid back as his racket head come out of the racket drop, he has employed some moderate amount of flexion (& ulnar deviation) to get it to a nearly neutral position during & after contact. His wrist does not appear to be in a state of flexion after contact (in this photo).
 
One of the key points is that if the wrist moves past neutral, which it sometimes does, but not always, that happens way after contact.

Roddick's wind up and power position are different. The elements in his unward swing--extension at elbow and hand and arm rotation are the same. In general if you look at a few dozen Roddick serves in slo-mo you really see the arm and racket rotating through contact with the wrist neutral well out into the followthrough.
 
Last edited:
Nanshiki said:
Roddick's serve is somewhat unconventional, so I don't think it's really a worthwhile comparison to what we should be doing.

I find the extra power (from more racquet head speed) and downwards hitting is a huge benefit, personally. But when I 'snap' the wrist it's not to say it's bent at a 90 degree angle when I finish, it's a slight movement that helps the racquet get to speed.
Click to expand...

Unconventional by what, it is one of the best on tour if not the best, the motion is very simple and very easy to reproduce.


And, Roddick can definitly do the same motion with a cast on his wrist
 
Last edited:
JohnYandell said:
In general if you look at a few dozen Roddick serves in slo-mo you really see the arm and racket rotating through contact with the wrist neutral well out into the followthrough.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with your interpretation of the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91IxRV4RDt8). The way I see the video, flexion begins almost immediately after contact. Look at the first two serves, especially (I think the first is a flat and the second is kick).

I also think it's wrong to say that the flexion happens "way after contact" when you consider the speed of Roddick's motion in real time.
 
Nanshiki said:
Roddick's serve is somewhat unconventional, so I don't think it's really a worthwhile comparison to what we should be doing.

I find the extra power (from more racquet head speed) and downwards hitting is a huge benefit, personally. But when I 'snap' the wrist it's not to say it's bent at a 90 degree angle when I finish, it's a slight movement that helps the racquet get to speed.
Click to expand...

You are not getting extra speed snapping your wrist you are compensating for a flaw in your motion and toss, your racquet face is probably too open at contact without the wrist snap forward, you are simply using your wrist movement to compensate for the flaw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Wrist snap (flexion-extension) on serve
Replies
37
Views
6K
vectorthurm
vectorthurm
bkpr
  • Locked
Wrist snap question
2 3 4
Replies
168
Views
43K
Cheetah
Cheetah
gzhpcu
Pronation versus "wrist snap"...
2 3 4
Replies
197
Views
40K
Manhattan
M
thebuffman
  • Poll Poll
Poll: The Wrist Snap; autonomic or deliberate
2 3 4
Replies
159
Views
21K
Bagumbawalla
B
T
Tennis Serve Wrist Snap: Harmful Myth?!?!
2 3
Replies
111
Views
32K
bitcoinoperated
bitcoinoperated
Back
Top