Robert Lansdorp The Reverse Forehand Revisited

[nabrug]

I agree to the implications of Robert Lansdorp's article towards coaches etc..

I want to add 4 things:

1. Nadal is also reversing his Backhands. He is using it in the same way as he does with the Fh to build ralleys etc.. Like the Fh towards the finish of a point he is using flatter groundstrikes. He doesn't use the Bh in an offensive way.

2. I am convinced that understanding the reverse Fh and Bh in the defensive way Nadal is using it will be the answer for Federer if he wants to be nr 1 again. Especially for the Bh-returns in which he fails quite a lot. Nadal is using the Fh (not the Bh-reverse) reverse also in a very offensive way when he builds his points. In my opinion that is less interesting for Federer.

3. Nadal is hitting a different reverse Fh than all other players mentioned. As mentioned in other articles he is combining it with a straight armed technique. That is why he can use it not only as a passing shot but also as a very agressive defensive shot or building shot.

4. Besides the mentioned curved ball trajectory the real big advantage is that the hitting zone is enlarged. I am still researching this. For the time being I think if you see the double-bend Fh as 1, the straight arm Fh gives you a 4 time bigger hitting zone and than you can double this amount when you use the reverse Fh/Bh. So I see it as 1:4:8. In my opinion that is giving him the decisive advantage and that is why he is nr. 1 nowadays.


Nico Mol
Amsterdam
Holland
Europe

[airforce1]

I think you make some very good and interesting points. Nadal does some very creative things with his strokes.

But I really think the stroke to stroke match up between Fed and Nadal is over done. So many just seem to accept that Nadals shots to Feds BH cause too much trouble. Yes, they give him trouble, but Fed still commands points better than 2 to 1. I can't comment on clay, but in Wimbledon and on hardcourts, Nadal is not hitting enough winners and forced errors to command any stroke advantage over Fed to effect the match except mentally.

It really comes down to more of a shot tolerance thing, as Roger dominates him in the number of winners, forced errors and dictating points in the matches I've charted. It is the UEs by Fed that undo him. Rafa makes Fed feel he has to do more, and earlier due to Nadal's ability to defend, an incredible shot tolerance, and turning defense into offense if you blink.

[uspta146749877]

Fed vs Nadal

I agree to the implications of Robert Lansdorp's article towards coaches etc..

I want to add 4 things:

1. Nadal is also reversing his Backhands. He is using it in the same way as he does with the Fh to build ralleys etc.. Like the Fh towards the finish of a point he is using flatter groundstrikes. He doesn't use the Bh in an offensive way.

2. I am convinced that understanding the reverse Fh and Bh in the defensive way Nadal is using it will be the answer for Federer if he wants to be nr 1 again. Especially for the Bh-returns in which he fails quite a lot. Nadal is using the Fh (not the Bh-reverse) reverse also in a very offensive way when he builds his points. In my opinion that is less interesting for Federer.

3. Nadal is hitting a different reverse Fh than all other players mentioned. As mentioned in other articles he is combining it with a straight armed technique. That is why he can use it not only as a passing shot but also as a very agressive defensive shot or building shot.

4. Besides the mentioned curved ball trajectory the real big advantage is that the hitting zone is enlarged. I am still researching this. For the time being I think if you see the double-bend Fh as 1, the straight arm Fh gives you a 4 time bigger hitting zone and than you can double this amount when you use the reverse Fh/Bh. So I see it as 1:4:8. In my opinion that is giving him the decisive advantage and that is why he is nr. 1 nowadays.


Nico Mol
Amsterdam
Holland
Europe

Hi,
you may read an article in the November issue of the Tennis Player
on the very related subject

[nabrug]

Questions?

Hi,
you may read an article in the November issue of the Tennis Player
on the very related subject

Where? Which article?

[julian]

Article

Where? Which article?

Please click new issue.

Otherwise

you may click

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/new_issue/2008/november/new_issue_november_2008.html

juliantennis@comcast.net

[nabrug]

Please click new issue.

Otherwise

you may click

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/new_issue/2008/november/new_issue_november_2008.html

juliantennis@comcast.net

I can't find any article on reversed Bh's.

[johnyandell]

If you mean where the racket finishes on the same side of the body as it starts--like the reverse forehand--it's gonna be a long look.

[nabrug]

?

[julian]

Confusion-my bad

I can't find any article on reversed Bh's.

I did NOT say it is ABOUT REVERSED BH.
I meant that it was a comparison of Nadal and Federer shots.
Sorry for confusion
The title of the article is:
"Federer versus Nadal:Three Overlooked Factors".
Worth reading imho.

[nabrug]

Confusion

The article Fed vs Nadal is written by two Dutch colleagues. The article was already published in a Dutch tennis magazine 6-12 months ago. The conclusions were already known to me for some time. They are from a different kind than my conclusions mentioned above.

Nico Mol.

[airforce1]

I agree to the implications of Robert Lansdorp's article towards coaches etc..

I want to add 4 things:

1. Nadal is also reversing his Backhands. He is using it in the same way as he does with the Fh to build ralleys etc.. Like the Fh towards the finish of a point he is using flatter groundstrikes. He doesn't use the Bh in an offensive way.

2. I am convinced that understanding the reverse Fh and Bh in the defensive way Nadal is using it will be the answer for Federer if he wants to be nr 1 again. Especially for the Bh-returns in which he fails quite a lot. Nadal is using the Fh (not the Bh-reverse) reverse also in a very offensive way when he builds his points. In my opinion that is less interesting for Federer.

3. Nadal is hitting a different reverse Fh than all other players mentioned. As mentioned in other articles he is combining it with a straight armed technique. That is why he can use it not only as a passing shot but also as a very agressive defensive shot or building shot.

4. Besides the mentioned curved ball trajectory the real big advantage is that the hitting zone is enlarged. I am still researching this. For the time being I think if you see the double-bend Fh as 1, the straight arm Fh gives you a 4 time bigger hitting zone and than you can double this amount when you use the reverse Fh/Bh. So I see it as 1:4:8. In my opinion that is giving him the decisive advantage and that is why he is nr. 1 nowadays.


Nico Mol
Amsterdam
Holland
Europe

Are you surprised at how important some see this reversed shot, which is primarily a defending shot for when your "position on the ball" way less than optimal?

[nabrug]

The "reversing" with FH1/BH1 technique is imo not important although Sharapova and Clijsters manage to get Nadal like results with FH1.

When you use FH2/BH2 technique than it gets a real different story. Nadal has built his game around it! And if I am correct (I can be wrong though) he is the number 1 of the world with imo inferior technique when compared to Federer. So how important do you want it to get?

Surprised? No. Talking about "idiocy"? I think it is doubtful to write about things you hardly understand in a way that you give the idea that people could implement it in their game.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<Maybe don't listen! (From the thread: Philipp Kohlschreiber Backhand)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by normand_trempe:
"i realise i am not very specific in my explanations! What my coach wanted me to do wasnt just a 90 degree rotation which i agree happens almost on every shot, he wanted me to rotate it 180 degrees so that the head of the racquet was parallel to the ground on the opposite position that the racquet is at the hit. I felt my elbow and shoulder muscles were about to break".

I am almost convinced that what you mean belongs to the Bh2 technique. To explain this I have described the strokes from the movies of Kohlschreiber above on this thread.
Movie 1 (3 strokes): ?, ?, Bh2.
Movie 2 (4 strokes): Bh1, ? (probably Bh2), Bh2, Bh2.
Movie 3 (3 strokes): Bh2, Bh1, Bh2.

The danger is that coaches try to persuade caracteristics of strokes on pupils in order to achieve the same stroke of the top player without really understanding the stroke themselves. Something that also John Yandell mentioned several times in several articles as a warning. In this case the hand/arm rotation belongs to Bh2. People with Bh1 shouldn't strive for the same arm rotation like in Bh2.

Besides this as a tennis teacher I think that you shouldn't give pupils instructions about the form of the racket (racket face trajectory) in the end fase. The end fase gives information on the former racket trajectory. In my opinion you should only use this information to give feedback/instructions on the preparation fase and/or main fase of the swing.

Nico Mol
Amsterdam
Holland>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Nico Mol

[mntlblok]

The "reversing" with FH1/BH1 technique is imo not important although Sharapova and Clijsters manage to get Nadal like results with FH1.

When you use FH2/BH2 technique than it gets a real different story. Nadal has built his game around it! And if I am correct (I can be wrong though) he is the number 1 of the world with imo inferior technique when compared to Federer. So how important do you want it to get? . . .



Nico Mol

I'd been away from the Tennisplayer web site since December, but have spent the last few days catching back up - with both the articles and the forum posts.

Several times it looked like you were going to share some interesting insights about your original categorizations of forehand types. Each time, however, unless I missed something, you never seemed to get around to actually describing how those categories differ. It seems that the contact point range offered by one type is the primary difference that you feel you've picked up on. Have I just missed where you've explained your fh2/bh2 findings?

Kevin
Savannah

[oliensis]

Reverse Forehand Not So New?

From:

http://bmarcore.club.fr/tennis/Grandslam.html

Can't be sure, but this looks a lot like an artist's rendering of just such a reverse forehand.

Otto Froitzheim, german tobacco card, 1925

[uspta146749877]

Error messages and fun with computers

From:

http://bmarcore.club.fr/tennis/Grandslam.html

Can't be sure, but this looks a lot like an artist's rendering of just such a reverse forehand.

Otto Froitzheim, german tobacco card, 1925

FYI:
If I click the name of the file snap1.gif
I got the message below.
It is a part of more genertic problem how to export images
to www.tennisplayer.com.
Eric Matuszewski had similar problems dealing with the same issue
and my knowledge on this subject did NOT move forward
----->
uspta146749877, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.