A New Year's Serve

[bottle]

In doubles, the new backswing McEnrueful was good. But can be better. As Steve suggested, I need a good hitting partner with whom to work on stuff.

[bottle]

Cageman as Model

Who was smarter: the teaching pro to whom you paid $100,000 in lessons or your first singles opponent who told you to hit a one hand backhand with a figure eight?

Depends on personal philosophy and how many warts you have. Warthogs vote for other warthogs, as my Yale linguist brother-in-law, who teaches Russian and Czech intricacy at Wake Forest University often says.

Having spent most of a lifetime to try to decipher a one hand backhand-- which according to director of tennis at Indian Village Detroit John Boris is nothing unusual at all-- I can easily put myself in the tennis shoes of a complete beginner and say this:

If you don't roll the racket backward before you roll it forward with all of this in the quick part of the stroke you won't get around in time.

And, personally speaking, I'm unimpressed by players who try to look like Stan Wawrinka by continuing the forward roll long after contact. Well, a bit of this could be okay but not a lot. Where forward roll really does its stuff is from backward roll to contact.

Also, since I've never before mastered the one hander to my own maybe impossible standard, I opt for Cageman's racket head just behind his butt. You can see where the racket is because you can see through his butt which is the nature of Cageman.

I want my strings there at end of the backward roll, not farther around the body. I take the racket in my hand and put the strings there. I memorize where the hand is. Now I've got it.

[bottle]

A while ago I decided that this was a bad idea, but, self-contradiction is what the best scientists do. (Richard P. Feynman, certainly the funniest, probably rejected his first Nobel Prize in winning his second.)

When one has opposite hand off of racket for one's overhead the way John McEnroe does, pointing elbow then fingers at the ball becomes easier than ever and closely related to what the other arm is doing at the same time.

Lift fingers to the ball. Forget the elbow. Going elbow first might be smart (Vic Braden, that clever man, preached it) but I choose to go dumb, not smart.

I propose this different course because of all the times one tosses the ball to serve in a tennis life. Why not build on the deep grain of this?

[bottle]

Reversions are Painful but Sometime Necessary

In doubles, the new backswing McEnrueful was good. But can be better. As Steve suggested, I need a good hitting partner with whom to work on stuff.

Back to simple down and up arm work in the backswing. Worked on this for a long time after all, with emphasis on the relation between the two arms. No need to alter something good. Hit it with different lengths of rise-- sure. Isn't that an advantage of such a backswing, that it offers more feel than the mechanism does in loopier strokes and can therefore more organically be figured out?

If this weren't true, no teaching pro in existence would ever have commented on how a student's game immediately declined when the pro tried to graduate him from straight back preparations to looped preparations. But I don't think the teaching pro in this universal situation then advised a reversion. Instead, everybody plunges ahead, with the thought that eventually just as much feel (or more) will develop-- just takes time.

But what if this envisioned second generation of feel never comes about? Who's going to take the player backward in the progression? The player himself, I would guess, if he's still interested in tennis. The transition from straight back to loop is a great winnowing out, is what I'm trying to say, in which many players fall through tiny holes.

But a John McEnroeish forehand backswing is anything but straight back in the first place. It's more like a bowling or golf backswing, 100 per cent feel.

Natural contrast I guess is Andre Agassi whacking balls over two or three fences as a kid. Did he ever take the racket straight back or down and up like Mac? I don't know but doubt it. More likely his father bullied him into a loop from the beginning. And it worked.

[bottle]

Doubles Poach to Recessive Arm Side Utilizing Mini-Smash

Steve and I were discussing the mini-smash of Pancho Gonzales when Steve was over here in the United States (page 67, TENNIS BY PANCHO GONZALES).

Pancho obviously had a mini-smash and a maxi-smash, but for many people a smash is a smash-- not for me.

In between strokes in tennis can be very useful.

I want the mini-smash for doubles poach on a high ball in ad court when I am playing the deuce court.

The footwork for this shot obviously has to be amazing with any 76-year-old likely to fall on his keester but I'm willing to take the Allison Riske.

Now that I've figured out the footwork (did it in the last paragraph but do see subsequent discussion), I'm ready for abbreviated racket work which I relate to my splitting of logs. (Just bought a three-and-a-half pound axe to remind myself of heating by wood for 20 years on a Virginia mountainside-- it all has to do with a good chopping block.)

Racket to go up perfectly straight perpendicular to court and sky like the tail of a skunk about to spray.

The hand goes forward which causes the racket tip to lay slightly back (see serve of Mr. Hulot in the Jacques Tati film MR. HULOT'S HOLIDAY). The lagged racket head then catches up. Then whole arm goes out but because forward must go down somewhat.

Mini-smash...perfect. They never had a chance.

II. The Necessary Footwork

I make this up as I make everything up. Then the dance instructor shows me the error of my ways.

Start with a double-pronged (neutral) split step. Favor left leg as body rises up which frees slightly pivoting right foot to replace closer to ball but nearer to rear fence too. Front foot replaces where it is by turning toes inward-- in opposite direction to the splay of a standard unit turn. This move takes time but is necessary to avoid falling on keester and be able to skip backward successfully on a slant under the ball.

[bottle]

Upper Arm Post as Foundation of all Forehands-- Groundstrokes and Volleys Both

From mentalblock:

I had no idea ... that the upper and lower arm segments were pulled clockwise prior to snapping back counterclockwise for the "doorknob" or "wiper" thing.

I know you’re trying to interpret Brian Gordon here, mentalblock, but after conducting personal self-feed experiments on this subject, I concluded that clockwise arm movement and wrist layback worked best as simultaneous mondo or flip. Simultaneity seems more economical and easy to control but most important simply works better for me in the forehands of my particular competitive doubles.

In other words I tried wrist layback first then arm roll as the mondo. Then I tried arm roll first then wrist layback as the mondo. And I reject both of these ideas from personal experience—a conclusion that may not be wise for somebody else.

Another idea in this rich forum that recently struck me hard was somebody telling about a personal visit to Brian in which Brian opined that a straight backswing was better than a loop in hitting the topspin forehand that he has worked so hard to research and communicate. The forum member's conclusion was that Brian has subsequently modified this view in favor of loop.

To me this report astounds. Not that one way is better than the other and that Brian may have changed his view but that he ever entertained both possibilities in the first place.

Since I am doing seniors revision from what I did before to a common wait position for volleys and ground strokes both like that of John McEnroe with racket low and cheated over for the backhands, I’m especially interested right now in level backswing possibility.

For a middle separation forehand volley key racket on the post of upper arm with whole arm in the shape of a right angle. Helpful would be if one had done experiment with hitting the forward part of a forehand in this farm gate hinge way. But now the “keying” or twisting of the upper arm post goes mostly into backswing in a ratio as high as 10 to 1 . This could be 20 inches of racket tip backswing compared to a 2-inch volley in which forearm rolls backward at contact to caress and control the ball. But the upper arm does make quite level forearm key forward like some kind of a T-wrench in auto mechanics. But only for volleys at medium separation from body. For the big stretch volleys that frequently happen or ought to happen whole arm movement from the shoulder makes more sense. But in either case one more effectively “keys” the racket back. Why? Because one is operating that way with a shorter bat if we can call forearm and racket together a “bat,” also from McEnroe’s cheated over wait position one has to get strings into their distant position fast.

Forehand groundstroke from same wait position presents a different challenge. First of all the body turn in both directions is going to be much greater. But racket could be keying level in a variety of distances and speeds at same time the body turn is happening. Anybody who has followed me would know that I favor a down and up backswing for my composite grip forehands. But now I go to a strong eastern with level waist height keyed backswing for norm on a full topspin forehand.

How can pitch work in this arrangement? Well, if cheated racket wait position is a bit out from body the strings will be more closed. Similarly if one lifts forearm for a higher ball the strings will close more. Regardless, the change to a keyed backswing is huge simplification to the ATP3 as I understand it in which loop and dog pat bring hand down to waist level. No, hand already is at waist level.

Obviously, experimentation, innovation, and meaningful change is half of my fun in tennis. My writing or conceptualization however is way ahead of my actual game. I haven’t yet done the poached mini-smash from deuce court recently described. I’ve also put my recent see see or topspin angle ideas on hold to give them a chance to work into my nerves. Both things are coming to me though, and so is this level forearm basic “waist high straight round backswing” topspin forehand, good as one gets older.

[bottle]

Takes Time to Poach a Lob but Takes Time Too for Lob to Come Down

Steve and I were discussing the mini-smash of Pancho Gonzales when Steve was over here in the United States (page 67, TENNIS BY PANCHO GONZALES).

Pancho obviously had a mini-smash and a maxi-smash, but for many people a smash is a smash-- not for me.

In between strokes in tennis can be very useful.

I want the mini-smash for doubles poach on a high ball in ad court when I am playing the deuce court.

The footwork for this shot obviously has to be amazing with any 76-year-old likely to fall on his keester but I'm willing to take the Allison Riske.

Now that I've figured out the footwork (did it in the last paragraph but do see subsequent discussion), I'm ready for abbreviated racket work which I relate to my splitting of logs. (Just bought a three-and-a-half pound axe to remind myself of heating by wood for 20 years on a Virginia mountainside-- it all has to do with a good chopping block.)

Racket to go up perfectly straight perpendicular to court and sky like the tail of a skunk about to spray.

The hand goes forward which causes the racket tip to lay slightly back (see serve of Mr. Hulot in the Jacques Tati film MR. HULOT'S HOLIDAY). The lagged racket head then catches up. Then whole arm goes out but because forward must go down somewhat.

Mini-smash...perfect. They never had a chance.

II. The Necessary Footwork

I make this up as I make everything up. Then the dance instructor shows me the error of my ways.

Start with a double-pronged (neutral) split step. Favor left leg as body rises up which frees slightly pivoting right foot to replace closer to ball but nearer to rear fence too. Front foot replaces where it is by turning toes inward-- in opposite direction to the splay of a standard unit turn. This move takes time but is necessary to avoid falling on keester and be able to skip backward successfully on a slant under the ball.

Don't forget to turn out arm at outset of the movement to get strings square to ball-- no pronation or upper arm rotation or internal shoulder rotation (ISR) or whatever you want to call it during the actual hit in Pancho's mini-smash. This is a case where simplicity is good.

Reader, have you ever played with a partner who could smash every lob wherever it was in the doubles court?

I have (for one set one time) and I've never gotten over it. It elicited for me the Rod Laver book in which any lob equals a smash.

You call such a person "the designated smasher."

Does he exist in senior senior's tennis horribilis?

I don't think so. But with great fortitude, willpower and footwork one can skip backward in that direction. The worst your partner can do is kill you. (You may be grateful.)

[bottle]

Topspin Forehand: Cooking up Six Degrees Beyond Square at Contact

This is a variation on what they'll tell you in India: that first time God left dough in the oven too long and got the black man, that God took it out too soon second time and got the white man, that God left it in just the right amount of time on third try and got the Indian.

So, reader, if you think six degrees beyond square is a good idea, first choice is to roll over the ball to get the six degrees on the fly. I saw a girl win a tournament that way but a week later she lost to her mother, who was far too smart to do such a thing.

Second choice is to lift elbow behind you to make a big loop, but what is so hot about long trajectory of one's racket head?

Third choice is to study the grip at mimed contact and adjust it until you get the six degrees with racket opening up rather than closing down when you (a right hander) actually wipe from right to left.

[bottle]

Swamp Buggy and Stuck Cellar Door

"six degrees (forward pitch) with racket opening up rather than closing down when you actually wipe from right to left."

Close analysis of this complex phrase might either get us lost or give us some ideas. Is there a way to use imagery to shortcut the developmental process?

The image of windshield wipe comes to mind. But if there's a wipe there's a wiper. And a windshield. Curved (modern) or flat (Model T Ford, i.e., ordinary window)?

Flat. At least that's what Luke Digweed was showing my 10-year-old faux granddaughter in the UK. "Look, Cate, at these three freeze positions-- here (racket tip down and pointing at right fence), here (racket tip up toward sky), and here (racket tip down and pointing at left fence)."

I swear, that's all he demonstrated. And Cate's forehands started jumping an extra foot. I ought to know since I hit with her just the night before.

When one thinks about it, a fan whirling around a stalk isn't going to be efficient if the stalk wobbles in any way.

Next image then: a swamp buggy boring through the Everglades.

Next after that: the traditional stuck cellar door imagery of twentieth century instructional tennis.

You push on the door with your whole body and both arms. Then try it with one arm.

The arm is stronger when its rod (forearm) points directly at the door.

Recently in my coddled evolution toward "forward emphasis" I've spoken of racket pitch opening during contact.* How could that happen? Through a level and maximized push from the elbow as fan spins counterclockwise.

I see some sequence here: 1) core body to activate mondo and 2) total body and arm push simultaneous with the wipe.

* Perfect would be single pitch (6 degrees for all three freeze points in this example). But no one is perfect. The choice therefore is between racket closing or opening as it hits the ball.

And a wobble is not the same as a push.

[bottle]

Tennis in a Short Story by Somerset Maugham

Read two short stories by Somerset Maugham, the first THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER, in which the grasshopper succeeds in driving the ant mad.

In the second, THE THREE FAT WOMEN OF ANTIBES, there is this sentence about tennis:

“They drank their waters together, had their baths at the same hour, they took their strenuous walks together, pounded about the tennis court with a professional to make them run, and ate at the same table their sparse and regulated meals.”

By the end of the story the three protagonist bridge players have undergone a transformation but perhaps not what one might think.

[bottle]

No Evidence Anywhere that Julie Delpy has ever Played Tennis

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/julie-delpy-i-do-have-a-lot-of-neuroses-a6709776.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCtv2ycLH2c

[bottle]

Swamp Buggy Forehands

All ideas may be capricious but here nevertheless is mine for today regardless of whether I change it tomorrow or next week.

The idea is to set up a contrast between banking and level shoulders in my McEnrueful and my new forward emphasis topspin forehand (FETF).

I've described my McEnrueful a lot so I'll simply say it is a solid body forehand that heavily depends on banking shoulders. During coffee this morning one of four partners stated after our productive doubles that a forehand is largely an arm shot. He is a very good player, maybe the best of us four, so I wasn't about to disagree, but right now I may express my doubt. My McEnrueful is body and arm in its backswing but all body as it strikes the ball.

The FETF is body and arm in both directions. And its mondo combining wrist layback and forearm roll-down (SIM) should emphasize the roll-down since roll-up (windshield wipe) comes immediately afterward while wrist is still bent backward and therefore out of the picture.

A strong eastern grip level backswing FETF is complex enough without the joker factor of banking shoulders. McEnrueful, sad that it's not a John McEnroe forehand, is solid body while FETF is not.

Some people might argue that arm is part of the body but they are of course all wet, it's part of the soul.

[bottle]

Cageman-- Hard to Escape his Influence

Cageman in his forehand banks down as he flips but doesn't bank up until after he has hit the ball.

I certainly will try the level shoulders during forward swing idea but will try this idea too.

[bottle]

Simultaneity or Sequence in One Hand Backhand Backswing

One can, from cheated over low wait position, turn shoulder down and around and call that the entirety of the backswing.

Can one from that achieved position then perform the forward double roll needed for a successful shot? Yes but maybe not for a great successful shot. Feels a little cramped to me.

My progression/evolution has therefore included the addition of a small amount of independent arm lift to be performed simultaneously to make slightly more space for the subsequent double roll.

Simultaneity as a concept has been promulgated by Martina Navratilova, i.e., she thinks that if simultaneity or sequence will work, go with simultaneity-- you'll be glad later.

Usually I will but in this case I'm not sure. A graceful one hander may include a small amount of independent arm lift to follow the turn as in Cageman's example.

For me the simultaneity has become part of essential timing. So make the two steps have same duration as one, i.e., turn shoulder faster so that the total action takes no more or less time.

I want to try this. Then I may or may not go back to the simultaneity I had before.

[bottle]

Mini-Smash Page 67 TENNIS BY PANCHO GONZALES

There's no extra pointing up with opposite hand. The two hands function together to take the racket up to skunk tail position; but, Pancho already has turned strings out to make them square with the ball.

Pancho's left hand then stays where it is for the hit.

Contrast everything in this shot with Pancho's maxi-smash on 68-9 .

I just think, that, when performing an outlandish poach overhead an old guy will have better odds working for him if he knows and uses the mini-version.