What's the difference between a reverse FH and and IOFH?

TennisAsAlways

TennisAsAlways

Professional
What's the difference between a RFH and an IOFH?

I am just curious as to how you would distinguish the two; the reverse forehand and an inside out forehand.

Now, for a righty, I know that an IOFH is when you run a round your baclhand on the ad side and hit a FH crosscourt. I know that for a regular FH that the swing path and follow-through is directed towards the left. What if you hit an inside out FH but the swing path and follow-through stays on the right side? Would that be a reverse FH, IOFH, or a Rev.IOFH?
I'm just trying to get the terminology correct. Thanks.
 
Your definitions are all correct.
If you hit an inside-out forehand with a reverse forehand swing path, it would be both; an inside-out forehand, and a reverse forehand.

Pls for a certain poster that believes the reverse FH is for lobs, it is not. You are not hitting the stroke correctly!
 
TennisAsAlways said:
I am just curious as to how you would distinguish the two; the reverse forehand and an inside out forehand.

Now, for a righty, I know that an IOFH is when you run a round your baclhand on the ad side and hit a FH crosscourt. I know that for a regular FH that the swing path and follow-through is directed towards the leff. What if you hit an inside out FH but the swing path and follow-through stays on the right side? Would that be a reverse FH, IOFH, or a Rev.IOFH?
I'm just trying to get the terminology correct. Thanks.
Click to expand...

INSIDE-OUT FOREHAND

An inside-out forehand is based mainly on how you position yourself to the ball. Like when you run around your backhand.

To get the feel of an inside out forehand have someone feed a ball straight at you or to your backhand side, then move around the ball in an arcing pattern a "C" pattern and hit to the Ad court (if you are righthanded).

The key tactical use of the inside out forehand is it allows you to hit back to an opponents backhand (provided they are righthanded as well).

REVERSE FOREHAND

A reverse forehand is based mainly on how your arm follows through after contact. On a reverse forehand the arm goes up and back staying on the same side of the body. It does not crossover and finish on the other side.


everything050822_stroke_175.gif


website to learn to hit one is at: http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/urban/strategist/everything/tennis/12530/
 
Thanks for the information and confirmation Slazenger and Bungalo Bill.

I've noticed that I tend to hit RFH's a lot when I'm positioned at center court or hitting DTL FH's from the deuce court. That's what brought up my questions.
 
TennisAsAlways said:
I am just curious as to how you would distinguish the two; the reverse forehand and an inside out forehand.

Now, for a righty, I know that an IOFH is when you run a round your baclhand on the ad side and hit a FH crosscourt. I know that for a regular FH that the swing path and follow-through is directed towards the left. What if you hit an inside out FH but the swing path and follow-through stays on the right side? Would that be a reverse FH, IOFH, or a Rev.IOFH?
I'm just trying to get the terminology correct. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Inside out simply means you hit the ball the opposite way or to the right for a righty. A reverse forehand, aka female forehand, means you're whipping that followthrough up and over your head like Davenport and Nadal.
 
Rickson said:
Inside out simply means you hit the ball the opposite way or to the right for a righty. A reverse forehand, aka female forehand, means you're whipping that followthrough up and over your head like Davenport and Nadal.
Click to expand...
I Know a reverse FH is. I didn't create this thread asking. "What is a reverse FH?" In the starting opening post, I even hinted things that pointed out that I know these basic things. Also, had already concluded the thread stating that I only wanted clarifications as to what to call such a FH when it is combined with inside-out FH direction.

Furthermore, I don't think "female forehand" is an appropriate name to call the reverse. Am I criticizing you for the FYI (that I already know about BTW) about the other name for the reverse?.....NO.

The number one player happens to use the Reverse FH and saying that he uses a female forehand would make it sound like an insult towards him. (Even if you were to insult him, would I criticize you for that?......No.) Federer doesn't use the reverse as his primary forehand. I don't either. My primary FH is the modern approach: hitting penetrating shots, hitting through the ball with the windshield wiper follow-through across the body between shoulder and waist height (It's not really a modern technique. It has been used quite often in the old days. It's sort of like how some people refer to the open stance as being "modern" when in fact it was common in the older days as well. Just one of those style cycles.) Now because I mentioned about Federer and pointing out the things that I do that are in common with what he does, does that mean that I am an obsessed fan of his?.........No, as a matter of fact, I'm not even a plain "fan". Do I respect him for his talents?........Of course I do.

A lot of WTA players use the reverse as their primary FH and so that could be the reason why people call it the female FH. Nadal is a guy who uses it a lot so maybe he can be mocked as a female forehander. I wouldn't say that Feder is a female forehander and I wouldn't say that I am a female forehander. Fed (and Sampras) use it when left in the situation, when they are in a position where it's effective to use it. When a right handed player is on the run to the right side deuce court retreiving the ball then that shot sometimes gets used naturally. Now am I saying that the reverse is only good for reteivals or defensive shot-making?.....NO, I did not say that.
 
Rickson said:
Does that mean you like using the female forehand?
Click to expand...
No. As dumb as it may sound, I avoid it so that people don't think that it's my primary FH. (Yes, having a good image is also something that I care about as well as playing good.)I only use it when stuck in the situation, much like when playing a seriuos match you would someimes dive to make saves. Now do I dive when it's uneccsary?..NO That is much like in the same way as to when I use a reverse FH, like that diving example.
 
TennisAsAlways said:
No. As dumb as it may sound, I avoid it so that I people don't think it's my primary FH. (Yes, having a good image is also something that I care about as well as playing good.)I only use it when stuck in the situation, much like when playing a seriuos match you would someimes dive to make saves. Now do I dive when it's uneccsary?..NO That is much like in the same way as to when I use a reverse FH, like that diving example.
Click to expand...

The reverse forehand is not really the type of forehand that want as your primary motion to hit the ball. It is a motion that can be used on different occasions including during a baseline rally. But I would use it like other players use it - when you feel it is the right time to do so based on your abilities and preferences on when to use it. Some players will use it more often then others.

The reverse forehand is a versatile shot. I use it at different times both for crosscourt and DTL shots. I use it when I am approaching and at the baseline. But it is not my rally motion.

I think Rickson is kidding you about the "female forehand". Certainly players like Davenport use the reverse forehand but so did/does Sampras, Federer and a lot of those talented men players we watch on TV. The reverse forehand is simply another way to hit the forehand.

What I haven't studied is WHO tends to use a reverse forehand. It seems that players with milder grips (Eastern, mild SW, or SW) tend to use the reverse forehand more often. So any information from anyone (facts please) would be helpful.
 
Bungalo Bill said:
Certainly players like Davenport use the reverse forehand but so did/does Sampras, Federer and a lot of those talented men players we watch on TV. The reverse forehand is simply another way to hit the forehand.

What I haven't studied is WHO tends to use a reverse forehand. It seems that players with milder grips (Eastern, mild SW, or SW) tend to use the reverse forehand more often. So any information from anyone (facts please) would be helpful.
Click to expand...

BB, Nadal with western forehand also uses reverse fh quite a bit...especially on the run. So its not just eastern mild SW or SW
 
Bungalo Bill said:
What I haven't studied is WHO tends to use a reverse forehand. It seems that players with milder grips (Eastern, mild SW, or SW) tend to use the reverse forehand more often. So any information from anyone (facts please) would be helpful.
Click to expand...
Nadal on the men's side, and Davenport, Sharapova, Clijsters, let's just say the whole WTA on the women's side. Roddick and Nadal are western grippers who use the reverse, but Nadal uses it as his primary where Roddick prefers to use it on the run.
 
Bungalo Bill said:
The reverse forehand is not really the type of forehand that want as your primary motion to hit the ball. It is a motion that can be used on different occasions including during a baseline rally. But I would use it like other players use it - when you feel it is the right time to do so based on your abilities and preferences on when to use it. Some players will use it more often then others.

The reverse forehand is a versatile shot. I use it at different times both for crosscourt and DTL shots. I use it when I am approaching and at the baseline. But it is not my rally motion.

I think Rickson is kidding you about the "female forehand". Certainly players like Davenport use the reverse forehand but so did/does Sampras, Federer and a lot of those talented men players we watch on TV. The reverse forehand is simply another way to hit the forehand.

What I haven't studied is WHO tends to use a reverse forehand. It seems that players with milder grips (Eastern, mild SW, or SW) tend to use the reverse forehand more often. So any information from anyone (facts please) would be helpful.
Click to expand...
Well BB, I didn't care whether or not Rickson was kidding or not. I was admitting the truth as to why I avoid the reverse. I hear people on the court referring to the rev FH as "The Sharapova shot" etc. I also avoid a lot of other things that "I" believe do not look good. One example would be for the service stance. Now I know that one should chose and develop a stance that maximizes one's own abilities etc.etc. I happened to have an abbreviated take back like Roddick along with a similar stance. Well I intentionally customized my stance to differentiate it from Andy's because I think he looks stupid when he bends over, arching forward. I also don't want people to think I modelled my serve after him or copied him. Another thing that I avoid is the waiter's wrist during take back. I don't have to actually consciously tell myself to avoid the waiter's wrist because my service motion is executed subconsciously. It's when I developed and adjusted my service motion , that's when I consciously told myself to avoid waiter's wrist. There are so many other things that I will not get to because there really is no point in doing so. I think my few examples should have gotten my point across.

I construct and adjust my form with aesthetics, effectiveness, and efficiency in mind. The aesthetic part is something I admit and I am sure that others care about image too. I don't think that those other people are likely to admit it though, because they may want to sound professional, saying sometihing like, "it's only winning that matters" etc etc.

"Winning Ugly" is probably not a book for me If the book were literally about mechanical form.
 
pham4313 said:
BB, Nadal with western forehand also uses reverse fh quite a bit...especially on the run. So its not just eastern mild SW or SW
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm sure BB is aware of that, as a lot of people are.
 
pham4313 said:
BB, Nadal with western forehand also uses reverse fh quite a bit...especially on the run. So its not just eastern mild SW or SW
Click to expand...

Yes, I do know Nadal uses it, but is he truly in a Western grip? I am only asking because I dont have time right now to disect his film and others in this area.
 
Bungalo Bill said:
Yes, I do know Nadal uses it, but is he truly in a Western grip? I am only asking because I dont have time right now to disect his film and others in this area.
Click to expand...
Welp, that gives me something to do (tennis research-wise).
 
TennisAsAlways said:
Well BB, I didn't care whether or not Rickson was kidding or not. I was admitting the truth as to why I avoid the reverse. I hear people on the court referring to the rev FH as "The Sharapova shot" etc. I also avoid a lot of other things that "I" believe do not look good.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. The reverse forehand is not for everyone. I have not heard that it is called the "Shoutapova" shot. As many players (both male and female) used the shot and popularized it. With Sampras coming to mind (at least for me) most often. Sampras had a beauty and man was it a deadly shot.

Again, I really do believe the reverse forehand should be used at certain times. But as I mentioned this is a shot that is highly "player's preference" oriented. It could be with Shoutapova, Davenport, Sampras, etc, that they had a common coach on the matter as well. ;)


One example would be for the service stance. Now I know that one should chose and develop a stance that maximizes one's own abilities etc.etc. I happened to have an abbreviated take back like Roddick along with a similar stance. Well I intentionally customized my stance to differentiate it from Andy's because I think he looks stupid when he bends over, arching forward. I also don't want people to think I modelled my serve after him or copied him. Another thing that I avoid is the waiter's wrist during take back. I don't have to actually consciously tell myself to avoid the waiter's wrist because my service motion is executed subconsciously. It's when I developed and adjusted my service motion , that's when I consciously told myself to avoid waiter's wrist. There are so many other things that I will not get to because there really is no point in doing so. I think my few examples should have gotten my point across.
Click to expand...

Well if I understood you right, the waiters wrist for the serve is something no one really wants to have. I have a similar serve motion as well as Roddicks. I really dont pay any particular attention to any pros form but will develop the fundamentals so that I can develop my own form as you have. So that is good.

I construct and adjust my form with aesthetics, effectiveness, and efficiency in mind. The aesthetic part is something I admit and I am sure that others care about image too. I don't think that those other people are likely to admit it though, because they may want to sound professional, saying sometihing like, "it's only winning that matters" etc etc.
Click to expand...

I think form, style, technique, is all important.

"Winning Ugly" is probably not a book for me If the book were literally about mechanical form.
Click to expand...

Wel the book is not about mechanical form but never count out a "back to the basics" lesson either. ;)
 
Why are you listening to Rickson?? He is a 3.5 claiming the reverse FH is for lobs!!! He is just upset that he can't hit the shot LOL.

Anyways open your eyes Rickson. LOTS of men on the tour hit this shot. Haas hits this shot. Ginepri hits this shot. Federer hits this shot. Sampras would hit wicked WINNERS off this shot. In fact a lot of his running forehands were reverse. This IMO is the best position to pull out the shot.

If you are a western gripper, Reverse FH is also very good (if not essential) to hitting lower bouncing balls.

The Reverse Forehand is a versatile but situational shot.

Let's say solely for the sake of argument, that I concede that it is a female forehand.
Are you saying that Davenport's, Sharapova and Clijster's reverse forehands are too good for you? HA HA HA HA HA HAH A HAH AH AH AHA H. Poverino, poverino! ha ha ah ah ah ah
 
Slazenger said:
Why are you listening to Rickson?? He is a 3.5 claiming the reverse FH is for lobs!!! He is just upset that he can't hit the shot LOL.
Click to expand...
Whoa there, buddy! You almost got me in flaming mode.
 
geez tennisasalways talk about overreacting to nothing o_o

edit. how do you distinguish things? By DEFINING them. yes, the latter half of your post talks about something else. but the first half, including the topic title, is you asking what the difference is =\ not to mention you say "i'm just trying to get the terminology correct" which definitely suggests that you are not 100% sure of such "basic things."

rereading your post, you seem to think that people are out to get you or something...

and I noticed that when bb gave you the definitions, you said thanks. When rickson gave you his definition, you blew up.
 
ta11geese3 said:
geez tennisasalways talk about overreacting to nothing o_o

rereading your post, you seem to think that people are out to get you or something...

and I noticed that when bb gave you the definitions, you said thanks. When rickson gave you his definition, you blew up.
Click to expand...
I bring out the best in people.
 
ta11geese3 said:
geez tennisasalways talk about overreacting to nothing o_o

edit. how do you distinguish things? By DEFINING them. yes, the latter half of your post talks about something else. but the first half, including the topic title, is you asking what the difference is =\ not to mention you say "i'm just trying to get the terminology correct" which definitely suggests that you are not 100% sure of such "basic things."

rereading your post, you seem to think that people are out to get you or something...

and I noticed that when bb gave you the definitions, you said thanks. When rickson gave you his definition, you blew up.
Click to expand...
It seems like Rickson is against the reverse and it seems like he thinks that I am for it when in fact I am not. I don't like it when someone ASSUMEs a person to be a certain way, a way based on the subject of what the assumed person is inquiring about. In this case, I mentioned REVERSE FH and it seems like Rickson is assuming that I am a fan of it. And the other thing is, even if I were a fan of it, I would be pissed that he calls it a female FH because someone who uses it could take it as an indirect insult (Not that I would be accusing him for the indirect insult but it would have been the fact that he wasn't careful to think about how the wording could have an effect on some people, the fact that he wasn't think or trying to avoid stirring up trouble.) It

Also, I am not acting like people are here to get me. I just like people to understand me clearly and not have to deal with pathetic attacks. People prejudge alot. For instance, if I were to say that my BH was like Federer's etc., some people might think that I am one of those Fed maniac fans!

And about me thanking certain people, if I were to thank some persons and leave out others, would that make it that I am unappreciative of the ones whom I left out? Either way, I can appreciate whomever I want to. Another thing is, I had thanked BB and Slazenger because basically I have undertood things clearly.....no need for anything else further. Also, are you going to go around being hypercritical, pointing who expresses their gratitude and who doesn't, and for the ones that don't are you going to comment them much like you have done so to me? And Rickson, even though I didn't learn anything from your post, at least some others may, and so for that, thanks.
 
wow are you SURE you don't believe people are out to get you? you seem to try to cover all the bases, even ones that only idiots would come up with. having a fed like bh would not make you a fan of fed in anyway!

no, i wasn't complaining that you didn't THANK rickson; i was just commenting on how you got MAD at his response. also, you seem to be afraid of being a fan of a lot of things o_o i don't think he called you a fan of it.

anyways, seems like I touched some nerves. i apologize for that.
 
ta11geese3 said:
wow are you SURE you don't believe people are out to get you? you seem to try to cover all the bases, even ones that only idiots would come up with. having a fed like bh would not make you a fan of fed in anyway!

no, i wasn't complaining that you didn't THANK rickson; i was just commenting on how you got MAD at his response. also, you seem to be afraid of being a fan of a lot of things o_o i don't think he called you a fan of it.

anyways, seems like I touched some nerves. i apologize for that.
Click to expand...
Well the thing is, I have known some of these members for quite some time now and sometimes I get hints as to what they may be insinuating. I think you reacted that way to my reply to Rickson because you thought that my reply to him was a general reply to a stranger. Well I know a bit about Rickson therefore I think I know if he were to insinuate something that pertains to the RevFH and in the way in which I referenced it("if" there even were any insinuations at all.) He does have a history of making fun of the Reverse FH and calling it a female FH, "almost" like mocking it and people who use it, I think.

Also, no....I am not saying that if someone has Fed's BH then another person may think that they are obsessed fans.

The thing was, Rickson referred to the RevFH as a female FH and I replied back to him something like, "Well Fed (and the other great ones) use the REV as well as I sometimes do in emergency situations, and so if you were to call me a female (for using such a FH) you would also be calling Fed and the other great ones a female!"
So with that reply, for an outsider who just jumped into this thread, it could have looked like I am an obsessed fan . It may look like I am a fan because it may have looked like I attached myself to Fed (and the other great ones), implying something like, "if you're really calling me a female then that means you are calling Fed (and the other great ones) a female as well. If you are insulting me, then you are insulting them too!" Now that's not what I said to Rickson but that is my reason for covering all these bases so that other people cannot have an opportunity to throw a cheapshot at me, for what ever reason.

I cover my bases so that I don't spark a fight abd to make things very clear from the start so that I don't have to go on explaining myself.. Plus, I am a thorough person in general. This is my thread afterall. Unfortunately I had to keep explaining myself becasue you jumped in here asking all these questions, assuming and imply things that aren't true in the first place.
 
^ Speak for yourself. This thread is old and you come in here with nothing insightful to add? Things have already been concluded in here. This thread became peaceful again and now you're trying to shake things up for what reason?
The poster who stirred up trouble (from what it seems to be, ta11geese3 did it unintentionally because he probably didn't realize the situtaion) had already reached an understanding and apologized.
 
Federer reverse FH: super-slow clip

There's one reverse FH here (check the finish on the right side of the head), amongst other FHs, somewhere before the BHs start.

Courtesy of Tennis Ball Hitter, we have this great clip:

----------
Check Federer
3:54 min 27Mb [Federer]
http://www2.uploadready.com/v/8967184/Fed.avi.html
(courtesy Tennis Ball Hitter
in this thread from which you should download ALL the clips:

super slow mo videos
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...t=83214&page=2)
---------
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

forehandshanker
Kinetic chain in Rafa and Fed's FH
Replies
4
Views
1K
supineAnimation
supineAnimation
Z
Difference between topspin-slice and kick?
Replies
4
Views
1K
skuludo
S
R
Reverse Forehand Help
Replies
15
Views
2K
supineAnimation
supineAnimation
X
Reverse FH vs buggy whip
Replies
5
Views
1K
zapvor
zapvor
A
What is the "Reverse Forehand"?
Replies
28
Views
10K
5263
5263
Back
Top