Interactive Forum: December 2008 Dylan Bednarczyk

[uspta146749877]

Transfer of weight

Airforce1,
there is a serve at the end
of

http://www.carimages.info/videos/vid..._tennis_player

when weight is transfered forward during a serve

The Web page somehow disappeared-sorry
julian

[uspta2448519013]

I just wanted to chime is and say I agree with what Airforce said regarding the forehand takeback. As Dylan gets stronger it will probably shorten up naturally, but if it wasn't going to before hopefully it will now

I would also think that Dylan's father is open for constructive criticism regarding his son and usually parents that are searching for answers appreciate feedback as long as it leads to better results in the end. As the years go on it would be great to have video upadates on his progress every year to see where his game is at.

Dylan is on the right track, little tweaks here and there will help but he's definitely going in the right direction.


Jason Frausto

[airforce1]

Airforce1,
there is a serve at the end
of

http://www.carimages.info/videos/vid..._tennis_player

when weight is transfereed forward during a serve

yes, I did notice that one.
He does so much well on the serve, but the leg action was not consistent. Could just be chasing the toss, but I figured he was showing some of the better clips and I saw a lot of room for improvement in how the leg drive was going.
Clean up the toss location and it is amazing how much better the rest gets.

[tennis_chiro]

couple of points

This kid looks great for a 10 year old. Hits the ball more like he is 11 or 12. Seems to have very good velocity and ability to accelerate the racquet head through the ball. The things that trouble me are

the degree to which he takes the racket back to the inside on the forehand backswing. I guess that's the linearity referred to above. As a result, when he executes that wiper-action, he doesn't go through the ball nearly as much as he could.

On the backhand, I feel the initial backswing is a little too much to the outside. He manages to get to the inside pretty well, but will that hold up when he gets pressed or he is forced to shorten the backswing for a return of serve or even approach shot. Minor point, but it will make a difference long term.

On the serve, there is an apparent "pro action" with the extreme knee bend and complete motion, but I look for a couple of other fundamentals I want established before I worry about my students trying to get into the leg action so much. I emphasize more of a "bow" of the legs and not so much of a bend of the knees, but that is relatively minor compared to whether he is actually at full extension from right toe up to contact point (which he is not) and whether he is pronating through contact point at the top of the action (which he is not). Granted it is great for a 10 year old. But if this kid is being considered as a prodigy, these little fundamentals are very important.

don brosseau

[uspta146749877]

A second video tape

This kid looks great for a 10 year old. Hits the ball more like he is 11 or 12. Seems to have very good velocity and ability to accelerate the racquet head through the ball. The things that trouble me are

the degree to which he takes the racket back to the inside on the forehand backswing. I guess that's the linearity referred to above. As a result, when he executes that wiper-action, he doesn't go through the ball nearly as much as he could.

On the backhand, I feel the initial backswing is a little too much to the outside. He manages to get to the inside pretty well, but will that hold up when he gets pressed or he is forced to shorten the backswing for a return of serve or even approach shot. Minor point, but it will make a difference long term.

On the serve, there is an apparent "pro action" with the extreme knee bend and complete motion, but I look for a couple of other fundamentals I want established before I worry about my students trying to get into the leg action so much. I emphasize more of a "bow" of the legs and not so much of a bend of the knees, but that is relatively minor compared to whether he is actually at full extension from right toe up to contact point (which he is not) and whether he is pronating through contact point at the top of the action (which he is not). Granted it is great for a 10 year old. But if this kid is being considered as a prodigy, these little fundamentals are very important.

don brosseau

Don,
a serve at the end of the second video

http://www.carimages.info/videos/vid..._tennis_player

is a bit different and worth comparing with the serve video,
regards,
julian

[tennis_chiro]

to Julian

I still think the pronation stops at the top of the action instead of continuing through it like the classic Sampras move and I don't think he is fully extended. I couldn't find a comparable angle for a lefty in the stroke archive. Great motion, but until he does those things he's really only "massaging" the ball and won't get any real pop on the serve. Like Nadal until about 2 years ago.
don

[uspta146749877]

to Don

Don,
sometime ago we had a conversation/exchange of posts about size of a sweet spot
for different rackets as a follow-up of your article,I believe.
It is possible however,that my memory is failing me here.
Just to let you know that
Tennis Warehouse
provides a tool which more or less
measures size of a sweet spot.
Obviously a definition of a sweet spoit has to be introduced here.
Please see

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/contours.html

for tools.
julian
juliantennis@comcast.net

PS Pronation in general affects a location where a ball touches strings.
With some skills and timing this spot could be "moved" lower/towards a throat.Some people believe that it will increase a speed of serve.
To some extent we have a link between amount pronation and some characteristics of a racket.
Please let me know what do you think.
I have sent E-mail to you but I am NOT sure whether your E-mail
will reject me or NOT.I remember I had some problems before

[tennis_chiro]

Sweet spots, pronation, lever arms & TW University

Wow, that TW University site is terrific. But they kind of agree with what I was trying to say in our earlier correspondence. It's a continuum of more speed at a longer lever arm vs less power from the sweet spot further from the throat. It's a great explanation of the physics. But, as usual in most of these analyses, they have to measure one parameter, in this case speed. The tools on the TW U website give you the chance to measure some different things, but essentially it's speed. If you are going to be that detailed and specific, you have to account for the difference in accuracy: i.e. how long is the ball touching the strings and what effect of the trampoline misdirection takes place away from the exact trampoline center, how is the spin effected. It would get pretty complicated. Perhaps the biomechanists can figure that out, but it wouldn't mean much to a player. Maybe to a racket designer.

Bottom line, the player has to feel the sweet spot for him and for his specific shot. He will learn a slightly different sweet spot for serve as opposed to groundstrokes. He won't do this on purpose. It will just happen as he feels the ball and his best shots (if he's paying attention and feeling the racket head).

We can use all this information to look for rackets that are worth trying out, but ultimately, the player has to find what feels great for him and get used to it. One of the great thing about demo programs.

[uspta146749877]

A direction of toss

I still think the pronation stops at the top of the action instead of continuing through it like the classic Sampras move and I don't think he is fully extended. I couldn't find a comparable angle for a lefty in the stroke archive. Great motion, but until he does those things he's really only "massaging" the ball and won't get any real pop on the serve. Like Nadal until about 2 years ago.
don

It seems to me that a toss is straight up,NOT on an arc.

[tennis_chiro]

toss: straight up or in an arc

It seems to me that a toss is straight up,NOT on an arc.

Reminds me of the show I was watching on the history channel tonight on the speed of light. The demonstrator throwing the tennis ball standing still or riding the bicycle (faster & farther on the bike).

Up until a few years ago it was almost written in stone that the weight went forward as you tossed the ball. You could start back like Sampras or start forward and rock like Stich, but when you were actually tossing the ball, the weight was moving forward. This would, of course, move the toss further forward than just the stationary toss. I still insist upon this. But a few years ago, leg action began to be emphasized more and more. I always felt the weight should have been transferred 100% to the front foot by just before the final upward snap for the sake of consistency and control. The argument is that you can get more power by moving up into the serve as you are hitting the ball. And you start to see more platform stances and people holding the weight on the back foot until the toss is completed and then moving forward on the hit.

The body works for real power with angular momentum. We use levers to generate forces around pivot points or fulcrums. If the fulcrum is not secure, you can't apply much force to the lever. If it was efficient to move forward into the snap as you are snapping we would see a lot more jump passers in the NFL and major league pitchers would be leaving the mound before they release the ball (although I don't know; that may be against the rules in baseball). Sure we had rules that kept you from moving your feet before you hit the ball, but I don't think that is the key to the toss. To me the lynchpin that holds the rhythm of the serve together is the rock/weight-transfer. This whole business of leaving the weight back and then going forward is way to complicated. I don't think 1st serve percentages are what they could be. My research sample is limited. Obviously there are many ways to hit a serve. Some players have no problem with rhythm and consistency, but even world class players like Coria (now 574) can lose their rhythm if it does not have a sound fundamental basis. When someone has trouble learning the serve, I can get them some consistency based on the gravity swing of the racket and the weight transfer/rock that hold the motion together.

But I digress. The point is, if he moved his weight forward as he tossed the ball, he would move it further in front of him automatically. I seem to remember John having some data on tosses that they don't really go up straight but actually move from right to left IN AN ARC. From my point of view, before Dylan worries so much about the knee bend he has going, he should get absolutely habitually committed to hitting the ball at full extension with better and more complete pronation through the contact point. And that would also include hitting the ball out in front a little more. When he learns that, then it might make sense (not to me) to start to do all these extreme moves with the knee bends on the toss. There is also the argument that if you are ever going to learn to hit the serve like the Battistones (if you think that is the next stage in development of the serve...Steve Johnson told me he saw one of them bounce a first serve OVER the fence against his son), you better start learning that motion early. I think you have to get the fundamentals sound first. There's a reason we see all those classic pictures of Pete's forehand when he was younger (see John's article this month).

Well that's enough. Kind of disappointed we are not getting much response from anybody else here. What do you think, guys?

By this point, after all, Dylan's dad is getting pretty confused and we are not helping him much. Let him hear some other voices.

[dnabedrick]

Dylan's strokes and Jason's article on pro men/women combined. hope that is okay....

I think Dylan's strokes are for the most part amazing for 10 years old, yes variations and strength questions must certainly come into play when dissecting anyone's strokes, but clearly this 10 year old has been taught well and taught very strong technically solid concepts for fh/bh/ and serve.

I wanted to add a little more to the question about Dylan's game and tie in Jason Fausto's last great article about variation in Pro Tennis Men's and Women's Forehands.

When I saw Dylan's backhand technique which I loved, it reminded me I wanted to request that Jason do a follow up for tennisplayer.net about variations in men's and women's backhands. I have wanted to have a discussion about this for quite some time because I think the technique, strategy, and strength issues highlight clear differences in the men's and women's backhands, and also are noteworthy in regards to how we should be coaching/teaching young aspiring junior players such as Dylan.

Excuse me if the subject shifts a little bit directly from Dylan.

Dylan's backhand though with the high pre-set take back and the upper body rotation, and the non dominant(left) elbow flare up and out at the start is what I love to see now on the men's tour, and am trying really hard to master on my own game, and to teach to juniors.

here is the letter I addressed to Jason below, that covers the men's/women's pro backhand questions and ties into how to teach a great junior like Dylan who hits this "men's pro backhand already".

One last thing- 1) who will get ultimate credit for the reverse forehand in tennis- how did it really evolve and was it just an "strain" from the original forehand or was it a deliberately taught modification. In the case of Nadal, I believe it was taught to create additional enormous advantage for a lefty battling a righty? It is the one main hole Nadal can implement attacking in Federer's game that really most right hander's cannot do against Federer.

2) Who gets credit for this new age backhand technique mainly used on the men's tour. Racket cocked up, left elbow out etc. Was Kafelnikov first, did a Russian coach develop it, Safin, a local kid now 28 living in Minneapolis and working with me with top 300 ATP like strokes and game- is a russian who came over 10 years ago from Siberia with this backhand, so somebody there I know was teaching it. Any thoughts....love to hear...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
the letter made the thread to long so it will follow in a second post below...

[dnabedrick]

Follow up letter to Jason and comments about Dylan's backhand

Hi Jason,

I have read at least two of your articles, Donald Young and now Men/Women Forehands on the tour. Loved both of them, maybe read one more previously not sure. You have done an amazing job laying out the concepts and then adding the right video footage to complement perfectly.


Anyway, just saw you thoughts on the young boy and reminded me to contact you. I will ask one detail about boy later, but first, will you consider writing your next article about a similar issue to your last. Will you write one about the men's and women's backhand on the pro tour?

I believe that the two articles almost go hand in hand and would make for more future interesting discussion and validation of different key issues in teaching styles to men and women.

I loved your analysis of Henin Hardenne who played more like a pro man's style version of tennis. Do you also see similarities to some degree with that style in Svetlana Kuznetzova's game, similar strokes to me and much more of the men's technical backhand to me, she also does not probably move as well as other women, so the men's style may suit her better more offensive and more dictating (speculating only). What do you think?


Highlighting- the different usage of footwork patterns, court position and stroke production differentiations.

Specifically- I think that....

1)The women hit far more balls open stance than the men do, and do so because they are opening up the court more with their backhands than the men are and the women are hitting more angles with their backhands and not driving the ball as much, inside out backhands from the center of the court, and also do not need to drive the backhand as much to avoid their opponents taking control of the center of the court like the men do with big forehands.

2) The women probably less than 60% forehands vs. backhands in a typically even high level pro match. Some women you see even still choose to run around balls and hit backhands. I also still see that a lot on the junior tournaments. The women are just as comfortable rallying from the center of the court hitting backhands as they are forehands.

Women probably hit more backhand winners, and comparing the article on Nadal/Federer Wimbledon match statistical analysis that the European Guys wrote about the effects of the Serve and then the 2nd ball hit after the serve and dictating with forehands, I would dare to say that women hit far fewer second ball forehands off the serve as a habit than men do. How much, any interesting statistical query.

Due to a lack of muscular strenght for women in comparison to the men, the women serves cannot dictate as much, so therefore women cannot control where there 2nd ball is going to be hit from nearly as much. Thus the result is they cannot hit as many forehands or choose not to on their second ball.

3) The men play at least 60% of all baseline balls as forehands, I would guess. And would prefer to play even more forehands than that when possible.

I see the backhand baseline shot (not passing shot) primarily used in Men's tennis in the far 1/4 or 1/5 corner of the court. It is hit mainly neutral closed stance and hit with a driving linear swing much more than the women's stroke.

The men's down the line backhand is often the game changer shot in a match. Chela, Murray, Safin and many more can often take a hard hit inside out forehand and still change the direction and needle in a sweet down the line ripping - defense to offense - "transitioning" shot that re sets the point on the other side of the court and creates for exciting follow up on the run "pete sampras- esque forehand winners.

You can see that point structure happen often enough, Man takes the middle ball run's around backhand and hits forehand inside out and then eventually defender goes for big shot down the line with backhand and then gets a return shot coming at him on the opposite corner of the court and now hits a forehand either back cross court or now down the line to opponents backhand.

4) Technical differences in Men's and women's backhand are partly determined by the strength strategy variations on the different tours.

John Yandell earlier laid out some good variations to the 2 handed backhand, and then of course there is the amazing one handers that often you see more of on the men's side, but still a few great ones have existed on the women's side (henin hardenne being one).

The two handers seemed to change with Kafelnikov being the first, might be wrong. Love to know how the evolution occurred. Chang was # 2 in the world with the drop down racket head back hand that I also learned as a junior.

Now Kafelnikov, Safin and I think the russians began teaching the racket head upright on the backhand. Where else did it come from?

Since the beginning of this evolution the 2 handed backhand has become a game changer like never before, It can be ripped down the line. It can also defend better against the big men's kicking topsin serve out wide and high, because the racket head is higher now in preparation and can be hit from up high with decent power and control.

Also, as I mentioned the stroke needed to be hit harder and swung at with more force because of the racket technology changing and the new age defense- offense- speed baseline players like NADAL and Murray specifically can cover huge amounts of a tennis court with lightning quickness and play well beyond the baseline if needed but still rip huge balls off forehand and backhand wings, and also start back further on return of serve to get more back and play better defense than ever before.

5) The women's stroke technically still favors finesse and holding the ball longer than just ripping and beating the opponent to the spot (men's down the line shot does that). The women are trying to wrong foot or angle out their opponents from often the center of the court with their backhands and they have great ability to hit the inside out backhand from middle of the court that you rarely ever would see a man hit (man would almost always run around and choose a forehand).

Serena has now even perfected and inside out backhand return from the deuce side of the court. Which we hardly ever see a man try to hit.

6) The into the body serve against a man with the high racket set up and left elbow out (more questions on the elbow to still come) is now almost more effective than the high kick serve.

The men have their arms pre set further away from their bodies and their elbows to. The women still have their arms and elbows often resting on the waist or rib cage.

This concepts are one reason why we typically will not see a man hitting an inside out return on the deuce side like Serena can do.

Men still can do it but it is as of yet still an unperfected shot by many.

7) Lastly- as we see with the boy Dylan from Canada who is only 10 years of age and has pretty well developed technically sound strokes and solid footwork/balance pattern foundations as shown in the videos-

What are you thoughts on that left elbow flare out on the take back on the men's pro backhand.

I love it, and I know have to consciously remind myself to set it up that way. It is hard because I was not taught that way.

But when I think about it and do it, I have a far superior, hard hitting, controlled directional backhand than previously.

I like the left elbow flare and pre set, similar to what we do with the right elbow on the forehand, and I also find it very similar to what
Baseball players historically/tradionally are taught to do in the batter's box when getting ready to hit.

With the elbow up and out away from the waist/hip- I am able to much easier crack that backhand and smack it with control and without the racket face caving in which so often happened before.

I know want to better learn to teach the high racket pre set on the backhand and the elbow flare up and out as well, especially to boys but maybe not always to girls unless I think they position the personality, strength and dictating serves to be offense minded and control the court with their forehands.


Really hope you will consider responding and also love to have you put an article with video footage together that really complements your previous article as well

Sincerely,

Daniel Nabedrick

[uspta146749877]

Articles about serve of Sampras

Don,
an article below relates nicely to your last post

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/tour_strokes/john_yandell/sampras_serve/sampras_serve_tossingarm_part3_pg3_images/sampras_serve_tossingarm_part3_pg3.html

julian

PS See Pages 1 and 2 as well

[uspta146749877]

Lefty serve

I still think the pronation stops at the top of the action instead of continuing through it like the classic Sampras move and I don't think he is fully extended. I couldn't find a comparable angle for a lefty in the stroke archive. Great motion, but until he does those things he's really only "massaging" the ball and won't get any real pop on the serve. Like Nadal until about 2 years ago.
don

To some extent

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/pro_men/rafael_nadal/rafeal_nadal_high_speed.html?2ndSAdSideFront-0513524-0001.mov

is of interest

[uspta146749877]

Forearm pronation

It would be proper to mention that

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/biomechanics/brian_gordon/serve_tennis_science%20_brian_gordon/serve_tennis_science%20_brian_gordon.html

states that forearm pronation contributes 5% to racket speed prior to contact.
Elbow extension contributes 35%
and wrist flexion contributes 24%.