A New Year's Serve

[bottle]

Try Something Else, Anything New and Why

Try simple rise of elbow of four inches (but no more) as hands stay connected by the racket.

Nope. More like seven inches or eight. So elbow goes way out to right (count one), then comes way back to inside, not in slot at all (count two), then swings (count three).

Oldsters, if they followed thus far, would begin to talk about getting hips out of the way of the stroke. Nope. The hips pivot is going to be delayed. One will swing elbow inside out. The arm will straighten gradually and continue to do so right through the pivot until arm and racket are both pointing directly at the target wherever that might be.

I see no reason to bend arm after straightening it a bit like Ellsworth Vines. That is a finesse that an ordinary person needs like a hole in the head. And this way one can absolutely cream a ball which after it lands will hardly come up at all.

Maybe some people are stronger from fairly close in behind their back than from out in the slot, deep.

Next task: Take this shot from self-feed to actual play with no loss of efficiency.

Note: If trying like this to find the variation of Ellie-bam that works for oneself, one must concentrate on it to the exclusion of everything else-- no self-fed Federfores or serves or lob practice. Limiting oneself in this fashion, one can come up with the greatest hit-and-miss shot in tennis history, which is what one wanted, no? To mix with more reliable shots at a time when one wants to take a chance.

[bottle]

Unfettered YouTube Commentator, 2017 Henley Royal Regatta

"If you're a tennis player or a golfer, you're just trying to complete the perfect stroke, and it's never quite there."

[bottle]

Try Something Else, Anything New and Why

Ellie-bams were working perfectly firing like Breitbart brickbats into every corner, changing people's perception of the world and of you as its messenger.

But then the venue shifted from self-feed to actual play and not a single Ellie-bam stayed in court except for the last shot of the day, but that one took the match only because of funky unwanted spin, not one's desirable knuckled nonspin.

Moral of the story? "Self-feed is no good." Or any other panicked and absolutist statement so endemic to a Breitbart bigot.

Try simple rise of elbow of four inches (but no more) as hands stay connected by the racket. Was that a count? It was count one.

Now do a bent-arm breast-stroke (count two). Now hit the ball (count three).

Is this simplification? Yes.

For now the hitting hand is far back enough though no longer in the slot, rather around the back.

Better yet, all three counts are tied together by a single cue: "Move the elbow."

Three separate moves of the elbow constitute continuous movement of the elbow.

And I once played "Elbow," a dumb cop in MEASURE FOR MEASURE by William Shakespeare, so how can this scheme possibly fail?

[bottle]

Discard Waterwheel Forehand too?

I've tried to do that before then changed my mind since that stroke is reliable under pressure.

But it certainly does change the level of the elbow bigtime.

A lesson to draw from the newly acquired Beasley-bam is that many forehands can keep elbow at a single level or close to it.

And what else is Roger Federer doing when he keeps elbow where it was and lets racket tip come up at beginning of his forehand?

So the Federfore is trying to have resurgence in my game.

Squeeze racket up (count one). Do a straight-arming mondoeing sideways dog knockout toward right fence (count two). Pivot into ball while sweeping it while twirling arm for extra topspin (count three).

[bottle]

Could Elbow Remain Set at One Level for the Small Loop of an Ellie-bam?

Absolutely. It's not what Ellsworth Vines did but perhaps is easier.

Remember, the arm is quite bent. And if it squeezed a bit more before opening out, I wouldn't mind. I would simply call that making something mechanical more organic.

But wrist is straight throughout in this latest iteration of an Ellie-bam.

To put sufficient forward sweep before the pivot I recommend moving elbow independently backward while it twists yet remains on its fixed level.

Thus the farm gate potential of bent arm can be utilized. That implies horizontal movement of the hand and racket. But when loop is "pencil-thin" one can next turn elbow down a bit without mishap.

Back and loop, I am recommending, with elbow gliding backward faster than the turning bod, and hand but not elbow then settling down to hit level.

So that is backswing, with some farm gate or short hinge quality built in. Foreswing is just the opposite, with elbow in the center moving whole arm to either side of it.

Gliding elbow back a substantial amount encourages more of a round-about elbow swing forward, I believe, which in turn keeps racket face from opening too much as would happen if one crowded the ball or bowled. Or failed to straighten elbow gradually.

Then comes the pivot which in old photography made the racket disappear.

Whittling Down the Forehand Array:

I think I've expressed my cantankerous view that of the whole group of coach and his 1930's champions, Mercer Beasley, although a self-promoter, was smartest of the lot.

I loved learning that certain players resisted the close behind backswing and gradual extension outward of the Beasley-bam, perhaps the most energy-saving and consistent forehand I have ever had the pleasure to hit.

Still, like those other resisters I was skeptical, thinking such squeeze together of the arm might waste time. So I invented a shortcut, the Beasily-bam, which I now discard. The Beasley-bam and the Beasily-bam both make use of three counts and take the same amount of time to get off, so why bother to have both?

[bottle]

Torn Attention

My focus like that of any multiculturist is torn today between the Henley Royal Regatta as seen nonstop on YouTube complete with innovative drone coverage and "unfettered" commentary and self-feed in Rouge Park, Detroit.

Since this is a tennis website I go more with Rouge Park although I have to say, as an experienced crew coach in eight-oared rowing, one can get a good idea of the speed of a boat by watching a single stroke through the eyes of an overhead drone. One can also see the expression on every oarsman's face and the balance of the whole boat when viewed from slightly behind the backs, but the apprehension of speed I am talking about is determined by knowledgeable observation of strokes per minute combined with distance between each set of "puddles," the Homer-called or is it Vergil-called or both "fading footprints" left by each oar in one's wake.

I'm not usually a partisan supporter of rich private schools attended by the children of American presidents, however, St. Alban's upset victory today over Montclair (N.J.) H.S. is a huge win for the schoolboy crews of the Potomac, a group to whom I am permanently beholden since the late dean of that group, Charlie Butt, was my personal mentor through Annapolis certification and drove all the way out to Morgantown at 55 m.p.h. to help me with my winning crews at West Virginia University.

As for Rouge Park, there must have been a reason the attendants finally mowed the 4-foot weeds, perhaps the sudden appearance of a tennis player out on those Plymouth Street courts. If they now resurface all those courts I guess I'll have to start a tennis school.

Straight wrist in Ellie-bams is a promising change and "a keeper" although requiring additional changes in one's backswing.

[bottle]

Topspin Forehands: Uninhibited Waterwheel Form and Knock Out the Dog

It's just something I want to try, having hit a total of one successful shot in match-play this way (yesterday).

I'm sick of the timing pause near top of the loop that Segura, Metzler and other extremely brilliant tennis minds so strongly advocate.

Such a pause is supposed to through abbreviation lend control to my shots but merely makes me late.

So, with perfect waterwheel form and new determination to get the waterwheel around I will press palm down, even shoot it down, will straighten the elbow down for an extra burst of energy.

"Don't knock out the dog," said Rick Macci as he introduced his concept of dogpat.

But when someone tells you not to do something-- often but not always-- you should try it.

The working concept here comes from flat shots in which gradual straightening from the elbow appears the best possible route.

Am trying now to get rid of such arm push, great in a flat shot but only confusing to the generation of purity of topspin.

Vigorous straightening of the arm will not hurt the arm if it occurs somewhat before contact with the ball. What it should do is create a long lever bowling forward and up to create pure spin with or without the additive of wipe or twirl.

Immediate question: Does not this form create contact so far out front that it is beyond the control of any human being on earth? Immediately possible answer: Be like Federer and hit the ball with large separation out to side.

[bottle]

Drawing Out Some Lessons

The Guy I've been Talking So Much about

https://www.si.com/vault/1957/07/29/...mercer-beasley

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Mercer_Beasley

To me it is extremely interesting to discover in all this tennis history something I only suspected-- that Mercer Beasey and Ellsworth Vines did not always see eye to eye-- almost a characteristic I would venture of a perfect teacher-student relationship in any field. So Ellie takes a shot at Mercer sometime but at other times praises him to the skies.

Interesting too that Mercer Beasley like other extremely successful teaching pros was good at self-promotion. How many potentially great coaches have utterly failed in this regard and thus found themselves unable to help thousands of the players they should have helped?

But my new concern with flat shot technique made me revisit Beasley's book, and in this area I find him more and more interesting every day. No, topspin should never be the basis of anyone's game unless he is Borg, Vilas, Muster or Nadal especially as he gets older. Keeping the ball deep is so much easier and less energy-draining with controlled flat shots, and that is exactly what a Beasley-bam is replete with its high behind the back close form (hard to read among other advantages).

I followed my curiosity, that's all I did, then found I suddenly had an extremely consistent new forehand. But in the above material we find Beasley chiding at least one of his national champions for refusing to go the close behind the back route. This other champion and Ellsworth Vines both refused, I would suggest, though Beasley is utterly supportive of Vines' mastery and what he did on his own-- from and after his Beasley lessons.

Me, I will never discard the Beasley-bam nor my attempt to learn the more hit-and-miss Ellie-bam.

The Ellie-bam works remarkably well in self-feed right now but not equally well in actual play. Starting today (a self-feed day for me), I shall cease laying the wrist back in any form whatsoever except in topspin shots with different grip.

This pre-stroke flattening of the wrist and flat wrist maintenance will make my Ellie-bam more consistent with my Beasley-bams and Beasily-bams (abbreviated version of the Beasley-bams which immediately worked and continues to do so and is good for service returns) as well as with my McEnruefuls.

[bottle]

The Guy I've been Talking So Much about

https://www.si.com/vault/1957/07/29/...mercer-beasley

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Mercer_Beasley

[bottle]

Third Possibility

All one has to do is doubt some third possibility and there it will be.

Possibility 3) Count one: Take straight wrist back and then loop down with wrist opening a bit. Count two: Swing arm to ball. Count three: Pivot.

"The weight is where the racket is," said Stan Smith, but that is not really true in Ellie and Beasley bams.

The weight is where the racket is in a Stan Smith forehand, which is a different kind of excellent flat forehand more from transverse stomach muscles (trunk or shoulders) I would say.

Here, weight transfer is delayed and all from the hips at very end of the stroke.

Right now, given the three choices I have outlined, I choose number two: 1) racket back with wrist opening a bit, 2) racket drop and sweep to ball, 3) power part of the stroke.

It is not that this possibility is necessarily best of the three but that I like it. It suits my temperament.

But wind yesterday taught me to value third possibility more.

[bottle]

Why, if a Cue Works, Would one Want to Try Another?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

Nope. The new cue might work better than the old one.

Curiosity killed the cat.

Satisfaction brought it back.

Old cue for the Ellie-bam: 1) racket back, 2) racket drop, 3) whole forward stroke.

Replacement cue: 1) racket back, 2) racket drop and sweep to ball, 3) power part of the stroke.

Do I have to know which alternative will be better before I run the comparison? Of course not. It is essential, in fact, that I don't know, i.e., "suspend judgment."

Either one could be better than the other on a given day and there could be a third better than either although I doubt it.

Third Possibility

All one has to do is doubt some third possibility and there it will be.

Possibility 3) Count one: Take straight wrist back and then loop down with wrist opening a bit. Count two: Swing arm to ball. Count three: Pivot.

"The weight is where the racket is," said Stan Smith, but that is not really true in Ellie and Beasley bams.

The weight is where the racket is in a Stan Smith forehand, which is a different kind of excellent flat forehand more from transverse stomach muscles (trunk or shoulders) I would say.

Here, weight transfer is delayed and all from the hips at very end of the stroke.

Right now, given the three choices I have outlined, I choose number two: 1) racket back with wrist opening a bit, 2) racket drop and sweep to ball, 3) power part of the stroke.

It is not that this possibility is necessarily best of the three but that I like it. It suits my temperament.

[bottle]

A Looser Prescription for Grip

Mercer Beasley, coach of Ellsworth Vines and other champions, wanted his students to find their best grip in a looser way than other coaches have always taught and continue to teach.

In his 1936 book HOW TO PLAY TENNIS, he advises his students to place racket on shoulder and feel natural (wriggle the fingers and hand, I presume) then see what grip they come up with.

He calls this "automatic grip" and gives the same prescription for both sides (forehand and backhand).

I can't pretend to have followed such a sensible method in acquiring my own grips.

But I do think most of what I've read or seen on the subject is wrong and over-conceptualized as if delivered by a character in a play by Henrik Ibsen.

Grip is individual, must be discovered by the individual, has a lot to do with the shape and size of one's hand as well as the diameter of the racket handle, is not something anybody wants to be doctrinaire about.

The uni-grip that John McEnroe claims he uses for all of his shots is just east of an eastern grip, it seems to me, a "composite" or "Australian" grip as described by Ellsworth Vines in his book TENNIS: MYTH AND METHOD.

This grip is so close to conventional eastern forehand it may even qualify as such depending on whom is doing the talking.

Remember: GRIP IS INDIVIDUAL.

Other tennis writers almost universally describe the Ellsworth Vines forehand grip as "eastern." But consider how silly Bud Collins was in viewing the Vines forehand as a windmill. We need constantly to assess the credibility of anybody passing himself off as a tennis sage. The Vines grip may have been eastern or a bit to left of that. Whatever it was, it probably was arrived at in the Beasley way: Put racket naturally on shoulder then see what grip you have.

[bottle]

Why, if a Cue Works, Would one Want to Try Another?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

Nope. The new cue might work better than the old one.

Curiosity killed the cat.

Satisfaction brought it back.

Old cue for the Ellie-bam: 1) racket back, 2) racket drop, 3) whole forward stroke.

Replacement cue: 1) racket back, 2) racket drop and sweep to ball, 3) power part of the stroke.

Do I have to know which alternative will be better before I run the experiment? Of course not. It is essential, in fact, that I don't know, i.e., "suspend judgment."

Either one could be better than the other on a given day and there could be a third better than either although I doubt it.

[bottle]

Drop & Sweep then Pulverize the Ball

What? You missed the shot!

Then hit 10 Beasley-bams and 5 Beasily-bams.

[bottle]

Paper Cutter Drop to Launch the Ellie-bam

Just because the great Ellsworth Vines does something complicated doesn't mean that little u-i must follow him.

Ellie takes bent arm far back in the slot while keeping his racket tip pointing a bit toward side fence. Then, as he drops his elbow he has wrist lay back to point tip more at rear fence.

Let's be bold and depart from this for the sole purpose of injecting more paper cutter feel into the shot-- a worthy goal.

Maybe one's paper cutter feel already was there. In which case I merely seek to purify and intensify it.

I do this by laying wrist back during count one of three, the almost level bent arm takeback. Wrist can smoothly lay back at the same time thus getting that move accomplished and out of the way.

To make things even easier, one can reduce the amount of wrist layback, cutting it to half of available range.

The racket tip goes sooner now in pointing back. And paper cutter drop consists of nothing more than a small elbow drop to estimated level of ball or a little above it.

One can see, in the Pathe films, that Ellie not only is bent from the hips but bends a little more as he hits the ball.

This transfers extra power from his pivoting hips.

Count one: Racket tip back.

Count two: Paper cutter drop.

Count three: Sweep with the arm first but then jolt the ball simultaneously with all known power elements.

What are they?

The long smooth hips pivot transferring body weight which also makes racket disappear in some old photographic renderings.

The opening at elbow followed by immediate contraction at same place.

The pushing of that elbow too.

The slight taking of more body angle to slam the ball a bit more.