Unmyth Of The Wrist Snap
- Thread starter larry10s
- Start date
You're so full of it I won't even bother pointing out the holes in your argument.
No it isn't. It's easy to MIMIC the serve but it's nigh-impossible to have the same effectiveness if you try to use that motion.
gzhpcu
Professional
Of course flexion on the serve is not so extreme, because just prior to flexion, you have ulnar deviation. Just try the following:
first: stretch and then flex your wrist
second: stretch, ulnar deviate and then flex your wrist.
Compare and you will see that ulnar deviation inhibits extreme flexion.
first: stretch and then flex your wrist
second: stretch, ulnar deviate and then flex your wrist.
Compare and you will see that ulnar deviation inhibits extreme flexion.
Lsmkenpo
Hall of Fame
You already stated that you were serving long around 70% of the time without the wrist snap. How do you think wrist flexion brings the ball into the court? A proper motion and toss location needs no wrist snap to bring the ball into the court. Like others have asked post a video to prove me wrong and I will gladly eat my words.
M J
Rookie
I already did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91IxRV4RDt8
I don't know how it works, but Roddick has a decent serve, and the flexion is definitely there.
Lsmkenpo
Hall of Fame
Pic 1 from your video
Pic 2
No you are wrong you dont understand that he is pronating his forearm from picture 1 to picture 2 not flexing his wrist, hold a racquet above your head in the same position as pic 1 now pronate your forearm and you are at the position in pic 2, there is no wrist flexion involved, prior to or at contact with the ball. His elbow has turned 90 degrees from pic 1 to pic 2.
Last edited:
M J
Rookie
Pic 1 from your video
Pic 2
No you are wrong you dont understand that he is pronating his forearm from picture 1 to picture 2 not flexing his wrist, hold a racquet above your head in the same position as pic 1 now pronate your forearm and you are at the position in pic 2, there is no wrist flexion involved, prior to or at contact with the ball. His elbow has turned 90 degrees from pic 1 to pic 2.
I know what pronation is. I'm not saying there is no pronation, I'm saying there is both pronation and flexion.
Your pictures prove it. In the first picture the racquet face is perpendicular to the ground. In the second, the face of the racquet is pointing more toward the ground. If there was no flexion, the racquet face should still be perpendicular with the ground at that point (just facing the opposite direction).
There is just no way you could hold the racquet in a continental grip and point the face toward the ground from that position with your wrist laid back. Especially when the tip of the racquet is still slightly pointed up.
Last edited:
Lsmkenpo
Hall of Fame
Sure you can hold it above your head in that position and pronate the forearm the racquet magically moves from position 1 to 2 without wrist flexion. Notice the change in his elbow position clearly this is pronation not wrist flexion. My point is he is not making a conscious effort to flex his wrist the wrist changes location as a result of the pronation naturally not a conscious wrist snapping motion.
Last edited:
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
Hey fellas. . . I am game for an experiment.
I have a wrist splint that totally imobilizes my wrist that I wore to bed at night when it was hurt a couple years ago.
About how fast would you folks that advocate snapping the wrist guess that I could serve with it on?
What if I hit 10 serves with it, and 10 without it, do you think you could tell the difference if I put up the video?
J
I have a wrist splint that totally imobilizes my wrist that I wore to bed at night when it was hurt a couple years ago.
About how fast would you folks that advocate snapping the wrist guess that I could serve with it on?
What if I hit 10 serves with it, and 10 without it, do you think you could tell the difference if I put up the video?
J
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
M J
Rookie
Great idea. It depends on how much wrist you normally use, but if you usually have a big serve, I bet there will be a noticable difference. And I bet you'll start hitting it long.
M J
Rookie
I think we all agree that Roddick pronates when he serves. I'm saying there is also some flexion. There is no other way for the racquet face to be pointed down while the tip is pointed up with a continental grip. I have no way of knowing whether or not it's conscious or ever was, but it's there.
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
Here is a short vid of one of my flatter deliveries.
http://vimeo.com/3793468
If you are looking for something else lemme know, I am sure I have vid of it somewhere.
J
BrianGordon
New User
I like the thinking!!! - Problem is the splint is designed to replace the muscle in producing joint torque - it produces the torque so the muscle-tendon does not have to - even if only maintain neutral position - hence healing. Still, I'll play if you immobilize the wrist in its most extended position at the end of your backswing - roughly 80 degrees hyperextended - of course this still won't answer the fundamental question of if and/or how muscle produces wrist motion - but... if you use a nerve block on the wrist flexor muscle groups the question will be answered - I'll be glad to help with this experiment.
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't think I could make contact with the ball with it immobilized at its most hyperextended position.
What if it was locked up solid at the neutral position where I make contact?
J
M J
Rookie
I would say that's big enough to make you a good subject for this experiment.
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
Brian dunno if you can help by picking a frame out of these shot at 210FPS for me to try to replicate.
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
If there are any other shots you want lemme know and I'll try to find them.
J
One of my serves pics taken from 210fps high speed.
It is a 2nd serve kicker, but that doesn't really matter for this.
J
J
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
BrianGordon
New User
If you immobilize in neutral the wrist will be contributing isometrically - since the forearm to racquet orientation is roughly in contact configuration you should be able to hit with a relatively normal arm contact configuration but with (guessing) about 20% less racquet speed - my guess is you could make that up by compensating with another joint - probably the shoulder - probably not a great idea to do a lot of those. Of the pictures you posted, last of the backswing - mid lateral sweep transitioning to the upward swing - where the racquet is roughly perpendicular to the forearm would be the test
immobilization - I agree you would have tough time contacting the ball - which indicates some wrist joint motion is required - again the fundamental question many wonder about is how that motion is made to occur - I can get the nerve block and needles!!! - kidding.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
Not a bad idea, but it would only be fair to do the following as well:
Place your arm completely extended over your head. from there lay back your wrist. Toss the ball, and only snapping your wrist forward past neutral (no other arm movement), see how fast you could serve.
I believe you said once you have a speed trac???
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
But. . . ummmm. . . the ball wouldn't go anywhere if I didn't pronate my forearm.
All I would be doing was changing the angle of the racquet face relative to the ground.
If all I used was flexion.
J
JohnYandell
Hall of Fame
Here's a small gift from Tennisplayer: a Roddick serve in high speed video that you can look at frame by frame:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick_v1/index.html
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick_v1/index.html
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
OK, so you want me to immobilize my wrist in this position. (I am holding the racquet in my left hand because it is easier to take pics using my right on the camera)
I think I could serve like that.
J
BrianGordon
New User
J-
Actually I’d rather you did not immobilize in any position because, while potentially entertaining, it would not add anything to the discussion and mostly because if you try to generate normal racquet speed with restraint or isolation you open yourself up to a useless injury.
The reason nothing is added to the discussion is because tests of this type are only valid if ALL other variables stay the same – it would require much more than a video to show that all else is the same.
One might say that racquet velocity is the only variable that needs to be controlled – assuming even that could be measured, the body is very savvy – give the body that single goal, and it will compensate in multiple ways to succeed – but then comparisons to your real motion are not possible anymore – the comparison becomes “apples to oranges”.
In reality, even something as draconian as a nerve block suffers the same problems – the real reason I responded was because I can appreciate the “out of the box” thinking your experiment demonstrated - Brian
Last edited:
BRIAN from your prior post 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. ............... brian can you describe what drills or exercises you use to train your players to acheive a shift in their force velocity curve?
gzhpcu
Professional
I would just like to point out this article from the usta (see page 10) entitled: Wrist Management: on prevention of wrist injuries in tennis players.
http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_437_38.pdf
http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_437_38.pdf
BrianGordon
New User
Larry-
Happy to beat it around on stroke mechanics from time to time - but for several reasons I'd prefer to pass on specific intervention discussions - on your question there is a lot of information available - try the NSCA - BG
T
tennis angel
Guest
Pic 1 from your video
Pic 2
No you are wrong you dont understand that he is pronating his forearm from picture 1 to picture 2 not flexing his wrist, hold a racquet above your head in the same position as pic 1 now pronate your forearm and you are at the position in pic 2, there is no wrist flexion involved, prior to or at contact with the ball. His elbow has turned 90 degrees from pic 1 to pic 2.
This is correct. If you want more data on how this works PM me and I'll give you some links.
T
tennis angel
Guest
Just because the USTA published it doesn't make it true. For example in the article you point to above is the following statement:
"Players are hitting more powerful shots than they were five years ago. This places the body, particularly the hip and shoulder, under much greater stress.” Additionally, more players are hitting with an open-stance forehand. This is another factor that can contribute to injury since
this style of tennis subjects the rear hip to much larger forces as
the player generates the force and power to swing the racquet." THIS IS UNTRUE. OPEN STANCE DOES NOT CAUSE INJURY TO THE HIP. IN TRUTH, CLOSED STANCE CAUSES INJURY TO THE HIPS AND KNEES. Open stance relieves stress on the hips and knees.
JohnYandell
Hall of Fame
I'm hurt nobody commented on this piece of video!
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick_v1/index.html
But seriously, here is a high speed Roddick clip that shows how the racket stays netural right on out into the followthrough. No doubt there is "flexion" in the upward swing, and in this case it might actually still be going on at the contact.
My point is that if you want to call that wrist snap go for it. BUT look a few frames after contact and see how the wrist is perfectly in line with the arm. Most of the motion is the continuation of the left to right racket and arm rotation.
The "wave bye bye" thing or maybe we should call it "wrist break" rather than snap--that's the part that's not happening and why the demonstrations like those on the Tennis Channel one minute tip may be counterproductive.
http://www.tennisplayer.net/public/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick_v1/index.html
But seriously, here is a high speed Roddick clip that shows how the racket stays netural right on out into the followthrough. No doubt there is "flexion" in the upward swing, and in this case it might actually still be going on at the contact.
My point is that if you want to call that wrist snap go for it. BUT look a few frames after contact and see how the wrist is perfectly in line with the arm. Most of the motion is the continuation of the left to right racket and arm rotation.
The "wave bye bye" thing or maybe we should call it "wrist break" rather than snap--that's the part that's not happening and why the demonstrations like those on the Tennis Channel one minute tip may be counterproductive.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
The USTA does a lot of homework on these types of publications. I would not dismiss what they have to say out of hand. I've seen other credible sources that indicate that excessive use of an extreme open stance (versus a semi-open) can result in injury to the right hip and right shoulder for right-handed players. Kuerten & Hewitt are prime examples of pros who have suffered hip problems from the excessive use of the open stance FH.
Try a search, in these forums. I've posted 2 or 3 such sources on this.
First off, good video.
Second, people who believe there's a "bye bye" / "wrist break" motion, what purpose do you contend it would it serve?
Look at the frame in JY's video where Roddick is making contact. Because of the angle of the racket to his forearm even if he completely bend his wrist back and snapped it forward it would only serve to change the angle of the racket face and change the direction of the ball.
John, the wrist is definitely flexing until contact, as evidenced by the changing angle between the racquet and the forearm. Could it be that the reverse forces generated upon contact with the ball slows down the flexion so much that it appears to have stopped flexing? Also, as gzhpcu pointed out, an ulnar deviated wrist cannot flex forward as much as a non-deviated wrist, which may be another reason why it appears to have stopped flexing after contact.
In any case, my belief is that the wrist is playing a very active role, although not consciously so. When the brain is striving to produce the maximum racquet head speed within the consciously determined parameters - such as the grip, the basic serve motion, and the contact zone, among others - I believe all the elements of the kinetic chain that can contribute will do so, including the wrist, which results in the effects we see. It is not surprising to me that the motion is more explicit on some occasions, and very subtle at other times, since every shot is different.
M J
Rookie
That's an excellent shot of Roddick's serve. I'm not sure whether it's the particular serve or the angle, but it looks less wristy than the serves in the youtube video.
At least based on that shot, I admit that it would be an exaggeration to say that there is a “ton” of flexion. The wrist is moving from extension toward flexion during contact, but based on that clip and your comments, I think that particular movement may be less extreme than I had thought.
The thing that really strikes me now is the speed of the movement from radial deviation toward ulnar deviation during contact, even for flat serves. There seems to be a group of players and coaches who say that they feel a “wrist snap” on the serve, and when they feel it the ball is more likely to go in; could this “wrist snap” they claim to feel (but cannot articulately describe) be that quick movement toward ulnar deviation? The movement obviously adds topspin to the serve, which would explain the perception of the “snap” pulling the ball “down into the court.”
M J
Rookie
I don't really understand the question. There's movement toward ulnar deviation. When hitting a serve, I guess you say that's up and toward the deuce court.
I didn't say it went long 70% of the time, I only said that it sometimes didn't go in (when being hit at full power) that often. But it's a gross estimate that might be way off.
I admit the part about bringing it into the court may be some sort of tennis voodoo, but it seems to help in my case. Keep in mind, when I say 'wrist snap' I mean putting a slight effort into my wrist rather than leaving it limp or perfectly stiff. Combined with good racquet speed, it seemed to give me a boost of power without sacrificing accuracy.
T
tennis angel
Guest
This is incorrect. Kuerten did not suffer hip problems from the excessive use of the open stance FH. I did not say dismiss the USTA out of hand. I said just because the USTA publishes something does not make it true.
Similar threads
