A New Year's Serve

[bottle]

Should I take a shot here at 10splayer? Nah-- too easy.

[don_budge]

Tennis and Life...rich in Metaphor

Should I take a shot here at 10splayer? Nah-- too easy.

Tennis and life are two games that are largely based on the decisions that we make. So the question is...what is there to be gained?

With 10splayer...he somehow has this incredible need to agree or disagree but then he tends to get a bit short with anyone that doesn't agree with him. His comfort zone tends to be the conventional wisdom of the day. He tends to be an "engineer" and feels more comfortable in like company. It's a stretch for him to get "artsy fartsy" with the artists around.

I remember back when I was living in the States and working at Ford Motor Company...the workers used to say "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" and me with my mirror mind and Alice in the Looking Glass way of looking at things...turned it around to "joke 'em if they can't take a fuck".

10splayer tried to call me out recently on some really piddley crap so I chose to joke him. Afterall...I have nothing to prove by trying to sink lower than the next guy. More often than not "the next guy" is 10splayer on this forum. Which is quite alright with me...there is plenty of room for everybody here. Afterall it would be really boring if everyone would be like me...the perfection of things would be overwhelming. He also told me to get over myself...which I assured him that would never happen. Unless monkeys started flying out of his butt first.

Now cue in 10splayer...accusing me of sticking up for my buddy Bottle. Guilty as charged. Cool it 10splayer. Take it down a notch. Just state your case and let things be. Your opinions tend to be good enough without having to shoot somebody down. I'm being serious in the last sentence...by the way.

[10splayer]

Tennis and life are two games that are largely based on the decisions that we make. So the question is...what is there to be gained?

With 10splayer...he somehow has this incredible need to agree or disagree but then he tends to get a bit short with anyone that doesn't agree with him. His comfort zone tends to be the conventional wisdom of the day. He tends to be an "engineer" and feels more comfortable in like company. It's a stretch for him to get "artsy fartsy" with the artists around.

I remember back when I was living in the States and working at Ford Motor Company...the workers used to say "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" and me with my mirror mind and Alice in the Looking Glass way of looking at things...turned it around to "joke 'em if they can't take a fuck".

10splayer tried to call me out recently on some really piddley crap so I chose to joke him. Afterall...I have nothing to prove by trying to sink lower than the next guy. More often than not "the next guy" is 10splayer on this forum. Which is quite alright with me...there is plenty of room for everybody here. Afterall it would be really boring if everyone would be like me...the perfection of things would be overwhelming. He also told me to get over myself...which I assured him that would never happen. Unless monkeys started flying out of his butt first.

Now cue in 10splayer...accusing me of sticking up for my buddy Bottle. Guilty as charged. Cool it 10splayer. Take it down a notch. Just state your case and let things be. Your opinions tend to be good enough without having to shoot somebody down. I'm being serious in the last sentence...by the way.

I have to believe there is some hope for me. Please tell me there is. Was up all night, mulling this over, knowing I am the lowest rung on the tennis forum ladder. Self realization is a bitch.

All I can tell you and Bottle is that I'll try to do better. I'll pour through his endless posts of the almost hourly changes, to his game. Research his obscure passages/references/lingo to try to better understand his journey. I now really want to, I'm a changed man.


Hell, I'll fly to Detroit and take a tour of the old Ford factory, sing along to the lyrics you post...whatever's necessary to improve myself, and my status, in your guy's eyes.

I just want to be a better forum man.

[bottle]

Funny

Yes it is.

[stotty]

Wristy versus wristless

In the clip of Rosewall's backhand...which is the finest clip of his backhand I have ever come across, the most noticeable thing, for me at least, is the way he slings the wrist at the ball. He's almost a slapping at the ball. Contrast this with McEnroe's sliced backhand in the archive which is entirely wristless.

[bottle]

Double Rolls for Goose and Gander

I of course wrote this before receiving your new intelligence on wrist, Stotty, a tip that might change everything and all for the better.

The Gordon-Macci ATP Forehand doesn't exist in a bell jar somewhere. (See the autobiographical Sylvia Plath novel THE BELL JAR in which Sylvia aims her skis at the center of a fat tree while her boyfriend Buddy watches.)

No, once The ATP Forehand came out of the lab, we tennis inventors started looking for new applications.

Rosewallian slice seems one of the best. Roll this way then roll that way-- same idea but on other side of the body. And once one has mastered a reasonable facsimile of Ken Rosewall's full slice, one can shrink it and slightly invert for backhand volley to produce an upward blow.

An upward blow to produce the controlling backspin in a backhand volley? Absolutely though because of dying and death and funerals all over the place I haven't had time to try this yet. Ivan Lendl long ago talked about the upward trajectory slice of his youth in his joint book with Eugene Scott.

Why be interested in that odd subject now? Because I have gotten bored with my old backhand volley particularly in doubles poach even though my Detroit friend with beautiful sisters Sebastien Foka, who came up with Jo-Wilfried Tsonga as another mixed race junior in recent France, adjudged it the best of my strokes.

It served the 73-year-old me very well a couple weeks ago against a burly newcomer to the Detroit tennis scene, a left-hander with preternatural ability. Let's assume he's 24 years old and took up tennis when he was 22. If he'd started tennis at an earlier, more reasonable age, he would have known better than to hit the ball as hard as he could at my backhand volley.

I was so surprised that I froze. Clearly, this shot was faster than anything in Rome or Madrid. I barely had time to sidestep and hear the ball zing past.

Well, Burly Boy remembered and so did I. At the penultimate moment of the hotly contested set which my Australian partner Patrick and I won 6-4 having charged from behind, the left-handed drill bit came directly at my body again.

Did I get my arm straight? No. Did I do anything other than grip down tightly on my handle as if it was the lid on a Jif peanut butter jar? Nope. Best and fastest volley I ever hit and deep to the open court, and he didn't try that again although he should have.

But slower balls come to me, too. And that is why I'm looking right now to add new double roll to my game.

Note: For best way to produce both crossed slice and severe chop like the so-called "slice" of Roger Federer, see RACKET WORK: THE KEY TO TENNIS by John M. Barnaby.

[stotty]

The wall

A great way to practice volleying is against a wall. When I was a kid, I practiced against a wall for at least 30 minutes a day. I would stand up quite close to the wall...maybe 6 to 7 feet away...and rat-a-tat-tat away for all I was worth. Ten volleys on the forehand, then ten on the backhand, then interchanging, then low ones, then high ones, then a high one and straight to a low one, then out of the body....faster, faster, faster until I would lose control of the ball. This is a great way also to develop time on the ball. A good volleyer simply must have time, like Mac and Mecir...notice how time stood still for them...and how it doesn't for Djokovic and Nadal.

I became a good volleyer by practicing against a wall. Best of all, it made my volleys firm and wristless...against a wall there is no time to break the wrist back...I learnt how for brace on fast balls...brace and stick...perfect...now we get closer to Rosewall. I say closer but still miles away.

No slinging the wrist when Rosewall hit those thudding backhand volleys, only on the drive did he do that. How wonderful to be able to separate the two. Perhaps he, too, practiced against a wall.

If I were you I would study Rosewall's backhand volley for all I was worth, as I did once myself. If you learn to hit it a quarter as well as he did, the exercise will be well worth it.

Work hard, bottle, and use that wall.

[bottle]

Thanks. I like it (all).

[10splayer]

Thanks for this.

John Yandell concurs with you over Rosewall's sliced backhand and that it's debateable whether it's still a viable technique in pro tennis. I put the same question to John some time ago.

It's hard to imagine what it must be like to face balls struck at 90 mph and loaded with topspin as in the modern game. I've never had that experience...but it's easy to see why the sliced backhand has evolved the way it has..."high start and steep cut".

I was brought up on the Rosewall model (as were most of my contemporaries), and it worked great for me. Actually Rosewall's backhand didn't have that much slice, just a small amount. I know because I've witnessed it up close. It was more a flat shot.

It's still a great model for club players and I continue to teach it. The club player and regular juniors will never be faced with rocket-propelled, heavily topspun balls so the technique is still viable and makes good sense.

The game is so fast now, isn't it? Dimitrov was hitting one handed backhands at over 90 mph at times against Djokovic last week; some of his forehands were topping a 100mph...frightening.

The game really is incredibly fast. Not only in terms of velocity, but, with the high spin rates, a much wider game. Just an incredibly athletic endeavor.

I have spent the last 25 years or so on the court with many high level junior's, and I'm here to tell you (well you know), that the game is alot bigger than when I played major college tennis in the late 80's. These kids can really bring it. It's tough for this old man to hang with some of them.

As for this whole Rosewall backhand thing: First of all, I agree that it is a thing of beauty, and a viable option for the vast majority of players. I do think it (the drive/slice) however, has had it's days at the highest level. The proof, is in the pudding. You just don't see it anymore. Why? Because players have figured out that they cant control it with the incoming ball characteristics. They evolve. It's not coaching, or theory, but rather, practical application. Heck, i wouldn't surprised if many of them started with more of a drive slice, and it evolved into what you see today.Whether one thinks it's pretty or not is immaterial. In the teaching realm, there are so many parallels. We could coach a player to hit through the ball on the forehand, from a neutral stance, with very little wiper action (ala Chris Evert), till the cows come home. And while this is a sound initial fundamental/early progression ,they are not going to hit this way as they progress and learn to deal with the kind of ball you see at the higher levels.

And while I'm not discounting our profession as unimportant, players, when equipped with good fundamentals (our job) teach us, what to teach and how the game progresses.

Of course it's incumbent upon us (as teachers) to understand a players level, what theyre facing, and there future prospects. (your point)

Bracing for barage from Walter Matthau and Jack Lemmon

[stotty]

Evolution

The game really is incredibly fast. Not only in terms of velocity, but, with the high spin rates, a much wider game. Just an incredibly athletic endeavor.

I have spent the last 25 years or so on the court with many high level junior's, and I'm here to tell you (well you know), that the game is alot bigger than when I played major college tennis in the late 80's. These kids can really bring it. It's tough for this old man to hang with some of them.

As for this whole Rosewall backhand thing: First of all, I agree that it is a thing of beauty, and a viable option for the vast majority of players. I do think it (the drive/slice) however, has had it's days at the highest level. The proof, is in the pudding. You just don't see it anymore. Why? Because players have figured out that they cant control it with the incoming ball characteristics. They evolve. It's not coaching, or theory, but rather, practical application. Heck, i wouldn't surprised if many of them started with more of a drive slice, and it evolved into what you see today.Whether one thinks it's pretty or not is immaterial. In the teaching realm, there are so many parallels. We could coach a player to hit through the ball on the forehand, from a neutral stance, with very little wiper action (ala Chris Evert), till the cows come home. And while this is a sound initial fundamental/early progression ,they are not going to hit this way as they progress and learn to deal with the kind of ball you see at the higher levels.

And while I'm not discounting our profession as unimportant, players, when equipped with good fundamentals (our job) teach us, what to teach and how the game progresses.

Of course it's incumbent upon us (as teachers) to understand a players level, what theyre facing, and there future prospects. (your point)

Bracing for barage from Walter Matthau and Jack Lemmon

Yes, it's just evolution, isn't it? Players innovate, coaches follow. These things happen because they have to, they are forced, no other reason. Whether courts are speeded up or slowed down, or the balls made bigger, smaller, softer or harder...players will just evolve to cope...nature takes over. I believe this is right and perfectly natural.

If we want players to go to the net, the courts must be sped up...give it a year or two and players will soon be racing to the net...they'll soon work it pays the biggest dividend.

[10splayer]

Yes, it's just evolution, isn't it? Players innovate, coaches follow. These things happen because they have to, they are forced, no other reason. Whether courts are speeded up or slowed down, or the balls made bigger, smaller, softer or harder...players will just evolve to cope...nature takes over. I believe this is right and perfectly natural.

If we want players to go to the net, the courts must be sped up...give it a year or two and players will soon be racing to the net...they'll soon work it pays the biggest dividend.

Exactly, and the danger in coaching (in my opinion) is forcing, or not allowing a player to evolve because of our preconceived notions, bias's etc. I.e the Rosewall backhand is the best

As in the forehand example, I have seen so many coaches hamstring players because they think "neutral ", or open stance is the way to hit,for example. Equip a player with good fundamentals, and let them go out there and adapt and evolve. As long as they're operating within a range of acceptability, they'll figure it out without a coaches help.

[tennis_chiro]

A Word from Walter Brennan before Matthau and Lemon get their licks in!

Okay. I am old school. But I think a player should learn to hit both the more prevalent "Federerian" backhand players use today to deal with the aggressive heavy ball they face in today's high power game and the "Rosewallian" slice drive. Because guess what, they are still getting the chance to hit approach shots and drop shots. Most of the time, they are not hitting those shots off terribly aggressive, heavy balls. One of the things that Janowicz has demonstrated with his recent success (though I have failed to detect anyone really pointing it out), is that an effective dropshot can make the deep game and the associated appropriate move to the net much more effective. The "Federerian" (love that word) slice is great for approaching with a ball that floats deep and bounces low allowing suitable position to be taken in the front court. To be effective, you have to be able to keep the opponent off balance with the threat of the drop shot as well as the deep approach. Now you may not be able to hit a "Rosewallian" slice (love that one too!) off one of those blistering 3000 rpm, 70 mph groundstrokes, but you most certainly can hit it off a defensive return of serve; and when you can add to the dual threat of a drop shot or a feathery or even somewhat faster "Federerian" slicing backhand, the offensive beauty I like to call "the knife", that cuts through the court before your opponent has a chance to set up and turn defense into offense, you create a much greater challenge for that opponent.

So, no, "by cracky", I don't accept the fact that there is no place in the modern game for the Rosewallian backhand!!!

don

[10splayer]

Okay. I am old school. But I think a player should learn to hit both the more prevalent "Federerian" backhand players use today to deal with the aggressive heavy ball they face in today's high power game and the "Rosewallian" slice drive. Because guess what, they are still getting the chance to hit approach shots and drop shots. Most of the time, they are not hitting those shots off terribly aggressive, heavy balls. One of the things that Janowicz has demonstrated with his recent success (though I have failed to detect anyone really pointing it out), is that an effective dropshot can make the deep game and the associated appropriate move to the net much more effective. The "Federerian" (love that word) slice is great for approaching with a ball that floats deep and bounces low allowing suitable position to be taken in the front court. To be effective, you have to be able to keep the opponent off balance with the threat of the drop shot as well as the deep approach. Now you may not be able to hit a "Rosewallian" slice (love that one too!) off one of those blistering 3000 rpm, 70 mph groundstrokes, but you most certainly can hit it off a defensive return of serve; and when you can add to the dual threat of a drop shot or a feathery or even somewhat faster "Federerian" slicing backhand, the offensive beauty I like to call "the knife", that cuts through the court before your opponent has a chance to set up and turn defense into offense, you create a much greater challenge for that opponent.

So, no, "by cracky", I don't accept the fact that there is no place in the modern game for the Rosewallian backhand!!!

don

How bout Burgess Meredith, so we keep the reference all within one show?

[tennis_chiro]

Kind of feel like him sometimes!

How bout Burgess Meredith, so we keep the reference all within one show?

I always remember him for the Twilight Zone episode where he is the bookworm who was stuck in the library and just wanted to read and never has enough time (flying by the seat of my pants here) and comes out of the library one day to see there has been some kind of catastrophe (it is Twilight Zone after all) and he is the only person left alive. But he doesn't mind because he has all the time in the world to do what he wants to do, read. And then he has an accident and drops and breaks his reading glasses and he can't read anymore. That's kind of how I feel about all the knowledge I've gained of how to hit a tennis ball and play our game (largely from Tennisplayer.net), but my body can't respond anymore. If only I'd had this knowledge when I was 20 or even 30. Just think if I'd have had a forehand!!

In any case, I still think there is room for that "knife" in today's game!

don
PS Matthau and Lemon did a lot of movies. Which one are you referring to?

[bottle]

50-50

Bangboard is great for honing Rosewallian slice. For mastering Rosewallian backhand volleys, at least as I envision them, though, I don't seem to have enough time (in both senses). From seven feet away there just isn't in my case space for double roll. Also, my own backhand volley knows the relation between hand and strings. This relationship is different for Rosewallian backhand volley. To hit even the second Rosewallian backhand volley off of the bangboard seems impossible!

I see Rosewallian backhand volley as the same basic shot as a backhand smash, only modified for lower balls. No? I'll continue this line of experimentation just to be a contrarian.