Windshield Wiper Forehand Questions

[cg.tennis]

Lately I found my WW forehand became more like a slap shot due to that I don't swing the racquet vertically up, and during follow through my elbow doesn't finish higher than my hand. So I'm in the process of relearning WW Forehand. I have the following questions.

1. Is WW forehand more like a feel shot? When I swing up with a lot of racquet speed (just like the kick serve), I have to cut really a little bit of tennis ball (brush it, pat the dog whatever it is). If I have too much cut, the ball will just fly out. If I have too little cut, the ball is too loopy without pace. So the level of cut is totally by feel, right? This is even tougher if the incoming ball has no pace. I usually make mistake by having too much cut of the ball. I have pretty good kick serve during a match. I just couldn't get my windshield wiper topspin consistent during a match/under pressure.

2. For baseline heavy rally (not approach shots), should the degree of swinging up be 90 degree or around 80 degree or 60 degree? For approach shots, what I usually do is close my racquet face more, and swing forward more, it's more like 30-45 degree swing.

3. How low should hand/wrist be below ball (or same level)? How low should racquet head tip be below ball?

4. Do you feel that the ball dwelling time is longer with WW FH shot? Some coach said although by physics it's incorrect you should feel that you roll over the ball? Is that correct?

Sorry for so many questions. My FH becomes a liability at low 4.5 level. I really need to improve it.

 

[Shroud]

I found these vids really helpful for the ww fh:

 

[cg.tennis]

I'm trying to copy Nishikori's WW forehand. Does that look like 60 or 70 degree angle of swinging up?

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I'm trying to copy Nishikori's WW forehand. Does that look like 60 or 70 degree angle of swinging up?

Sure a lot of them are around 60 degrees or so. Some might be a bit more and others appears to be at 45 degrees or less. I would not get too hung up on trying to achieve one perfect angle. It is often situational. Depends on the incoming ball, your position relative to the ball and what you want to do with the ball. Take another look at the Kevin G video above if you haven't already done so.

Not sure if I like the 1st couple of FHs that Kei hits in this vid. He appears to be leaning back and sitting down awkwardly on his forward swing and follow-thru in the first one. Seems to be too close to the ball on the 2nd one -- he appears to be on his heel to much and he roll his weight to the outside of his left foot. As a result he falls off in that direction.

But perhaps I nitpick. There are many fine elements to Nishi's FH. Note that Kei employs a very extreme grip. It is more extreme that Novak or Rafa's. I would suggest using a more conventional SW grip instead.

 

[Limpinhitter]

In my opinion, focusing on achieving a WW finish is counterproductive. A well hit, modern forehand doesn't always result in a WW finish. I prefer to focus on achieving an optimal load-up/set-up position, employ the proper kinetic chain while remaining loose and relaxed throughout, and let the finish happen naturally without trying to manufacture any particular type of finish.

 

[cg.tennis]

When people are talking about proper kinetic chain, it's mainly for power. Even with very low powered racquet, I got enough power and racquet speed. If I let the finish happen naturally, the ball just fly out by 1 to 3 feet or so. In a match, if I keep making errors like this, i tend to slow down the racquet speed result in short balls. I am not sure without studying what's the proper natural finish, i can do this naturally without making tons of errors. One of my 4.5 mate, a former college player hit a great running Forehand. When i asked him how he does it, he said just hit it, let it happen naturally. Well, it's very tough for people to learn that. Until i found on YouTube the correct footwork of running forehand, practiced it, I can hit a mediocre running forehand.

 

[rkelley]

FWIW, I wouldn't concentrate on a WW finish. The finish happens as a result of what happened before.

Hit the load position and swing the edge of the racquet across the ball's path. You're basically throwing the racquet. Just let that swing path go well past the contact point. That's basically your WW fh.

The angle of the swing (and racquet face) are totally situational and depends on the incoming ball and your intent.

 

[cg.tennis]

Today i tried 15 minutes my modified WW FH in progress. It seems to be in the right direction, especially for high balls. I use extreme semi Western like Nishikori's FH grip. The best tip that I implemented is exaggerated elbow up (hand down) during follow through while still managing to keep arm and wrist loose. Previous I have a lot of swing up, but the wiper motion finished half way. With exaggerated elbow up, i feel that there is so much control even i hit it really hard. The trajectory of ball looks very nice. And today my forehand was not my liability. I split set with a top player in our club who looks like Tommy Hass. Still need to use it for more matches to settle down the stroke motion.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

When people are talking about proper kinetic chain, it's mainly for power...

Do not agree that a proper kinetic chain is only about generating power. One of the primary functions of a proper KC is to develop RHS effectively and efficiently. RHS can be used for generating greater spin as well as more power. A proper KC should also reduce or minimize the chance of an overuse injury -- particularly overuse of the shoulder and various parts of the arm.

 

[10isMaestro]

I'm trying to copy Nishikori's WW forehand. Does that look like 60 or 70 degree angle of swinging up?

1. If you would actually follow top player's racket prior contact and up to the poinbt of contact, you would find a much shallower upward plane than what you expect seeing the full swing. Even a player like Nadal routinely swing with an upward slope of 30 or so degrees. The most vertical part of a WW forehand happens after contact and, even so, it still has to be moving forward a bit. It's the follow-through, in other words, that plays a trick on our eyes. Dont' believe me? Alright, consider this: given the swing length L and slope angle O, the height H bellow the ball at which starts a swing is given by: L(tan(O)) = H. I know the swing is not linear, but let's assume it is for simplicity (in reality, we'd have to use a projection orthogonal to a plane to account for the fact that the swing length is smaller than the distance it travels as an arc). A 3 feet long swing to contact with 30 degrees of slope means you started about 1'-9'' bellow contact (which is a lot). With 60 degrees, that height is about 5'-2'' (which is nearly impossible to do, unless you're almost 7 feet tall). If the swing length is even just two feet (less than a racket long), you'd still need to swing the racket from 3'-5'' bellow contact. Mathematically, it just doesn't add up: the usual slope from the furthest point back up to contact has to be much smaller than 60 degrees.

2. If you have trouble keeping the ball inside the court, yet can hit reasonably good forehands, you probably are tackling the ball way too head on. If you start swinging almost levelled with the ball, you'll end up hitting a very fast strokes with a very horizontal path, even with a full western grip. A good reference point in a normal rally would be to lower your racket about a foot or so bellow the expected point of contact -- you can go for about foot and a half if you want loopier strokes.

 

[Daniel_K]

Nishikori uses close as makes no difference full western on forehand, not really extreme semi. It's a good forhand, but his backhand is what I would work to emulate out of his strokes, if i wanted to, not his forehand.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

1. If you would actually follow top player's racket prior contact and up to the poinbt of contact, you would find a much shallower upward plane than what you expect seeing the full swing. Even a player like Nadal routinely swing with an upward slope of 30 or so degrees. The most vertical part of a WW forehand happens after contact and, even so, it still has to be moving forward a bit. It's the follow-through, in other words, that plays a trick on our eyes. Dont' believe me? Alright, consider this: given the swing length L and slope angle O, the height H bellow the ball at which starts a swing is given by: L(tan(O)) = H. I know the swing is not linear, but let's assume it is for simplicity (in reality, we'd have to use a projection orthogonal to a plane to account for the fact that the swing length is smaller than the distance it travels as an arc). A 3 feet long swing to contact with 30 degrees of slope means you started about 1'-9'' bellow contact (which is a lot). With 60 degrees, that height is about 5'-2'' (which is nearly impossible to do, unless you're almost 7 feet tall). If the swing length is even just two feet (less than a racket long), you'd still need to swing the racket from 3'-5'' bellow contact. Mathematically, it just doesn't add up: the usual slope from the furthest point back up to contact has to be much smaller than 60 degrees...

Didn't quite follow all of this. Will need to read it again when my eyes and brain are not so tired. Yes, it is true that quite a bit of the forward swing is at a fairly shallow angle. We see most of the steeper swing path during the follow-thru. However, to get the increased WW topspin action on the ball, the forearm rotation to produce the steep part of the swing path actually starts shortly before contact. I believe that this can be seen here:

youtube.com/watch?v=nCnau0tjvuk&t=146

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ This is probably easier to see on this Novak FH:

Also, take a close look at the swing path of Novaks' right hand on his forward swing and follow-thru. It look quite a bit different from the swing path of the tip of his racquet.

 

[Dartagnan64]

^ This is probably easier to see on this Novak FH:

Also, take a close look at the swing path of Novaks' right hand on his forward swing and follow-thru. It look quite a bit different from the swing path of the tip of his racquet.

Not sure I like the idea of imprinting a 2D line drawing on a 3D motion. It doesn't really clarify the racket head path as it misses so much of the rotational motion.

 

[cg.tennis]

^ This is probably easier to see on this Novak FH:

Also, take a close look at the swing path of Novaks' right hand on his forward swing and follow-thru. It look quite a bit different from the swing path of the tip of his racquet.

How about this video? Nishikori swings pretty deep up.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Not sure I like the idea of imprinting a 2D line drawing on a 3D motion. It doesn't really clarify the racket head path as it misses so much of the rotational motion.

A 2D path representation such as this is something of a parallel projection or an orthogonal projection of a 3D motion. No doubt that this 2D projection cannot accurately show all aspects of a 3D event. However, it does offer a unique perspective that reveals some elements of an action that we might not otherwise realize. IMO there is some value in this perspective. We can observe some important elements of a Sampras serve in the 1st image below. Or we can use this perspective to observe the differences is the motion of the hand and the path of the tip of the racket in the Federer samples below.

http://www.feeltennis.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/fed-fh-ft.jpg
​

While the 2D representation of Novak's FH swing in my previous post does have the limitation that you indicate, it does a pretty good job of revealing the swing path change that I suggested. Considering this 2D projection combined with the motion that we can observe in the video, it becomes very apparent the swing path of Novak's fwd swing starts as shallow or gradual rise. However, shortly before contact, the swing path becomes fairly steep. The 2D representation combined with the slow motion video makes it easy to see this.

​

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

How about this video? Nishikori swings pretty deep up.

Kei's swing path looks similar to Novak's swing path in the image and video I posted. His forward swing starts fairly gradual at 20-30 degrees and then sharply increases to 60 degrees or so just prior to contact.

 

[5263]

I found these vids really helpful for the ww fh:

Sorry, but Kevin really misses it on the WW Fh. Sure, you can hit spinny, dipping shots with it, but it's development and use on the tour by top players is primarily a way to hit super heavy shots with enough Topspin to keep them in. WW Fh should be understood for it's ability to control a big strong Fh first, then also as a finesse dipping shot as a add-on.

 

[Shroud]

Sorry, but Kevin really misses it on the WW Fh. Sure, you can hit spinny, dipping shots with it, but it's development and use on the tour by top players is primarily a way to hit super heavy shots with enough Topspin to keep them in. WW Fh should be understood for it's ability to control a big strong Fh first, then also as a finesse dipping shot as a add-on.

I think its more a teaching tool like finding the ball and pulling back at contact.

When I try what he says I still have the WW but I seem to hit more through the ball. Its more like throwing the racket at the ball.

 

[Curiosity]

When people are talking about proper kinetic chain, it's mainly for power. Even with very low powered racquet, I got enough power and racquet speed. If I let the finish happen naturally, the ball just fly out by 1 to 3 feet or so. In a match, if I keep making errors like this, i tend to slow down the racquet speed result in short balls. I am not sure without studying what's the proper natural finish, i can do this naturally without making tons of errors. One of my 4.5 mate, a former college player hit a great running Forehand. When i asked him how he does it, he said just hit it, let it happen naturally. Well, it's very tough for people to learn that. Until i found on YouTube the correct footwork of running forehand, practiced it, I can hit a mediocre running forehand.

(To an extent, if your forehand technique is full and modern, you can get off a good shot on the run even with second-rate footwork, because your upper body work will be so effective.)

I'll give you my opinion about what should generate a WW finish, about what very good players use to achieve it. In part some degree of rising angle contributes, and this varies by player. Experiment. But the vital force causing the rise (and controlled power) is ISR, internal shoulder rotation, just into the hit. When you see in slow motion that a player's racket suddenly heads upward just into contact (Nadal, Fed, other, take your pick), it is vigorous ISR that (together with some bit of rising approach) makes the difference.

There are several descriptions of ISR on this board and other sites, if ISR is unfamiliar to you. And since your forehand should start with vigorous upper body rotation, allowing the racket to flip back and down resulting in a lagged racket with loose wrist and externally rotated shoulder....you'll be all set to do ISR into the hit.

 

[5263]

I think its more a teaching tool like finding the ball and pulling back at contact.

When I try what he says I still have the WW but I seem to hit more through the ball. Its more like throwing the racket at the ball.

Yes, very much like throwing the racket and Imo, you put it better than Kevin....but if he helped you get there, then I tip my hat to him all the same.