Forehand Stance Question

[uspta2801398569]

Hey John

You see a player like Federer and others use a full based wide open stance often. I know players that use a more of a western grip tend to lead to more of a wider stance on most hit balls, but you also see players also use a semi-open stance on shots too. What types of balls, tactical situations or court positions would this stance be more commonly used?
Do you see a more of a wide base behind the baseline shots?
Is it shots where either your coming forward or taking a ball on the rise, or less time to react that you would use a semi open stance? or Neutral stance?

Your thoughts

[johnyandell]

Not sure I would agree on "often" on the wide open stance. But the answer to your question is waiting for you in the stroke archive. Click thru the Federer forehands and make some notes. Think you'll find most are semi-open, but would be fascinating to see some actual numbers.

[uspta2801398569]

John

My follow up question to you then would be, Why and when and where would Federer use a wide open stance vs a semi-open stance?
Is the decision based on position on the court, type of ball received etc.
Can you hit a heavier ball with a wider base using more angular momentum/rotation for power? If so whould this be the ideal stance when your behind the baseline? Is it a better choice to use a semi-open or a neutral stance while hitting the ball on the rise inside the baseline?


Your thoughts

[johnyandell]

Like I said, do some work in the archives and your confidence in the answer is going much higher, because you developed it yourself.

Since Federer rotates his front shoulder around toward the opponent on forehands from all stances, I would be very careful of assuming that there is more rotation or power in the fully open stance versions. Dave Bailey suggests in his articles that this is more of a reflexive, parrying stance--his work in the archive is pretty definitive in explaining the corelations between stances and shots.

To me--and again I haven't looked at all the examples in the archive and that is what I am suggesting you do--the wide open stances are more situational. More are semi-open. That seems more the choice. The square stance comes in on shorter lower balls, though not always.

[oliensis]

FWIW, a local pro suggested to me that a neutral stance on the forehand can be especially helpful when hitting incoming shotts that have very little pace and esp. those that have a large vertical component in the flight of the ball (loopy shots).

I've found this to be helpful, maybe because the path of the racket may be more linear and less angular (curved), so it's a bit easier to time the ball. It helps w/ the "Step, step, rip!" timing that is suggested in an article on this site (sorry I don't recall which article right now).

For me, this has been helpful on both high deep moonballs and on loopy short balls. I think I mis-hit less and over-hit less when the forward momentum of my body is increased. And it's easier to generate my own pace on no-pace balls, and then follow them in after the "rip!"

I don't know if that applies at the ever-so-much-higher level at which pros play.
Best,
AO

[uspta146749877]

Forehand stances

FWIW, a local pro suggested to me that a neutral stance on the forehand can be especially helpful when hitting incoming shotts that have very little pace and esp. those that have a large vertical component in the flight of the ball (loopy shots).

I've found this to be helpful, maybe because the path of the racket may be more linear and less angular (curved), so it's a bit easier to time the ball. It helps w/ the "Step, step, rip!" timing that is suggested in an article on this site (sorry I don't recall which article right now).

For me, this has been helpful on both high deep moonballs and on loopy short balls. I think I mis-hit less and over-hit less when the forward momentum of my body is increased. And it's easier to generate my own pace on no-pace balls, and then follow them in after the "rip!"

I don't know if that applies at the ever-so-much-higher level at which pros play.
Best,
AO

please see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1209

[uspta146749877]

To uspta2801398569

Please click

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1209

[uspta146749877]

Forehand stances

FWIW, a local pro suggested to me that a neutral stance on the forehand can be especially helpful when hitting incoming shotts that have very little pace and esp. those that have a large vertical component in the flight of the ball (loopy shots).

I've found this to be helpful, maybe because the path of the racket may be more linear and less angular (curved), so it's a bit easier to time the ball. It helps w/ the "Step, step, rip!" timing that is suggested in an article on this site (sorry I don't recall which article right now).

For me, this has been helpful on both high deep moonballs and on loopy short balls. I think I mis-hit less and over-hit less when the forward momentum of my body is increased. And it's easier to generate my own pace on no-pace balls, and then follow them in after the "rip!"

I don't know if that applies at the ever-so-much-higher level at which pros play.
Best,
AO

A quote from an usta paper
Open Stance Forehand
Type(s) of momentum
• The open stance forehand primarily uses angular momentum to generate racquet head speed.
Balance and weight transfer
• To effectively generate angular momentum it is important to have a wide base of support. The ground reaction
forces produced by the feet help create rotational torques that contribute to the angular momentum of the
body.
• The body’s center of mass should remain centered over the base of support as it rotates about the vertical axis.
Tactical considerations
• The open stance forehand is effective in dealing with power and/or generating power.
• This type of forehand shot can be employed when there is little time for the player to prepare (e.g., return of
serve or forced wide in the court), and allows for a quick recovery.

Semi-Open Stance Forehand
Type(s) of momentum
• The semi-open stance forehand uses a combination of linear (as the body’s center of mass moves forward) and
angular momentum (as the body rotates about its vertical axis).
• Linear momentum, directed upwards, also help in the generation of topspin and power.
Balance and weight transfer
• This shot uses a narrower base of support and the body’s center of mass also shifts forward slightly during the
execution of the shot.
Tactical considerations
• The semi-open stance offers great versatility and is effective in dealing with power and/or generating power.
• This type of shot can therefore be used in offensive, defensive or neutral situations.

Square Stance Forehand
Type(s) of momentum
• The square stance forehand primarily utilizes linear momentum as the player’s weight shifts from the rear foot
to the front foot during the execution of the shot.
• A small amount of angular momentum, generated by the arm rotating about the shoulder (and other body
segments rotating about joints), does contribute to the racquet head speed and the force behind the shot.
Balance and weight transfer
• The square stance forehand uses a narrower base of support with the weight being transferred from back to
the front foot. The feet are typically parallel with each other.
• Dynamic balance, especially balance on one leg, is essential in the execution of this shot.
• Although Federer exhibits more body lean in the last sequence, he clearly keeps his head still and is tremendously
balanced in each of the shots.
Tactical considerations
• The square stance forehand is typically considered an offensive shot and is frequently used when moving
forward and/or attacking.
----->

[uspta2801398569]

I understand what everyone is saying and its good feedback
Lets say I have a Junior that questions me about when,why and where should I have a semi-open or a wider based stance? I have been asked by students "when should you my stance be wider than a semi-open?" Is it something they should think about? What is the benefit out of a wider base?
Do I say do what you would naturally do for balance? There must be a reason why one would choose one over the other. Watching players move back for a reverse pivot footwork technique is seen using a wide base.

Your feedback is appreciated

[johnyandell]

I'd be interested in what Brian Gordon has to say, but from what (small amount of the possible) I have learned from him, I would be skeptical of the above assertations about the momentum components, as trendy has this terminology has become, and despite the fact they come from our beloved USTA. Seems to me you would need to do some actual measurements.

Again, I think that the answer for now lies in actually looking at the strokes and seeing what stances are used when. When I see juniors who have been taught extreme open stance it always looks awkward on a majority of balls. It does seem to happen when the players are more forced for time, but does not seem preferred.

[uspta146749877]

Recovery time

I understand what everyone is saying and its good feedback
Lets say I have a Junior that questions me about when,why and where should I have a semi-open or a wider based stance? I have been asked by students "when should you my stance be wider than a semi-open?" Is it something they should think about? What is the benefit out of a wider base?
Do I say do what you would naturally do for balance? There must be a reason why one would choose one over the other. Watching players move back for a reverse pivot footwork technique is seen using a wide base.

Your feedback is appreciated

Hi,
a interesting contribution on this subject is

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/biomechanics/John_Yandell/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances.html

I will try to provide a bit more structured post this time.

Therefore six aspects could matter:
1.speed of a ball

2.balance of a player

3.how quick is recovery after a shot

4.time available to hit a ball/a location of a player on a court ( baseline,a middle of a court
etc)

5.a surface ( red clay is very often an exception)

6. a junior development vs ATP players
Issue #3 above
There is an orthodox line of reasoning about a QUICKER recovery for an open stance
compared with a square stance.
This line of reasoning NOT always very crucial for a slow red clay,especially for quick
players.

A quote from

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/footwork/michael_friedman/michael_friedman_hitting_stance_images/michael_friedman_hitting_stance.html

----> begiining of the quote
Open Stance
In today's game the open stance is used for two main reasons.

At the speed the ball is coming, players don't have time to step into the ball.
It is more efficient to recover back to the middle.
For every one extra step taken to the ball, it takes at least one (if not two) to get back to the middle, therefore, hitting with a closed stance slows recovery time.

----> end of the quote


There was a long discussion on related subjects between the user of name
emeralda and me
Please click

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=2&highlight=emeralda&page=29

and see posts #282,284,286,295 and 297.
Quotes from the ITF manual are of special interest.


Issue #4 listed above:
A forehand return of serve should be considered as a special case.
You may see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/howthread.php?t=1149

and

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1140

The next question is : which stance to coach/teach first?
In the case of forehand I teach an open stance FIRST ( from a baseline).
Next at some moment I talk about short balls, a middle of courts balls,approach shot
and serve and volley.
I try to explain possible different stances for this scenarios.
An question arises:
is it confusing for a student? Answer: sometimes it is


regards,
julian usptapro 27873
bedford,massachsetts

[uspta146749877]

ATP chalenger to analyse

I understand what everyone is saying and its good feedback
Lets say I have a Junior that questions me about when,why and where should I have a semi-open or a wider based stance? I have been asked by students "when should you my stance be wider than a semi-open?" Is it something they should think about? What is the benefit out of a wider base?
Do I say do what you would naturally do for balance? There must be a reason why one would choose one over the other. Watching players move back for a reverse pivot footwork technique is seen using a wide base.

Your feedback is appreciated

Hi,
you may see a video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0WK86A_rfU&feature=related

You may see different stances there.Using a full screen option allows to see
stances better.

julian usptapro 27873

[uspta146749877]

Neutral stance for inside-out forehand

I understand what everyone is saying and its good feedback
Lets say I have a Junior that questions me about when,why and where should I have a semi-open or a wider based stance? I have been asked by students "when should you my stance be wider than a semi-open?" Is it something they should think about? What is the benefit out of a wider base?
Do I say do what you would naturally do for balance? There must be a reason why one would choose one over the other. Watching players move back for a reverse pivot footwork technique is seen using a wide base.

Your feedback is appreciated

A neutral stance is very good/convenient for inside-out forehands
see for example

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_inside_out/rogerfederer_fh_inside_out.html?FedererFHInsideOutNeutralStanceSide.mov

The same for inside-in forehands
see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_inside_in/rogerfederer_fh_inside_in.html?FedererFHInsideInSide2.mov

BTW: I teach juniors to have neutral stance for inside-out AND inside-in shots.
Roddick hits those shots GENERALLY from open stance
see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/andyroddick/andyroddick_forehand/ar_fh_inside_out/ar_fh_inside_out.html?ARFHInsideOutFront1.mov

Nadal is generally semi-open or neutral with possible some exceptions for
clay

julian usptapro 27873

[uspta146749877]

Federer moving back

I understand what everyone is saying and its good feedback
Lets say I have a Junior that questions me about when,why and where should I have a semi-open or a wider based stance? I have been asked by students "when should you my stance be wider than a semi-open?" Is it something they should think about? What is the benefit out of a wider base?
Do I say do what you would naturally do for balance? There must be a reason why one would choose one over the other. Watching players move back for a reverse pivot footwork technique is seen using a wide base.

Your feedback is appreciated

A neutral stance is used when Federer moves back.
Please see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_moves_back/rogerfederer_fh_moves_back.html?FedererFHMovesBackSide1.mov

A neutral stance for drop shot
see

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_drop_shot/rogerfederer_fh_drop_shot.html?FedererFHDropShotSide.mov

An OPEN stance for short forehand

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_short/rogerfederer_fh_short.html?FedererFHShortFront1.mov

[uspta146749877]

for uspta2801398569

Could you post a question stated in your last private message sent to me
julian usptapro 27873
uspta....77