Why dont more female players use the ATP forehand?
- Thread starter a12345
- Start date
This video explains well the difficulties of using the WTA forehand. Their corrective advice at the end isnt great (a shortened version of a body rotated WTA forehand will be easier to time but now youve lost the power) but their diagnosis of the problems is accurate.
The WTA is just a more difficult stroke. Its harder to time and if you want topspin on top, youre just adding even more difficulties. It does bring you power though and thats its trump card.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
I think it’s safe to say Alex won’t be going into acting in his next career. He had to almost hurt himself to turn himself into a hack player. 
Dragy
Legend
@ByeByePoly @SystemicAnomaly
Commitment point. I cannot recall where I picked this term from first, I find it useful, but I think we need to determine it.
I think we would agree pro players, and experienced rec players do calculate the expected ball bounce relatively early. Consequently they make decision on the shot type they want and can hit (taking into account getting in position and adjusting) and get clear expectations on the contact point. It all becomes more precise as time moves closer to the contact, but it’s likely rather determined before forward swing.
Now there obviously are mini and then micro adjustments, usually subconscious, we make during stroke execution. Almost unavoidable - try to hit the ball closing your eyes after you’ve just seen the bounce.
Now simple logic. The closer to contact - the more precise is the perception/expectation for contact spot. The faster player’s body, arm and racquet is moving - the harder to change direction, aka micro-adjust. With more concentrated, closer to impact acceleration phase it’s easier to (micro)alter the swingpath than with longer, gradual acceleration, till some point in time very close to impact. In my understanding, typical ATP stroke sets things on general trail towards expected, intended swing and contact, and then starts powering the swing significantly closer to impact than typical WTA swing, allowing micro- to mini-adjustments for free, due to low base and big force applied. That’s what I refer to as “late commitment” to contact point, opposite to the general intention and stroke visualization, which should be set as early as possible.
Commitment point. I cannot recall where I picked this term from first, I find it useful, but I think we need to determine it.
I think we would agree pro players, and experienced rec players do calculate the expected ball bounce relatively early. Consequently they make decision on the shot type they want and can hit (taking into account getting in position and adjusting) and get clear expectations on the contact point. It all becomes more precise as time moves closer to the contact, but it’s likely rather determined before forward swing.
Now there obviously are mini and then micro adjustments, usually subconscious, we make during stroke execution. Almost unavoidable - try to hit the ball closing your eyes after you’ve just seen the bounce.
Now simple logic. The closer to contact - the more precise is the perception/expectation for contact spot. The faster player’s body, arm and racquet is moving - the harder to change direction, aka micro-adjust. With more concentrated, closer to impact acceleration phase it’s easier to (micro)alter the swingpath than with longer, gradual acceleration, till some point in time very close to impact. In my understanding, typical ATP stroke sets things on general trail towards expected, intended swing and contact, and then starts powering the swing significantly closer to impact than typical WTA swing, allowing micro- to mini-adjustments for free, due to low base and big force applied. That’s what I refer to as “late commitment” to contact point, opposite to the general intention and stroke visualization, which should be set as early as possible.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
I would assume your last point of adjustment is “hit” ... wherever “hit” is for you in “bounce” “hit”. I had assumed bottom of drop, or maybe slot ... but not even close. Contact was calculated much sooner for me.
You do the PTD thing right? Go hit FHs and see if you can do “bounce” “hit” drill with “hit” at bottom of drop?
fyi ... yes, good point ... probably decide what we are going to hit before the bounce most of the time. I think for me that is often just habits/patterns ... and then sometimes you are down to just reactions.
Last edited:
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Dragy
Legend
When I hit on the rise I definitely have that late final swing from bottom of the drop. When everything is good, it’s a down-and-forward racquet drop, then see the bounce and drive into the contact.
Dragy
Legend
Nah, I’m ok with a random post in random threadThis would be a good thread by itself ... you should start it.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Ah ... but the commitment point and final swing are different I think. I commit/calculate at top of backswing, and then timing to get to slot varies looking at my video. Sometimes slow drop/loop ... sometimes faster from the top. This is what I mean by a lot of stuff baked into that flight plan that we don't even know we are doing.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Nah, I’m ok with a random post in random thread
OK ... @SystemicAnomaly should do it ... he understands this stuff.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
You and @Dragy have covered it pretty well already. I don't really have any further thoughts on this right now.OK ... @SystemicAnomaly should do it ... he understands this stuff.
