Zero Backswing on the Forehand - Can't Extend Hitting Arm!

[Cherlos]

About a year ago, I tried to learn from the Ricc Macci "ATP-forehand", keeping the backswing compact. After a few months I noticed that I had lost some power in my shots, and my coach was saying regularly that I swing too close to my body.

After filming my forehands for the first time in half a year, I saw that I had made some misinterpretation/mal-adaptations of the ATP forehand. I could see that I had NO BACKSWING, I just drop the racket down after the unit turn. with a slightly bent racket arm "in front".

I know that 99% of all youtube coaches (like Jeff Salzeinstein) says amateurs should shorten the backswing not enlargen it, but I feel my backswing is non-existent/too short now, since I can feel I lost some pop in my forehands compared to my previous technique.

After that I've been filming my forehands like 5-10 times in the last month, and I can't for the love of god extend my arm out to create a bigger backswing, it's still bent through the whole backswing. Feels like syntax error not being able to correct it.

Anybody else had this problem? How much backswing is the right amount?

 

[optic yellow]

Dog the unit turn is the backswing.

 

[eah123]

I don’t see anything wrong with your backswing. Also, there’s nothing wrong with using a bent arm throughout the forehand stroke. Main issues from seeing your stroke is not enough loading on the right leg and not enough leg drive as a consequence.

 

[optic yellow]

I don’t see anything wrong with your backswing. Also, there’s nothing wrong with using a bent arm throughout the forehand stroke. Main issues from seeing your stroke is not enough loading on the right leg and not enough leg drive as a consequence.

Yeah this is why I said what I said. It looked fine to me.

 

[Cherlos]

My understanding from watching pros and youtube/coaches is that most backswings (such as the ATP Forehand explained by Rick Macci) are generally completed when the racket arm is more or less "extended" (give or take a few degrees).

Federer is considered to have a compact/ATP-style forehand and his is backswing is way bigger and his arm more extended than mine.

Del Potro and some other have of course much bigger backswings than federer.

 

[optic yellow]

My understanding from watching pros and youtube/coaches is that most backswings (such as the ATP Forehand explained by Rick Macci) are generally completed when the racket arm is more or less "extended" (give or take a few degrees).

Federer is considered to have a compact/ATP-style forehand and his is backswing is way bigger and his arm more extended than mine.

Del Potro and some other have of course much bigger backswings than federer.

The primary difference I can see is that they are letting more lag develop at the start of their downswing than you are. Go watch a video again of Federer and notice how he looks the same as you until he starts moving forward and then there is a little hitch as he lets the full loading develop and the racquet find the slot that you don't really do. But that is not a truly necessary step for a forehand, as you see from the WTA examples.

 

[Cherlos]

Thanks. Seems possible, like you say, to create that arm extension through lag + relaxed arm + powerful body rotation.

Seems however like players do actively extend the arm before the lag and forward rotation starts.
In this clip, djokovic seems to extend his arm after the unit turn, before the forward swing begins.

Also, in the clip below, Rick Macci seems to advocate for elbow extension like it's an active moment.

 

[ballmachineguy]

About a year ago, I tried to learn from the Ricc Macci "ATP-forehand", keeping the backswing compact. After a few months I noticed that I had lost some power in my shots, and my coach was saying regularly that I swing too close to my body.

After filming my forehands for the first time in half a year, I saw that I had made some misinterpretation/mal-adaptations of the ATP forehand. I could see that I had NO BACKSWING, I just drop the racket down after the unit turn. with a slightly bent racket arm "in front".

I know that 99% of all youtube coaches (like Jeff Salzeinstein) says amateurs should shorten the backswing not enlargen it, but I feel my backswing is non-existent/too short now, since I can feel I lost some pop in my forehands compared to my previous technique.

After that I've been filming my forehands like 5-10 times in the last month, and I can't for the love of god extend my arm out to create a bigger backswing, it's still bent through the whole backswing. Feels like syntax error not being able to correct it.

Anybody else had this problem? How much backswing is the right amount?

Wow! Dude, you’ve been YouTubed!!

 

[nyta2]

looks like the backswing i strive for when i'm returning big serves (hand "patting the dog" in front of your chest at 90 degrees)
try "patting the dog" with your *hand* 45 degrees behind you (if your chest is facing the side fence)

 

[socallefty]

Do practice drills where you try to hit the ball much harder than you normally do to deep targets set up in the corners. Your swing should start adjusting and go with the flow in terms of self-adjustments. Hopefully you will coil your body more to get more power. Make sure you don’t get tight with your arm/grip trying to hit harder.

Instead of focusing too much on trying to hit a particular way, do some outcome-oriented drills for a while (add Power, spin, accuracy etc.) and see what happens.

 

[zoingy]

Imo people generally think too much about the backswing. It just needs to be enough so that the first part of forward movement can consistently & efficiently produce the dynamic position where your shoulder/arm/wrist are tightly loaded & can transfer power into the racquet. And not too much such that you can't push into that loading because you have to arc around your body too much.

That being said, it does look like your arm's almost entirely in front of your torso like you're clapping your hands. You could try slightly opening up the arm relative to your chest, like you're giving someone a hug.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Your compact swing is somewhat like mine for deep incoming balls or for returns of fast 1st serves. But my regular Fh takeback is a little bit fuller than this. I believe there's a bit more roundness to my drop -- a slight rotation (supination) of the forearm.

You might benefit from somewhat more racket head lag to regain the power you've lost. Perhaps a slightly more robust (deeper) unit turn with a drop similar to Kevin G (below) will help to regain the lost power.

 

[Morch Us]

I tried to learn from the Ricc Macci "ATP-forehand", keeping the backswing compact.

Try to actively roate upper body during unit turn phase without worrying about "ATP" or "WTA" forehand.

I have a feeling that you created this issue by trying to forcefully keep the racquet on your right side.

 

[Dragy]

About a year ago, I tried to learn from the Ricc Macci "ATP-forehand", keeping the backswing compact. After a few months I noticed that I had lost some power in my shots, and my coach was saying regularly that I swing too close to my body.

After filming my forehands for the first time in half a year, I saw that I had made some misinterpretation/mal-adaptations of the ATP forehand. I could see that I had NO BACKSWING, I just drop the racket down after the unit turn. with a slightly bent racket arm "in front".

I know that 99% of all youtube coaches (like Jeff Salzeinstein) says amateurs should shorten the backswing not enlargen it, but I feel my backswing is non-existent/too short now, since I can feel I lost some pop in my forehands compared to my previous technique.

After that I've been filming my forehands like 5-10 times in the last month, and I can't for the love of god extend my arm out to create a bigger backswing, it's still bent through the whole backswing. Feels like syntax error not being able to correct it.

Anybody else had this problem? How much backswing is the right amount?

To things come to my mind:
1. You can hit with backswing like this. The key is to learn to “find the slot” as you begin uncoiling, not immediately swing at the ball. Reach kind of this position without actually moving hand any closer to the ball (by keeping your shoulder relaxed, letting it get stretched by your start of uncoil):

2. It’s way easier to learn proper rhythm of the swing and associated easy power + consistency by using fuller backswing and more pronounced drop phase. Key is not extending the arm, key is reaching high&back position, early, by the ball bounce. It looks like this:

 

[optic yellow]

by the ball bounce

This is actually a key timing point I've never seen said before.

 

[ballmachineguy]

This is actually a key timing point I've never seen said before.

You must not be paying attention.

 

[Humbi_HTX]

Wow! Dude, you’ve been YouTubed!!

I youtube'd his youtube and it was a'right br0

 

[optic yellow]

You must not be paying attention.

I'm sure its been said before but I would not say I've seen as clear and direct an explanation of the timing and form of the unit turn. Maybe I just know what to look for now that I understand its the single most important component of hitting topspin groundstroke. I will not ever be convinced this concept is communicated effectively to beginners on a broad scale because that simply is not true. Most people who know how to do a groundstroke well are much better at doing it than they are at explaining how they do it because they learned it at a relatively young age, like a native language. This is I think why there is such an abundance of content offensive to you on YouTube.

 

[ballmachineguy]

I'm sure its been said before but I would not say I've seen as clear and direct an explanation of the timing and form of the unit turn. Maybe I just know what to look for now that I understand its the single most important component of hitting topspin groundstroke. I will not ever be convinced this concept is communicated effectively to beginners on a broad scale because that simply is not true. Most people who know how to do a groundstroke well are much better at doing it than they are at explaining how they do it because they learned it at a relatively young age, like a native language. This is I think why there is such an abundance of content offensive to you on YouTube.

Self-taught in the last six years or so (just smashed balls previously for oohs and aahs) and I’m 62. Well no lessons anyway and didn’t play when a kid. I actually learned what you are talking about (prep position) on this forum.
What is offensive is that I haven’t seen anyone teach a fh correctly despite the abundance you cite. It’s all, the racquet goes here, then there and winds up here.
Ask yourself whether 1) someone hit balls the modern ATP style and then instructors dissected it and tell what they see and you could see for yourself or if 2) someone thought “I bet if I take the racquet back high, then drop below the ball, swivel the racquet into an extreme wrist lay back, find ‘the slot,’ pull the buttcap toward the ball and finish with a windshield wiper motion it would make for a great forehand!” Next day, goes out for a hit and says “yeah this works pretty well, but I mishit every fifth ball or so, I’ve got it! I bet if I keep it on the hitting side, it’ll be even better. Eureka!” That defies logic.
I promise it was the former. It isn’t rocket science someone took cuts at the ball the way we see now and people that don’t understand it just point out different locations of the racquet during the swing, because they don’t understand what causes it.
There is a simple goal that makes it go to all of those places and no one explains it. Apparently, you are supposed to piece everything together. Yes you, the amateur tennis player are in charge of teaching yourself
How many forehand lessons are out there, are posted online? What level of success are people having on here? It can be taught in a fraction of a single lesson’s time.

 

[optic yellow]

Self-taught in the last six years or so (just smashed balls previously for oohs and aahs) and I’m 62. Well no lessons anyway and didn’t play when a kid. I actually learned what you are talking about (prep position) on this forum.
What is offensive is that I haven’t seen anyone teach a fh correctly despite the abundance you cite. It’s all, the racquet goes here, then there and winds up here.
Ask yourself whether 1) someone hit balls the modern ATP style and then instructors dissected it and tell what they see and you could see for yourself or if 2) someone thought “I bet if I take the racquet back high, then drop below the ball, swivel the racquet into an extreme wrist lay back, find ‘the slot,’ pull the buttcap toward the ball and finish with a windshield wiper motion it would make for a great forehand!” Next day, goes out for a hit and says “yeah this works pretty well, but I mishit every fifth ball or so, I’ve got it! I bet if I keep it on the hitting side, it’ll be even better. Eureka!” That defies logic.
I promise it was the former. It isn’t rocket science someone took cuts at the ball the way we see now and people that don’t understand it just point out different locations of the racquet during the swing, because they don’t understand what causes it.
There is a simple goal that makes it go to all of those places and no one explains it. Apparently, you are supposed to piece everything together. Yes you, the amateur tennis player are in charge of teaching yourself
How many forehand lessons are out there, are posted online? What level of success are people having on here? It can be taught in a fraction of a single lesson’s time.

I agree with this. There is a lack of emphasis on the right fundamental steps in the right abstract terms. The unit turn is one component of this but the rest is not so well defined. It would be helpful if you described what that single goal is because it sounds like it is the animating idea that links all these components together and that is as important as knowing what they are individually apart and the order they go in.

 

[ballmachineguy]

it sounds like it is the animating idea that links all these components together and that is as important as knowing what they are individually apart and the order they go in.

There is and it does zero good to know them individually. That only invites mucking it up.
Oh and I forgot to tell you, when you know it, you can hit Tiafoe-style one shot, Sinner the next and Djoker the next.

 

[optic yellow]

There is and it does zero good to know them individually. That only invites mucking it up.

Well what is it? Why do you not tell me?

 

[optic yellow]

Well what is it? Why do you not tell me?

@ballmachineguy If the idea is that I figure it out myself, sure, just need a little time.

 

[ChaelAZ]

About a year ago, I tried to learn from the Ricc Macci "ATP-forehand", keeping the backswing compact. After a few months I noticed that I had lost some power in my shots, and my coach was saying regularly that I swing too close to my body.

After filming my forehands for the first time in half a year, I saw that I had made some misinterpretation/mal-adaptations of the ATP forehand. I could see that I had NO BACKSWING, I just drop the racket down after the unit turn. with a slightly bent racket arm "in front".

I know that 99% of all youtube coaches (like Jeff Salzeinstein) says amateurs should shorten the backswing not enlargen it, but I feel my backswing is non-existent/too short now, since I can feel I lost some pop in my forehands compared to my previous technique.

After that I've been filming my forehands like 5-10 times in the last month, and I can't for the love of god extend my arm out to create a bigger backswing, it's still bent through the whole backswing. Feels like syntax error not being able to correct it.

Anybody else had this problem? How much backswing is the right amount?

What was the actual issue you were trying to fix when the coach suggested a shorter backswing? Being late or ???

Been there, screwed myself up early, both on my "too high" start to my takeback, and then getting to far back...supposedly. Took me quite a while to get something together. Not that pros are terrific examples of what rec players should look like and do, but the irony to me is, for every coach nitpicking a nuance something-something that makes an "ATP" forehand, there is an ATP or college player, or many college and ATP players doing exactly the opposite. For example...shorten the back swing and 'pat-the-dog' to get the racquet face close to the ground or back towards the fence (cuz dropping on edge is WTA!)....

Right.


Or another favorite of mine, the racquet head should never go behind your body, cuz that is also "WTA". Or don't "drop-and-stop" in the slot and it MUST be a continuous motion. And so on...

Anyway, there certainly are check points to develop good technique, but how you get to those can be vastly different. I mean, to me I don't see anything bad in your form and the lack of 'pop' is more about loading and rotation/release to create the power, but if your old stroke felt fine and had more power with the same consistency, might take a bit to get back to it but that could be worth it.

Watch through all of these and notice a whole bunch of "bad technique" according to the 'ATP' forehand gurus.

EDIT TO ADD: Yeah, Meddy is an absolute Youtube coaches nightmare, the current #5 in the world. Again, right.

Good luck amigo. I will say technique will progress and regress at times with tweaks, but just make sure what you are working on fixes issues instead of creating them.

 

[Cherlos]

What was the actual issue you were trying to fix when the coach suggested a shorter backswing? Being late or ???

Been there, screwed myself up early, both on my "too high" start to my takeback, and then getting to far back...supposedly. Took me quite a while to get something together. Not that pros are terrific examples of what rec players should look like and do, but the irony to me is, for every coach nitpicking a nuance something-something that makes an "ATP" forehand, there is an ATP or college player, or many college and ATP players doing exactly the opposite. For example...shorten the back swing and 'pat-the-dog' to get the racquet face close to the ground or back towards the fence (cuz dropping on edge is WTA!)....

Right.


Or another favorite of mine, the racquet head should never go behind your body, cuz that is also "WTA". Or don't "drop-and-stop" in the slot and it MUST be a continuous motion. And so on...

Anyway, there certainly are check points to develop good technique, but how you get to those can be vastly different. I mean, to me I don't see anything bad in your form and the lack of 'pop' is more about loading and rotation/release to create the power, but if your old stroke felt fine and had more power with the same consistency, might take a bit to get back to it but that could be worth it.

Watch through all of these and notice a whole bunch of "bad technique" according to the 'ATP' forehand gurus.

EDIT TO ADD: Yeah, Meddy is an absolute Youtube coaches nightmare, the current #5 in the world. Again, right.

Good luck amigo. I will say technique will progress and regress at times with tweaks, but just make sure what you are working on fixes issues instead of creating them.

Thanks for the input!

The issue I was trying to fix in the first place was making sense of the takeback (I had no sense/understanding of what I was doing and did it differently every time.). I therefore had some issues with consistency and felt my arm/hand was traveling towards the ball in vastly different ways from time to time.

So you got problems from having your unit turn too ”deep” and takeback too high? Sounds kind of like the Djokovics unit turn and takeback. Did that cause timing issues and did you have to shorten everything up to get back to consistency again?

 

[ChaelAZ]

Thanks for the input!

The issue I was trying to fix in the first place was making sense of the takeback (I had no sense/understanding of what I was doing and did it differently every time.). I therefore had some issues with consistency and felt my arm/hand was traveling towards the ball in vastly different ways from time to time.

So you got problems from having your unit turn too ”deep” and takeback too high? Sounds kind of like the Djokovics unit turn and takeback. Did that cause timing issues and did you have to shorten everything up to get back to consistency again?

Was more Medvedev like and 'whippy'. This was several years back.

Kinda what it has ended up as:

I do like the simplified take back, and I like how I get in the 'slot' on the drop. I feel like I can pull through better and get good pop, but even now still work on getting a better swing path and spin.

My consistency in swing improved, but my age and fitness declined so consistency getting to the ball and set up to use it dropped. Can't f'in win.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

This is actually a key timing point I've never seen said before.

You must not be paying attention.

@Dragy @Cherlos

I disagree with the bounce as an ideal timing point for the (high & back) position shown. It might be fine for balls that bounce nr the service line or shorter. But it could be late for balls landing deeper -- especially for medium to fast balls landing beyond the service line.

When positioned around the baseline, I prefer to use the service line as a reference rather than the bounce point. Take a look at this rear view video of Roger hitting incoming balls that are moderately-paced. When the ball bounces deeper, Roger has already started to drop the racket head

 

[Cherlos]

Was more Medvedev like and 'whippy'. This was several years back.

Kinda what it has ended up as:

I do like the simplified take back, and I like how I get in the 'slot' on the drop. I feel like I can pull through better and get good pop, but even now still work on getting a better swing path and spin.

My consistency in swing improved, but my age and fitness declined so consistency getting to the ball and set up to use it dropped. Can't f'in win.

I see what you mean in the second video, with the arm looking very loose - in a good way - allowing for power from the lag.

My "locked-in/stiff" racket-arm in the backswing, not getting the arm to travel back in the backswing, started when I tried to achive the two-part/divided backswing where the unit turn is done as sone as possible, and the second part with the ball coming closer. As advocated in this video and many others.

This two-part division of the backswing removes the momentum of the racket travelling back, requiring me to actively steer the arm back after the unit turn, which seems to be strangely hard for me to do. Seems to have several timing benefits if done correctly though.

 

[Dragy]

I disagree with the bounce as an ideal timing point for the (high & back) position shown. It might be fine for balls that bounce nr the service line or shorter. But it could be late for balls landing deeper -- especially for medium to fast balls landing beyond the service line.

Look, it's definitely not a hard rule. For example, if I get a very high, but not very deep lob, that I'd like to take at comfortable height after it bounces way over my head, I won't be high & back by bounce, but maybe by the ball peak. Now if I see the ball coming to me in a way that I need to take it early after bounce, of course I'll try to be ready earlier.

Meanwhile, my practice and observations brought me to this concept, which proves to work most of the times:
- There's timing between bounce and impact that is optimal, usually matching "just after bounce peak";
- To hit the ball at that moment with most comfort and consistency, intending to be high & back by the bounce is optimal, with slight margin for error to not be late never.
- The ball does come shorter and deeper, that's true: one shall rely on ball recognition and footwork to play the ball as preferred.
- If opponent gives a lot of balls that land deep, I'll be settling farther behind the baseline and still intend to achieve same timing. This allows me to hit more balls with better quality.

Whatever variety in opponent's balls being short/deep, I'd prefer to hit at least 60% of them exactly that way, with racquet high and back by bounce. I'll try to recognize early and step in vs shorter balls. I'll rush and shorten my prep/slot entrance vs occasional deep balls. High & back may be replaced with more abbreviated takeback, but I still wanna beat the bounce with that.

Sometimes I have to start the swing by/before bounce. But that's not what I want. Increases inconsistency for me.

After all, once I went through a period of focusing on "high & back by bounce", I got enough experience and anticipation to subconsciously adjust for earlier/later preparation and swinging. When I see a good player, it's obvious that they are barely ever late. When you see a player who does only unit turn by bounce and waits for the ball with racquet still in front of the chest, you know he'll be late or very abbreviated/weak whenever he gets a bit challenging ball. You recognize that back-and-forth racquet jerking when you see it.

 

[Dragy]

This two-part division of the backswing removes the momentum of the racket travelling back, requiring me to actively steer the arm back after the unit turn, which seems to be strangely hard for me to do. Seems to have several timing benefits if done correctly though.

There's one important notice that it to be made, an issue that can block the benefits of bigger takeback for many. It is - one shouldn't be swinging hard from high & back position, shouldn't be trying to "punch" the ball with one simple move.

There's a very basic variation, old-school one, where you pendulum swing with moderate gradual acceleration. Works to hit softish shots, or when you use heavy racquet.

But the "good" technique implies that your swing starts with drop & slot entry. The swing starts, not drop-then-swing! But with no effort to accelerate too early!

You reach high & back position with full unit turn because it optimal configuration to get final read on the ball after bounce, reach optimal "slot" (by dropping, with minimal effort and tension), and accelerate from there.

But if you try to produce huge backswing and then powerfully accelerate from there, swing simply breaks down. Or it needs to be very well measured and gauged, like the freak-of-nature WTA stars of 00s and 10s were, think Serena or Sharapova, and their heirs like Osaka, Keys, etc.

 

[optic yellow]

@Dragy @Cherlos

I disagree with the bounce as an ideal timing point for the (high & back) position shown. It might be fine for balls that bounce nr the service line or shorter. But it could be late for balls landing deeper -- especially for medium to fast balls landing beyond the service line.

When positioned around the baseline, I prefer to use the service line as a reference rather than the bounce point. Take a look at this rear view video of Roger hitting incoming balls that are moderately-paced. When the ball bounces deeper, Roger has already started to drop the racket head

I read it as applying to the case where the opponent did not induce temporal duress.

 

[Jaferd]

First of all, I think you should not emulate Macci's atp forehand. It is awkward and not correct imo. No pros hit like that. Secondly, you do have a very limited take back because you only turn the body but your arm doesn't move back to give you more time to accelerate. I imagine your shots have little power. You need to externally rotate the shoulder and make a "C" loop motion to get the racket further behind you before the forward swing. Just don't make a large loop. Also, when you make contact with the ball, the head should be looking at the contact and kept there until the head is forced to turn away due to the rotation of your body in the follow through. Don't lift your head to watch where the ball goes. Lastly, the racket needs to be released into the shot, not after contact. Ow you will not get optimal racket head speed.

 

[nyta2]

Imo people generally think too much about the backswing. It just needs to be enough so that the first part of forward movement can consistently & efficiently produce the dynamic position where your shoulder/arm/wrist are tightly loaded & can transfer power into the racquet. And not too much such that you can't push into that loading because you have to arc around your body too much.

That being said, it does look like your arm's almost entirely in front of your torso like you're clapping your hands. You could try slightly opening up the arm relative to your chest, like you're giving someone a hug.

so what do you do if a student wants to have a backswing way behind them?

 

[nyta2]

First of all, I think you should not emulate Macci's atp forehand. It is awkward and not correct imo. No pros hit like that. Secondly, you do have a very limited take back because you only turn the body but your arm doesn't move back to give you more time to accelerate. I imagine your shots have little power. You need to externally rotate the shoulder and make a "C" loop motion to get the racket further behind you before the forward swing. Just don't make a large loop. Also, when you make contact with the ball, the head should be looking at the contact and kept there until the head is forced to turn away due to the rotation of your body in the follow through. Don't lift your head to watch where the ball goes. Lastly, the racket needs to be released into the shot, not after contact. Ow you will not get optimal racket head speed.

do you have a better mental model than the macci framework for a forehand? personally i love the checkpoints he provides (and then make adjustments from there), but im willing to use others if it makes more sense.

 

[Dragy]

do you have a better mental model than the macci framework for a forehand? personally i love the checkpoints he provides (and then make adjustments from there), but im willing to use others if it makes more sense.

I love @JohnYandell model for takeback (full back and ready to go) and extension (upper arm, forearm and chest making a "square box" after contact) as fundamental start-to-finish framework.

If you put @5263 Chuk Tomlin key moves in-between those checkpoints, which are entering the slot/setting the blade and attacking the ball across, you get it all pretty much.

1. Prepare with arm and racquet set up and back.
2. Find dynamic slot to pull from by dropping and with "swivel" (no static or hitchy pat-the-dog).
3. Accelerate the uncoiling with intended angle of racquet attack of the ball in mind.
4. "Tighten the arc" for racquet head going through and across the ball.
5. Reach good extension after contact with forearm away and "parallel" to the chest.
6. Let finish happen (here, you can definitely use finish shapes to control the type of forehand, but I'd say it's a tool outside of the fundamental framework)

PS I wonder if it hurts for the two to see them mentioned in one post

 

[nyta2]

I love @JohnYandell model for takeback (full back and ready to go) and extension (upper arm, forearm and chest making a "square box" after contact) as fundamental start-to-finish framework.

If you put @5263 Chuk Tomlin key moves in-between those checkpoints, which are entering the slot/setting the blade and attacking the ball across, you get it all pretty much.

1. Prepare with arm and racquet set up and back.
2. Find dynamic slot to pull from by dropping and with "swivel" (no static or hitchy pat-the-dog).
3. Accelerate the uncoiling with intended angle of racquet attack of the ball in mind.
4. "Tighten the arc" for racquet head going through and across the ball.
5. Reach good extension after contact with forearm away and "parallel" to the chest.
6. Let finish happen (here, you can definitely use finish shapes to control the type of forehand, but I'd say it's a tool outside of the fundamental framework)

PS I wonder if it hurts for the two to see them mentioned in one post

not gonna lie, i found that model difficult even for thinking about my groundstrokes...
macci seems simpler and easier to explain for beginners (iwth obviously lots of details hanging off his checkpoints)

the "hitchy pat the dog" is just a check point, but admittedly i can see how it can become a hitch if there are no followup progression drills to make the swing continuous through checkpoint.

but similar to the "pat the dog" checkpoint, if i interpret in isolation, "tighten the arc" makes me think of pulling my arms in at contact like a t-rex.
let the finish happen... but most (tight) folks don't finish with square box... they are still holding on tight, and end up squishing their bicep against their chest.

anywho, my takeaway, look at thiese models, is that you can't just use them in isolation,... there are "grains of sands" (details) between the "rocks" (checkpoints) that are critical

 

[Dragy]

macci seems simpler and easier to explain for beginners (iwth obviously lots of details hanging off his checkpoints)

What I like about Macci, he usually says “it’s a development instruction, not a final destination instruction”.

Why would you need to think of all my points simultaneously, let alone explain them to a beginner? If you get a Boeing blueprint book, will you try to get it through your mind with every detail? Or will you use it consequtively as you construct one?

Same here. You may want to start with grip, and ball contact. Then some swing from under the ball maybe. Check that they have follow-through. Then with turning sideways before they swing at the ball from under the ball. Then properly high takeback position, and learning to get there in time, and then swing in a way that racquet gets under the ball, torso uncoils, extension is reached.

If he does it all and makes clean contact, you are likely 2+ month into training

In the next few month dependent on the “beginner’s” athletic ability he might learn to load and accelerate more, relax the wrist and shoulder as more force is applied — swivel, be mindful of the slot and choose it intentionally. Get aware of “angle of attack”, introduce fade and draw basics.

Hello 6+ month of dedicated training!

Around 9 years ago I first learned about PTD and pulling from there. It didn’t do me well until I learned @JohnYandell concept, as far as I could understand it, mixed it a bit with pendulum swing, and only after that learned to inject the “lag-into-drag” in the middle of that swing.

Now I see the “PTD, then jerk it from there and slap the ball…” type of swings every know and then, and none of those is truly solid.

 

[optic yellow]

I love @JohnYandell model for takeback (full back and ready to go) and extension (upper arm, forearm and chest making a "square box" after contact) as fundamental start-to-finish framework.

If you put @5263 Chuk Tomlin key moves in-between those checkpoints, which are entering the slot/setting the blade and attacking the ball across, you get it all pretty much.

1. Prepare with arm and racquet set up and back.
2. Find dynamic slot to pull from by dropping and with "swivel" (no static or hitchy pat-the-dog).
3. Accelerate the uncoiling with intended angle of racquet attack of the ball in mind.
4. "Tighten the arc" for racquet head going through and across the ball.
5. Reach good extension after contact with forearm away and "parallel" to the chest.
6. Let finish happen (here, you can definitely use finish shapes to control the type of forehand, but I'd say it's a tool outside of the fundamental framework)

PS I wonder if it hurts for the two to see them mentioned in one post

Need more simple terms for the phases but this seems pretty on. What is the swivel though? I assume by this you mean letting the racquet face smoothly find the right orientation during the drop into slot? If that is the case I would say you want the intended angle of racquet attack there in mind earlier than 3rd step.

 

[Dragy]

Need more simple terms for the phases but this seems pretty on. What is the swivel though? I assume by this you mean letting the racquet face smoothly find the right orientation during the drop into slot? If that is the case I would say you want the intended angle of racquet attack there in mind earlier than 3rd step.

I use the terms @5263 introduced (hope I’m doing it more or less correct) to hopefully not deviate from original idea.

Intentions — yes, likely you shall intend the attack angle quite early. I put it there to emphasize you don’t uncoil independently, like it’s sometimes presented. All you do with your body is also to facilitate indented action of the racquet head vs the ball. Not just getting to contact and/or producing the power.

Swivel as I understand it is when racquet changes orientation as if it was pinned through some spot in the shaft. You move the hand down and out towards the ball, racquet head turns back around, while the racquet as whole barely moves until it’s entered desired slot.

The opposite is forcefully putting racquet head back during the backswing, or pulling forward hard before racquet is properly oriented.

 

[sureshs]

There are a couple of coaching videos on the Internet which explain why the ATP forehand is not suitable for many recreational players. It requires great timing, coil, and strength, which most rec players lack.

 

[Dragy]

There are a couple of coaching videos on the Internet which explain why the ATP forehand is not suitable for many recreational players. It requires great timing, coil, and strength, which most rec players lack.

Those who do this videos don’t understand ATP forehand

But they do understand how to attract particular auditory and collect following!

 

[ballmachineguy]

Those who do this videos don’t understand ATP forehand

But they do understand how to attract particular auditory and collect following!

The same can be said about the people you and nyta2 are talking about.

 

[Dragy]

The same can be said about the people you and nyta2 are talking about.

Anything can be said about anyone. But there’s pretty good way to gauge coaches: improvement and results of their students. It’s not perfect, but good enough.

 

[nyta2]

The same can be said about the people you and nyta2 are talking about.

which methodology do you prefer? i'm always open to alternative ways of thinking about how to teach tennis.
i'm all about using whatever makes sense... not trying to defend/refute any one particular framework, but will share what currently makes the most sense to me atm...

 

[ballmachineguy]

Anything can be said about anyone. But there’s pretty good way to gauge coaches: improvement and results of their students. It’s not perfect, but good enough.

Didn’t someone on here use one of those guys, gave up, and now hits WTA forehand?

 

[ballmachineguy]

which methodology do you prefer? i'm always open to alternative ways of thinking about how to teach tennis.
i'm all about using whatever makes sense... not trying to defend/refute any one particular framework, but will share what currently makes the most sense to me atm...

My own. I could teach anyone on here in 10 minutes. The guys you are following just broke down video of players that can actually do it and regurgitate those player’s racquet positions.

 

[nyta2]

My own. I could teach anyone on here in 10 minutes.

why not share here, i'm always open to learning something new.
10m is exceptionally fast... because i've definitely struggled with some beginners that had zero-to-little athletic ability (hand eye/foot eye - coordination)

The guys you are following just broke down video of players that can actually do it and regurgitate those player’s racquet positions.

i only use the methods/tips that have worked for me...

 

[Dragy]

Didn’t someone on here use one of those guys, gave up, and now hits WTA forehand?

I don’t know who are you talking about. And I’m personally ok with WTA variations like Ash Barty or Barbora Kejcikova, for example. Or Sabalenka.

One of the best YouTube coaches for me is Tom Allsop of TPA tennis. And he’s one who gives pointers and thoughts from different sides, for different situations, doesn’t try to create and transmit “ultimate blueprint”.

He also shows some before/after of students which usually looks like decent progress.

 

[ballmachineguy]

why not share here, i'm always open to learning something new.
10m is exceptionally fast... because i've definitely struggled with some beginners that had zero-to-little athletic ability (hand eye/foot eye - coordination)

i only use the methods/tips that have worked for me...

10 minutes to teach. I guess it could take a person longer to implement, but there wouldn’t be anything to oversee. It is so simple, it just wouldn’t be necessary.

I’d share, as I made a video a few months ago. I just don’t have the ability to edit it so it is ready for YouTube

 

[ballmachineguy]

I don’t know who are you talking about. And I’m personally ok with WTA variations like Ash Barty or Barbora Kejcikova, for example. Or Sabalenka.

One of the best YouTube coaches for me is Tom Allsop of TPA tennis. And he’s one who gives pointers and thoughts from different sides, for different situations, doesn’t try to create and transmit “ultimate blueprint”.

He also shows some before/after of students which usually looks like decent progress.

I didn’t say WTA isn’t good. It was just the inability of the pro to get the student to understand.
What is meant by “ultimate blueprint.” There is a one-size fits all for the ATP, if you understand it. Sure, they look different, but all do the same thing. Also, no need for progress when instantaneous success would have to be avoided to not have it.
Again, my jumping analogy. If you tried out for a basketball team, and on the first day, the coach said you were going to work on jumping, how long would you listen to and get confused about “the glute/quad/hamstring kinetic chain,” the “dynamic knee extension,” the “ankle release” and the two-stage toe explosion” that all need to happen, Individually, at precise moments, before you just said “screw this, I’m just going to push off of the ground explosively like I always have.” I just happen to know the “push off of the ground” action for the ATP/modern forehand. Believe me, I am not hurting my arm patting myself on the back over it. It is so simple, I can’t believe I didn’t figure it out much sooner.