What do you think about Inertial Tennis

[Smecz]

Hey Guys

On the internet you can find this site called inertialtennis.com
The author presents theory inertial tennis:

,,In the history of tennis, inertial tennis is the first complete, internally coherent set of techniques of movement and strokes, created from scratch on solid scientific foundations. Each element of inertial techniques has been designed for the most optimal use of the fundamental properties of physical reality within the biomechanical framework of the human body. The core of the inertial techniques is embedded in the inertia (both physical and biomechanical in nature)1.''

Main Facts

1.
Inertial tennis is the first internally coherent set of tennis techniques of strokes and movement, created around a theoretical structure embedded in the verified scientific knowledge. Each element of inertial tennis can be scientifically tested.

2.
Inertial tennis is a technically complete structure: it consists of well-defined types of strokes combined into groups (forehands, backhands, volleys, overheads and serves). Movement techniques are efficient and deeply integrated with the strokes

3.
Inertial strokes use the same physical principles that are critical for the uniqueness of Roger Federer forehands.


4.
Inertial strokes are powerful but effortless, the risk of injuries seems to be very low. Timings and flexibility are more important than athletic power.

5.
Inertial tennis is a generalization of typical tennis. In critical situations inertial techniques give you place and time to reduce your technique into a non-inertial version.

6.
It's easy to learn elements of inertial techniques. Total transformation is harder and should take 3-4 years. Due to the coherence of techniques, the longer you practice, the faster progress you see.

7.
Inertial tennis should be tested in scientific experiments. There are no teaching programmes, no dedicated athletic workouts etc. Help to create them!.

8.
Building a creative community is a hard task. If you want to help, please contact the administrator.

9.
The full description of inertial tennis will be presented in the book "Inertial Tennis: The Sources of Internal Power". The book will probably be published as a crowdfunded project, and should be available at the beginning of 2020.

10.
Inertial tennis is an open source project. Everyone can use it, verify it, extend it, and even make money using it - as long as the knowledge behind his/her work is available for other people.

	MODERN TENNIS	INERTIAL TENNIS
BASIC PHYSICAL PHENOMENA	mass, velocity	inertia, accelerations, conservation laws
BIOMECHANICAL STRUCTURE	straight kinematic chain	branched kinematic chains
TOTAL NUMBER OF JOINTS	x (depends on technique)	x + 1, varies in time
ENERGY PRODUCTION	as much as you can	as much as is needed (but no more!)
ENERGY LOSSES	who cares?	reduced to minimum
MAIN POWER SOURCE	muscles	concentration of energy in space and time
COHERENT THEORETICAL CORE	does not exist	unified theory of all strokes & movement
TYPES OF TECHNIQUES	specific for any stroke	universal

PROS & CONS OF INERTIAL TENNIS
	Simplicity and aesthetics	Optimal timing close to human neurological limits
	Powerful and effortless strokes	Certain percentage of mishits is physically irremovable
	Smart physics and biomechanics	Significant changes in timing of strokes and movement
	Effective masking of intentions	Counterintuitive direction of strokes initiation
	Well-defined types of strokes	Relatively slow global progress in learning at early stages
	Time and place for corrections	No coaches (yet)
	Coherent theoretical core for all strokes (no myths!)	Lack of easily accessible sources of knowledge (yet)
	Deep integration of strokes and movement	Not falsified by a vast community of players and coaches (yet)
	Efficient footwork
	Low risk of serious injuries
	Flexibility more important than athletic power
	Some technical elements easy to learn at early stages
	Rapid progress in learning at advanced stages

what do you think about inertial tennis, is it worth it or is it worth implementing it into your tennis?! or not?!

Is it better to stick with modern tennis?!

I invite you to the discussion


The Source:
All information and knowledge about inertial tennis comes from www.inertialtennis.com

 

[The Aceserver]

Lot of mishits in the “promo”, and his backhand looks a little weird. These are my favorite though showing himself and Federer side-by-side. Assuming he’s charging a fee to “unlock the secrets”; just save your money.

 

[Dragy]

He has been posting on here, and we discussed a lot. Were waiting for his book release, as he never actually disclosed any practical teaching. Got some harsh handling, of course, and couldn’t deal with it, so left the building.

We generally came to some conclusions like:

- Revolution is doubtful. Since no one does this successfully on pro tour, neither he could prove any meaningful success or his students’ success, it’s unlikely to be real.

- Players are the teachers — that has been the story for tennis, all the time. Only best players actually invent and apply technical things, and best coaches can do — is find methods to teach newer improved stuff, or even more likely — set up conditions for talented individuals to adapt best things to be found among actual pros.

- Meanwhile, experimenting is key to innovation, so whoever already has strong fundamentals might find it useful to experiment with the guy’s ideas, and maybe develop something. Unluckily there’s nothing to learn and try

 

[10sbeast888]

Lot of mishits in the “promo”, and his backhand looks a little weird. These are my favorite though showing himself and Federer side-by-side. Assuming he’s charging a fee to “unlock the secrets”; just save your money.

bh is fine... looks weird because of the ESR tipping the head forward then he loops it into the ISR;
fh clearly lacks left side clearing;

coincidence is both features/flaws are in my bh/fh... perhaps the result of self-teaching.

 

[bitcoinoperated]

This reads like someone took a high school physics textbook and used it as a thesaurus

 

[Topspin Shot]

I think it's up there with the worst tennis instruction I've seen in my life.

 

[Smecz]

I see you are skeptical about inertial tennis.

I generally associate these strokes with the action of a spring/leverage using the forearm...

I like the inertial forehand, but the inertial backhand is very explosive...

The most worrying thing is not the power of the shots, big problem with their control, not to mention closing the swing.. ehh

 

[Dragy]

I see you are skeptical about inertial tennis.

I generally associate these strokes with the action of a spring/leverage using the forearm...

I like the inertial forehand, but the inertial backhand is very explosive...

The most worrying thing is not the power of the shots, big problem with their control, not to mention closing the swing.. ehh

Why you personally want to explore it? What benefits over conventional high-level technique do you see?

 

[Smecz]

Why you personally want to explore it? What benefits over conventional high-level technique do you see?

I don't want to explore this, I'm just curious if it works in practice...

I wonder how a hard-working forearm and a loose wrist can suffer here, how much this inertial tennis can be injury-prone to the forearm and wrist?!

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I don't want to explore this, I'm just curious if it works in practice...

I wonder how a hard-working forearm and a loose wrist can suffer here, how much this inertial tennis can be injury-prone to the forearm and wrist?!

Are you yet another physicist from Poland? Do you know Jarek Chrostowski, who posted as @jch here for a few months back in 2018? Are you @jch?

Jarek C was supposedly a journalist & scientific editor from Poland according to several sources. He is identified as a physicist only on the inertial tennis website as far as I can tell.

I don't recall @jch providing any really useful feedback / insight in his 100+ posts back in 2018. Tho he did provide quite a few insults to those who challenged his claims. Some of those claims of his sounded absurd.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

He has been posting on here, and we discussed a lot. Were waiting for his book release, as he never actually disclosed any practical teaching. Got some harsh handling, of course, and couldn’t deal with it, so left the building.

We generally came to some conclusions like:

- Revolution is doubtful. Since no one does this successfully on pro tour, neither he could prove any meaningful success or his students’ success, it’s unlikely to be real.

- Players are the teachers — that has been the story for tennis, all the time. Only best players actually invent and apply technical things, and best coaches can do — is find methods to teach newer improved stuff, or even more likely — set up conditions for talented individuals to adapt best things to be found among actual pros.

- Meanwhile, experimenting is key to innovation, so whoever already has strong fundamentals might find it useful to experiment with the guy’s ideas, and maybe develop something. Unluckily there’s nothing to learn and try

He had promised to generate his own thread on inertial tennis concepts back in 2018. Do you recall ever seeing such a thread? If it did exist, it was removed by the mods long ago.

But there are still some amusing exchanges between him and @Gregory Diamond, another Polish "physicist".

 

[ballmachineguy]

I don't recall @jch providing any really useful feedback / insight in his 100+ posts back in 2018. Tho he did provide quite a few insults to those who challenged his claims.

Well, this just sounds like the type of person we don’t want in this forum.

 

[matterer]

He arms his strokes at a 5.0 level which is more than I can say for any of you.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

He arms his strokes at a 5.0 level which is more than I can say for any of you.

His strokes might appear to be at something around a 5.0 ntrp level. “Arming his strokes” is rather an ironic statement since, according to his TT posts back in 2018, this is the opposite of what his inertial tennis was attempting to achieve.

 

[Dragy]

He had promised to generate his own thread on inertial tennis concepts back in 2018. Do you recall ever seeing such a thread? If it did exist, it was removed by the mods long ago.

But there are still some amusing exchanges between him and @Gregory Diamond, another Polish "physicist".

Well, there're obvious issues with those slappy strokes. One may learn to use them to a level, based on individual talent, but to be an actual "method" it should be much more adaptable and reliable.

I think modern players show how powerful one can go within the limitations of court geometry. Powerful and spinny equipment is of big help. No need to seek more wild slap. Need to hit solidly on the move, on the rise, high balls with control, low balls with lift and spin... I bet the inertial guy would struggle against typical spinny moonballs of modern juniors, just too much action on the ball to time the slaps.

(Not saying nobody else will struggle, they might be tough to play, but more conventional and fundamentally solid technique can adapt)

 

[Topspin Shot]

He arms his strokes at a 5.0 level which is more than I can say for any of you.

His video cuts out after almost every shot. For all we know he can't keep more than two balls in the court.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Well, there're obvious issues with those slappy strokes. One may learn to use them to a level, based on individual talent, but to be an actual "method" it should be much more adaptable and reliable.

I think modern players show how powerful one can go within the limitations of court geometry. Powerful and spinny equipment is of big help. No need to seek more wild slap. Need to hit solidly on the move, on the rise, high balls with control, low balls with lift and spin... I bet the inertial guy would struggle against typical spinny moonballs of modern juniors, just too much action on the ball to time the slaps.

(Not saying nobody else will struggle, they might be tough to play, but more conventional and fundamentally solid technique can adapt)

Sounds like you are responding to a different post rather than #11. Do you recall ever seeing a dedicated “inertial tennis” thread from @jch that he said he would post?

 

[TennisCJC]

There's not enough real tennis instruction in any of those quotes, or in the videos or on his web site. I would not invest a lot of time in inertia tennis based on what I've seen. Seems like a lot of grandiose claims with little substance. The backhand in the demonstration videos is way too wristy to appeal to me and not something I would recommend. The guy seems to have spent a lot of time modeling Federer's groundstrokes and based on side view they look pretty at times but not sure about how they actually work and as I said I doubt that backhand could hold up to a player at a competitive level pounding on it.

Can he provide an instruction video where he demonstrates his points and maybe provides real checkpoints or concepts on what are the critical points of good stroke production? I am not talking about a video with biomechanics concepts and mathematical formulas but an on court instruction video where he reduces "inertial tennis" to concepts that tennis players can understand and highlights the difference in his ideas and what he calls modern tennis.

Too much fluff and not enough substance for me.

 

[Dragy]

Sounds like you are responding to a different post rather than #11. Do you recall ever seeing a dedicated “inertial tennis” thread from @jch that he said he would post?

No, never seen one.

 

[Smecz]

Are you yet another physicist from Poland? Do you know Jarek Chrostowski, who posted as @jch here for a few months back in 2018? Are you @jch?

Jarek C was supposedly a journalist & scientific editor from Poland according to several sources. He is identified as a physicist only on the inertial tennis website as far as I can tell.

I don't recall @jch providing any really useful feedback / insight in his 100+ posts back in 2018. Tho he did provide quite a few insults to those who challenged his claims. Some of those claims of his sounded absurd.

I understand,
physicists have their own world, and it's not easy to understand them... heh

However, the problem is that he didn't deconstruct the instructional videos of his strokes, so that they could be better verified..

I found another video that is based half on the same thing he writes about, on the principle of the foream spring and etc...

If he lets the forearm fall to the ground and turn, we can also achieve an inertial state of impact, we lose control and gain power.

Let's add that when playing forearm, we can play more with an open stance, than when we use too much of our body, which causes us to be positioned sideways to the net.

Did you know that Carlos and Novak use a lot of open positions to hit the ball?! They do it so that after hitting the ball they are ready for the next action.!!

 

[Dragy]

Let's add that when playing forearm, we can play more with an open stance, than when we use too much of our body, which causes us to be positioned sideways to the net.

Did you know that Carlos and Novak use a lot of open positions to hit the ball?! They do it so that after hitting the ball they are ready for the next action.!!

Open stance doesn’t impede the use of the body.

 

[Smecz]

Open stance doesn’t impede the use of the body.

I mean using Reactive Brakes, which gives an open position and body positioning facing the net instead of sideways, which causes loss of time:

Djokovic and Alcaraz lock their body to not use too much of it, to be able to get back into the game quickly.!!

 

[Dragy]

I mean using Reactive Brakes, which gives an open position and body positioning facing the net instead of sideways, which causes loss of time:

Djokovic and Alcaraz lock their body to not use too much of it, to be able to get back into the game quickly.!!

Look at your gifs. They are approaching the ball with chest facing sideways, and by contact chest is facing the net. It’s full use of torso uncoil.

Reactive break is what exactly? I have never heard this term other than from that 2-min tennis guy who unfortunately isn’t educated in physics/biomechanics.

 

[Smecz]

Look at your gifs. They are approaching the ball with chest facing sideways, and by contact chest is facing the net. It’s full use of torso uncoil.

Reactive break is what exactly? I have never heard this term other than from that 2-min tennis guy who unfortunately isn’t educated in physics/biomechanics.

The source :
Reactive breakers

The Movement of the Big-3: Part III

Off backhands—sliding—running forehands

hughclarke.substack.com

The Movement of the Big-3: Part I

reactive brakes—scissor kicks—Jumpman

hughclarke.substack.com

I also never heard of reactive breakers until I read about them from Hugh Clark.

And I see it like reactive breakers can be used naturally in inertial tennis.

If I use too much of my body on the court, and I often stand sideways to the net, I can get counterattacks.!!

If I block my too big body turn at the right moment, I will be standing in front of my body... Do you understand?!

 

[Dragy]

I also never heard of reactive breakers until I read about them from Hugh Clark.

Because it seems to be a made-up term, and actually used differently by different people.

For your premise about using/not usinng body, I suggest actually using it more, developinng more athletic ways. Gymnastics teaches it. Martial arts teach it. Using counter-moves with your limbs is a way to do it. Requires stong core and good balance. But it's not "using less body", no way.

What you see in these running shots is using the "outer" leg to convert running momentum (kinetic energy) into body rotation. Using "scissor-kick" or "step-through" move with the other leg to facilitate upper body separate rotation (less energy needed than to rotate the whole body). Real deal. And work "reactive" is applicable here, I agree, nnot sure about "breakers".

But how this is related to forearms, I don't know. Whatever you do, you need to accelerate the racquet as whole. You need to accelerate your arm to achieve it. To consistently accelerate the arm to high-enough speeds - there's the torso rotation as best option. So in whatever situations and positions pro players get, they try to create properly timed torso rotation to power their swings. In closed stance, stepping in. In open stance, pivoting on one or both feets. With lateral movement like on those mogul-step forehands you attached. In jump with scissor-kick. Moving forward with front-foot hop technique. Loading on the front foot with "reverse-open" stance, and scissor-kicking again... Multiple ways to achive same thing: properly timed torso uncoil (after initially coiled/turned to have room and shape to produce desired move).

Now all that happens around wrist and forearm is delivery, not power production. In most shots, forearm resists and keeps wrist more extended than it wants to "snap", in order to get good and powerful delivery. Which is totally oposed to all forearm SSC and "spring" theories.

 

[Smecz]

Because it seems to be a made-up term, and actually used differently by different people.

For your premise about using/not usinng body, I suggest actually using it more, developinng more athletic ways. Gymnastics teaches it. Martial arts teach it. Using counter-moves with your limbs is a way to do it. Requires stong core and good balance. But it's not "using less body", no way.

What you see in these running shots is using the "outer" leg to convert running momentum (kinetic energy) into body rotation. Using "scissor-kick" or "step-through" move with the other leg to facilitate upper body separate rotation (less energy needed than to rotate the whole body). Real deal. And work "reactive" is applicable here, I agree, nnot sure about "breakers".

But how this is related to forearms, I don't know. Whatever you do, you need to accelerate the racquet as whole. You need to accelerate your arm to achieve it. To consistently accelerate the arm to high-enough speeds - there's the torso rotation as best option. So in whatever situations and positions pro players get, they try to create properly timed torso rotation to power their swings. In closed stance, stepping in. In open stance, pivoting on one or both feets. With lateral movement like on those mogul-step forehands you attached. In jump with scissor-kick. Moving forward with front-foot hop technique. Loading on the front foot with "reverse-open" stance, and scissor-kicking again... Multiple ways to achive same thing: properly timed torso uncoil (after initially coiled/turned to have room and shape to produce desired move).

Now all that happens around wrist and forearm is delivery, not power production. In most shots, forearm resists and keeps wrist more extended than it wants to "snap", in order to get good and powerful delivery. Which is totally oposed to all forearm SSC and "spring" theories.

A lot of agree with you, but in tennis often you meet two types of tennis:
Player uses only arm or player uses too much body to his shots.(especially in beginners)

Now and now inertial tennis comes to the rescue and takes a little bit from each, and creates a hybrid of them.

I wonder what the injury risk of such a player is, such a player must be very good in terms of flexibility and fitness.

Let's go back to using too much body in the game, if I, as a right-handed player, hit the forehand with too much body, and position myself with my right foot to the net, it is obvious that in such a case I lose time to the position of readiness to hit!!

 

[Dragy]

Let's go back to using too much body in the game, if I, as a right-handed player, hit the forehand with too much body, and position myself with my right foot to the net, it is obvious that in such a case I lose time to the position of readiness to hit!!

I don’t understand this. Do you have video example?

 

[Smecz]

I don’t understand this. Do you have video example?

Live you would know what I mean, and it's not easy to explain over the internet...

I'll try to upload a video this weekend.

But maybe I can explain, what I mean is that if you hit with too much body, the opponent can see part of your back (that's the rotation)

In such a situation you expose yourself to a counterattack, and you will have a problem because you won't have time to get ready to hit, etc...

 

[Dragy]

Live you would know what I mean, and it's not easy to explain over the internet...

I'll try to upload a video this weekend.

But maybe I can explain, what I mean is that if you hit with too much body, the opponent can see part of your back (that's the rotation)

In such a situation you expose yourself to a counterattack, and you will have a problem because you won't have time to get ready to hit, etc...

If you mean over-rotation… it might not be the real issue. Check this guy:

The recovery is just part of general athleticism, quality footwork and your intensity on court. Yes, sometimes they finish strokes in a way that allow them to recovery faster, but that’s when you have less than 3 seconds between your 2 consecutive shots, and they are also taken in different corners of the court… Now with rec players, and typically over 4-5 seconds between the shots, taken both from around the middle, you can spin around 3 times and still be ready to play. You don’t need some groundbreaking firearm theories to solve this, in my opinion.

But if you make a video, this will be more clear.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Let's add that when playing forearm, we can play more with an open stance, than when we use too much of our body, which causes us to be positioned sideways to the net.

Did you know that Carlos and Novak use a lot of open positions to hit the ball?! They do it so that after hitting the ball they are ready for the next action.!!

The “forearm” is a part of the body. I believe you mean “forehand” here.

The problem with an excessive use of the open stance Fh is that it is extremely punishing on the dominant hip (right hip for righties) — especially for amateur players. In the 90s and 00s, it ended or shortened the career of many pro players — like Gustavo Kuerten and numerous others. Lleyton Hewitt had more than one hip surgery during his career.

In the past 15 years or so, elite players have incorporated exercises and other measures to offset this extreme stress to hip. Many rec / amateur players make prolific use of the open stance Fh but, unfortunately, do not incorporate adequate exercises / countermeasures to minimize damage to the hip. As a result, many will eventually develop serious hip issues — some in their 40 or 50s or even earlier.

Hip Injuries and the Open Stance Forehand

(TennisPlayer.net)

Can the Open Stance Forehand Increase the Risk of Hip Injuries in Tennis Players? - PMC

The open stance forehand has been hypothesized by tennis experts (coaches, scientists, and clinicians) to be more traumatic than the neutral stance forehand as regards hip injuries in tennis. However, the influence of the forehand stance (open or ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I understand,
physicists have their own world, and it's not easy to understand them... heh

However, the problem is that he didn't deconstruct the instructional videos of his strokes, so that they could be better verified..

It’s not necessarily the physics that is the issue with these physicists. It is often their lack of expertise when it comes to physiology / biomechanics and other aspects of tennis. @toly is another physicist who posted here for quite a while. To his credit, he did provide good insight with some of his presentations. But he also came up with quite a few claims that did not hold up when challenged by me and others.

Jarek C (@jch), the inertial tennis “physicist”, has been promising to provide details on his ideas for quite a few years now. Sill waiting, He started developing his inertial tennis concept back around 2011-13. He started his website and his YT channel back in 2017. He was posting for several months here on TT back in 2018. He had indicated that he would post an inertial tennis thread to provide detail. He never did. In Jan of 2022, on his own site, he indicated that he would publish something by Spring of that year. Don’t believe he ever did that.

Not really sure that @jch is an actual physicist. Sound like he might be a journalist who dabbles in physics.

In the threads below, @jch and @Gregory Diamond (a theoretical physicist from Poland) posted quite a few statements that made very little sense. Gregory D, in other threads (and under different username), often claimed that split steps were unnecessary for tennis players. He made quite a few other ridiculous claims (below) as well.

Among other claims, @jch indicated that it was physics and not muscles that were responsible for generating (elite) strokes. He also claimed that ISR (internal shoulder rotation) is not a source of power (energy) on the inertial tennis serve — “it produces nothing at all”.

Quite a few crazy ideas from 2 physicists in this first thread:

Federer-the greatest pusher of all time !!!

We can see in this video that from the moment when the ball touches the strings for the first time to the moment when ball leaves the strings the fist and the head of the racket move with the same speed. Racket stays perpendicular to the arm. Federer pushes the ball forward. The ball "feels" the...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Any physicists here? (pronation on serve)

What exactly does it do? 1. It allows you to swing the racket edge on until the last second hence increases racket head speed. 2. The last second rotation of racket face before contact adds another force into the equation. The first one is obvious but the second one seems tricky to me. Wouldn't...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

If you want some saner tennis insight & advice from physicists, I suggest you look at books and articles from Howard Brody and Rodney (Rod) Cross.

 

[Smecz]

If you mean over-rotation… it might not be the real issue. Check this guy:

The recovery is just part of general athleticism, quality footwork and your intensity on court. Yes, sometimes they finish strokes in a way that allow them to recovery faster, but that’s when you have less than 3 seconds between your 2 consecutive shots, and they are also taken in different corners of the court… Now with rec players, and typically over 4-5 seconds between the shots, taken both from around the middle, you can spin around 3 times and still be ready to play. You don’t need some groundbreaking firearm theories to solve this, in my opinion.

But if you make a video, this will be more clear.

Closer closer, I have a good example of what I mean:

Big hitters like Gonzalez often make over rotation,
but professionals can handle it,
it's worse for amateurs who do over rotation,
are often exposed to counterattacks...

 

[matterer]

His strokes might appear to be at something around a 5.0 ntrp level. “Arming his strokes” is rather an ironic statement since, according to his TT posts back in 2018, this is the opposite of what his inertial tennis was attempting to achieve.

All low level players arm their strokes. High level forehand technique initiates the swing by rotating the shoulders and swinging the arm. Low level technique initiates at the shoulder and their cores tighten up producing a "muscled" or "hack" stroke. No "hip shoulder separation" or "spinal engine" in biomechanics terms.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

All low level players arm their strokes. High level forehand technique initiates the swing by rotating the shoulders and swinging the arm. Low level technique initiates at the shoulder and their cores tighten up producing a "muscled" or "hack" stroke. No "hip shoulder separation" or "spinal engine" in biomechanics terms.

Not really following the point you’re trying to make with your posts. You say that JC is a 5.0 player but he “arms” his strokes. Are you saying that you believe a 5.0 player is a low level player?

I don’t see it. Not very many 5.0 players that I’ve played or come across “arm” their strokes. This guy’s strokes at a little bit off to my eye but they don’t appear to be “armed” as you indicate. What exactly are you saying?

 

[Chas Tennis]

Hey Guys

On the internet you can find this site called inertialtennis.com
The author presents theory inertial tennis:

,,In the history of tennis, inertial tennis is the first complete, internally coherent set of techniques of movement and strokes, created from scratch on solid scientific foundations. Each element of inertial techniques has been designed for the most optimal use of the fundamental properties of physical reality within the biomechanical framework of the human body. The core of the inertial techniques is embedded in the inertia (both physical and biomechanical in nature)1.''

Main Facts

1.
Inertial tennis is the first internally coherent set of tennis techniques of strokes and movement, created around a theoretical structure embedded in the verified scientific knowledge. Each element of inertial tennis can be scientifically tested.

2.
Inertial tennis is a technically complete structure: it consists of well-defined types of strokes combined into groups (forehands, backhands, volleys, overheads and serves). Movement techniques are efficient and deeply integrated with the strokes

3.
Inertial strokes use the same physical principles that are critical for the uniqueness of Roger Federer forehands.


4.
Inertial strokes are powerful but effortless, the risk of injuries seems to be very low. Timings and flexibility are more important than athletic power.

5.
Inertial tennis is a generalization of typical tennis. In critical situations inertial techniques give you place and time to reduce your technique into a non-inertial version.

6.
It's easy to learn elements of inertial techniques. Total transformation is harder and should take 3-4 years. Due to the coherence of techniques, the longer you practice, the faster progress you see.

7.
Inertial tennis should be tested in scientific experiments. There are no teaching programmes, no dedicated athletic workouts etc. Help to create them!.

8.
Building a creative community is a hard task. If you want to help, please contact the administrator.

9.
The full description of inertial tennis will be presented in the book "Inertial Tennis: The Sources of Internal Power". The book will probably be published as a crowdfunded project, and should be available at the beginning of 2020.

10.
Inertial tennis is an open source project. Everyone can use it, verify it, extend it, and even make money using it - as long as the knowledge behind his/her work is available for other people.

	MODERN TENNIS	INERTIAL TENNIS
BASIC PHYSICAL PHENOMENA	mass, velocity	inertia, accelerations, conservation laws
BIOMECHANICAL STRUCTURE	straight kinematic chain	branched kinematic chains
TOTAL NUMBER OF JOINTS	x (depends on technique)	x + 1, varies in time
ENERGY PRODUCTION	as much as you can	as much as is needed (but no more!)
ENERGY LOSSES	who cares?	reduced to minimum
MAIN POWER SOURCE	muscles	concentration of energy in space and time
COHERENT THEORETICAL CORE	does not exist	unified theory of all strokes & movement
TYPES OF TECHNIQUES	specific for any stroke	universal

PROS & CONS OF INERTIAL TENNIS
	Simplicity and aesthetics	Optimal timing close to human neurological limits
	Powerful and effortless strokes	Certain percentage of mishits is physically irremovable
	Smart physics and biomechanics	Significant changes in timing of strokes and movement
	Effective masking of intentions	Counterintuitive direction of strokes initiation
	Well-defined types of strokes	Relatively slow global progress in learning at early stages
	Time and place for corrections	No coaches (yet)
	Coherent theoretical core for all strokes (no myths!)	Lack of easily accessible sources of knowledge (yet)
	Deep integration of strokes and movement	Not falsified by a vast community of players and coaches (yet)
	Efficient footwork
	Low risk of serious injuries
	Flexibility more important than athletic power
	Some technical elements easy to learn at early stages
	Rapid progress in learning at advanced stages

what do you think about inertial tennis, is it worth it or is it worth implementing it into your tennis?! or not?!

Is it better to stick with modern tennis?!

I invite you to the discussion


The Source:
All information and knowledge about inertial tennis comes from www.inertialtennis.com

The one hand backhand drive shown, does not use 'chest press'. More top ATP players with 1HBHs use 'chest press'.

Compare strokes shown to ATP strokes.

 

[ShinMezame]

I don't see anything special here. All he's doing is utilizing the stretch-shortening cycle of his muscles more to be more energy efficient and having proper kinetic chain sequencing. That makes basically every shot whip-like.

The problem with it, and why it doesn't work at the highest level, is that it requires much more time and perfect timing to hit every shot like a whip. Balls on the ATP tour come at you too fast to hit like this. He is likely someone who spends a lot of time against ball machines or rallying with players who hit slower shots.

The mass majority of ATP players don't play like this because they can't afford to. They have to be more technically stiff and less whip-like to survive against the pace at that level which serves to maintain consistency.

The reason why Federer is the GOAT is because he had the timing and ball recognition on top of the athleticism in order to pull off this type of tennis style at the highest level.

 

[Curious]

I don't see anything special here. All he's doing is utilizing the stretch-shortening cycle of his muscles more to be more energy efficient and having proper kinetic chain sequencing. That makes basically every shot whip-like.

The problem with it, and why it doesn't work at the highest level, is that it requires much more time and perfect timing to hit every shot like a whip. Balls on the ATP tour come at you too fast to hit like this. He is likely someone who spends a lot of time against ball machines or rallying with players who hit slower shots.

The mass majority of ATP players don't play like this because they can't afford to. They have to be more technically stiff and less whip-like to survive against the pace at that level which serves to maintain consistency.

The reason why Federer is the GOAT is because he had the timing and ball recognition on top of the athleticism in order to pull off this type of tennis style at the highest level.

One of the best posts I’ve ever read on this forum!

 

[MikeLawn]

I don't want to explore this, I'm just curious if it works in practice...

I wonder how a hard-working forearm and a loose wrist can suffer here, how much this inertial tennis can be injury-prone to the forearm and wrist?!

Hi! I saw this thread about inertial tennis.
I tried few years ago implement this forehand and others strokes (as a result of forehand). I even exchanged some e-mails with the author of the site.
I doubt if any ATP/WTA player will use it and play efficiently. There's no book, no coaches has the proper knowledge how to teach.
As a talked with JCH there was no interest among tennis academys, clubs etc.
Of course he's right about the federer's forehand, the biomechanics etc. The strokes are fluid, you don't have to worry about the wrist's injury or elbow. Of course if you know/understand what to do on the court...
First thing is to understand, then shadow-swinging, then playing with the wall and at the end playing on the court with the opponent. That's my piece of advice here

my play with friend:

 

[Smecz]

I don't see anything special here. All he's doing is utilizing the stretch-shortening cycle of his muscles more to be more energy efficient and having proper kinetic chain sequencing. That makes basically every shot whip-like.

The problem with it, and why it doesn't work at the highest level, is that it requires much more time and perfect timing to hit every shot like a whip. Balls on the ATP tour come at you too fast to hit like this. He is likely someone who spends a lot of time against ball machines or rallying with players who hit slower shots.

The mass majority of ATP players don't play like this because they can't afford to. They have to be more technically stiff and less whip-like to survive against the pace at that level which serves to maintain consistency.

The reason why Federer is the GOAT is because he had the timing and ball recognition on top of the athleticism in order to pull off this type of tennis style at the highest level.

Very sensible comment, bravo man

In fact, in one of the videos you can see how he just pulls his hand back, (practically without a loop)

As if he didn't have time for a good loop, and do it as conveniently as it was...

This is the second video on Inertial Tennis-A brief indruction in this hall on hard courts.

To be a professional inertia tennis player, you would have to practice this way of playing from childhood, and there is no guarantee that you will succeed like Roger...

The problem with inertia in tennis is that you have to have really great skills and a sense of timing, ball, distance, control, moment of return, etc...

You would have to be a stuntman on the court like Pete and Roger, and the question is whether we care about control and taking care of the ball, or uncontrolled power and uncertain control over the ball...

Maybe you can learn it, or fall into a trance on the court, but is it worth it...?!

 

[Smecz]

Hi! I saw this thread about inertial tennis.
I tried few years ago implement this forehand and others strokes (as a result of forehand). I even exchanged some e-mails with the author of the site.
I doubt if any ATP/WTA player will use it and play efficiently. There's no book, no coaches has the proper knowledge how to teach.
As a talked with JCH there was no interest among tennis academys, clubs etc.
Of course he's right about the federer's forehand, the biomechanics etc. The strokes are fluid, you don't have to worry about the wrist's injury or elbow. Of course if you know/understand what to do on the court...
First thing is to understand, then shadow-swinging, then playing with the wall and at the end playing on the court with the opponent. That's my piece of advice here

my play with friend:

Yeah, all right,
in general, the whole inertial tennis is something like a sleigh ride, where the car suddenly brakes and the sleigh and people fly wherever they want...

Without the right content and knowledge from JCh, you can do the wrong thing, play inertially and cripple the technique.

The lack of a book, trainers and instructions will rather stop this inertial tennis, unless it is starting to create itself now in modern tennis...

It is not for me to define, but I am slowly seeing indications that we see more of this tennis during ATP games.!!

 

[ballmachineguy]

This thread should be narrated by Rod Serling.

 

[10sbeast888]

this thread is just an example of "you don't know what you don't know".