where'd the bent arm come from anyway?

[carrerakent]

A Federfore is a CONSERVATIVE stroke. Lendl: Elbow all over the place. Agassi: Elbow all over the place. Del Potro: Elbow all over the place. Federer: Elbow in one place.

bottle, don't know about you, but what you just described is a bunch of guys constantly changing and altering to try and get things to work the way they wanted and one guy that just let's natural movement and forces create consistent contact points for him.

[bottle]

Absolutely.

And Kent, please don't let the posters here convince you that you are arrogant. But be grateful that a person named Bungalow Bill hasn't joined the discussion. I now have read this entire thread. I didn't find a single arrogant word from you. Whoops-- well, maybe "get your heads out of the sand box." Up till then you were perfect and from then on, too.

What has upset people is your healthy challenge to the double-arm structure they teach too much. And what mightily confuses me is an article by John Yandell I read in Tennis Magazine suggesting that Roger Federer's forehand might be "a stroke for the masses." Anyway, I call such imitations "Federfores" because it's easier to have a name for them, and I definitely am "the masses," but I see a few of them working awfully well at the Randy Pate Tennis Academy for gifted youths here in Winston-Salem, also. The father is usually a tennis wonk, it seems to me. And won't let anybody change his boy to static double-bend (I make a distinction between that and "scissoring arm," a term I learned from Bungalow Bill). Roger scissors 60 per cent of the time and doesn't 40 per cent, no? Or did I reverse the percentages, and who really cares? Call it about half and half (scissoring is easier but you can still get the racket head passively to unfurl to the right while doing it).

I'm so glad my forehand has become five times more accurate just because I persisted in using Roger as the model. Even a tour technician advised that I use Todd Martin instead. The ball goes faster, too. And I win 6-0, 6-1 against the same player who used to beat me 4-6, 5-7. BELIEVE ME, DEAR READER AND EVERYBODY IF YOU HONOR PERSONAL TESTIMONY AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. I think it trumps well financed research projects every time, in fact is the best kind of energized raw data, is sports science itself.

[jeffreycounts]

And Kent, please don't let the posters here convince you that you are arrogant. But be grateful that a person named Bungalow Bill hasn't joined the discussion. I now have read this entire thread. I didn't find a single arrogant word from you. Whoops-- well, maybe "get your heads out of the sand box." Up till then you were perfect and from then on, too.

What has upset people is your healthy challenge to the double-arm structure they teach too much. And what mightily confuses me is an article by John Yandell I read in Tennis Magazine suggesting that Roger Federer's forehand might be "a stroke for the masses." Anyway, I call such imitations "Federfores" because it's easier to have a name for them, and I definitely am "the masses," but I see a few of them working awfully well at the Randy Pate Tennis Academy for gifted youths here in Winston-Salem, also. The father is usually a tennis wonk, it seems to me. And won't let anybody change his boy to static double-bend (I make a distinction between that and "scissoring arm," a term I learned from Bungalow Bill). Roger scissors 60 per cent of the time and doesn't 40 per cent, no? Or did I reverse the percentages, and who really cares? Call it about half and half (scissoring is easier but you can still get the racket head passively to unfurl to the right while doing it).

I'm so glad my forehand has become five times more accurate just because I persisted in using Roger as the model. Even a tour technician advised that I use Todd Martin instead. The ball goes faster, too. And I win 6-0, 6-1 against the same player who used to beat me 4-6, 5-7. BELIEVE ME, DEAR READER AND EVERYBODY IF YOU HONOR PERSONAL TESTIMONY AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. I think it trumps well financed research projects every time, in fact is the best kind of energized raw data, is sports science itself.

Science is always suspect of personal testimony and anecdotal evidence. That's why science hasn't embraced ufo sightings or psychic phenomenon. But I must say that Bottle and Carrera Kent are on the same wavelength here. I do prefer Bottle's posts with his literary references and fanciful metaphors.

Bottle - I think you should arrange a session with Carrera's coach and corroborate.

Carrera - where is your coach based? What player level does he work with?

[carrerakent]

My coach doesn't really have a base, but i guess you could say California, as he goes to where the tournaments are...his most recent success was Bethanie Mattek...getting her into top 40 (but doesn't work with her anymore), now he works primarily with Artem Sitak...who since changing to the extended arm foreahand from the bent has made the semis in three of his last three tournaments, so i suspect we will see his ranking continue to move up. he's moved up about 75-100 spots in the past month.

I am communicating with Brian Gordon to hopefully get some science behind the feel with Artem so that we can quantify the massive amount of improvement we've seen lately.

Bottle, where are you?

[bottle]

Where am I?

In Winston-Salem, NC working on three books and with very little cash: John Escher, in the phone book.

Jeff, thanks for the nice note. But, (you always knew there would be a but, didn't you?) on this subject of personal anecdote, Richard P. Feynman was a
pretty good scientist and didn't shun it, embedded a razor blade in a wooden block for instance to produce more quantifiably rapid slicing of string beans, but abandoned this experiment when he suddenly realized his life was in danger. Another one was when he went around counting to a fixed number, pretending he was a second hand on a clock. Then he would compare himself with an actual clock, measure himself at different times of the day and lights, in different moods, after different meals, etc., etc. And then he made all his friends do the same thing, keeping impeccable data, of course. I don't think his two Nobel prizes came from either of these experiments, but...it's very interesting and revealing of a more expansive and very sound view of science, I think.

I remember one time at the Crooked Run Racquet Club, Front Royal, VA (more of an exercise gym by now) a computer expert at Lord Fairfax Community College, Middletown, came out of tennis retirement and didn't look very good to me, and I never saw him play a match with anybody. Then he beat a really
good player-- an absolutely terrific player-- for the club championship. All he'd done was hit the wall and think. He was his own scientist, is what I'm trying to say.

[jeffreycounts]

My coach doesn't really have a base, but i guess you could say California, as he goes to where the tournaments are...his most recent success was Bethanie Mattek...getting her into top 40 (but doesn't work with her anymore), now he works primarily with Artem Sitak...who since changing to the extended arm foreahand from the bent has made the semis in three of his last three tournaments, so i suspect we will see his ranking continue to move up. he's moved up about 75-100 spots in the past month.

I am communicating with Brian Gordon to hopefully get some science behind the feel with Artem so that we can quantify the massive amount of improvement we've seen lately.

Bottle, where are you?

I found online that Artem's coach is Jason Fransen, and that Jason also coached Bethanie (http://www.tennis.com/features/gener....aspx?id=67790). Maybe Jason and John could get together and work on an article on the straight armed forehand?

[carrerakent]

I found online that Artem's coach is Jason Fransen, and that Jason also coached Bethanie (http://www.tennis.com/features/gener....aspx?id=67790). Maybe Jason and John could get together and work on an article on the straight armed forehand?

Jason and I will be talking about it in two weeks while he's here in Florida training with me.

[uspta146749877]

For Mr Counts

Mr Counts,
could u see posts by Oliensis around

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?p=9277&posted=1#post9277

Any comments?

julian mielniczuk
usptapro 27873
Courtside Tennis Club,Bedford,NA

https://www.julianmielniczuk.usptapro.com

juliantennis@comcast.net

[nabrug]

Federer the closest/lowest man to the ball?! Obvious too close. In my next training session with him I will tell him to get further away from the ball.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_short/rogerfederer_fh_short.html?FedererFHShortFront4.mov

[carrerakent]

nabrug...looks pretty "extended" to me. ha ha Actually, if his arm is straight like that at contact, you'd be amiss to tell him he was too close. Once again, ya'lls examples prove me right. i love it. ha ha

[nabrug]

nabrug...looks pretty "extended" to me. ha ha Actually, if his arm is straight like that at contact, you'd be amiss to tell him he was too close. Once again, ya'lls examples prove me right. i love it. ha ha

Got you! ......., didn't you get the false irony?

Ofcourse this is a FH2. And ofcourse he is not too close. He is doing this frequently. You did not get the point. I want to prove that the advantage of this technique lies in the much bigger contact point area (like you can read in my former posts) and not in the increased speed. Much closer to the body and much wider.

I am going to hit with left first thing tomorrow!

[carrerakent]

Got you! ......., didn't you get the false irony?

Ofcourse this is a FH2. And ofcourse he is not too close. He is doing this frequently. You did not get the point. I want to prove that the advantage of this technique lies in the much bigger contact point area (like you can read in my former posts) and not in the increased speed. Much closer to the body and much wider.

I am going to hit with left first thing tomorrow!

good one you got on me.

my coach demonstrates a full extended swing with upright body and straight legs and hits ball resting on the ground to make his point that the key is extension, not knee bend, getting down to the ball etc, so i am glad you showed me this video of Fed pulling a ball up from so low by extending to it instead of bending down to it.

[oliensis]

What the f***k?

One ball that he doesn't get down to and you take that as affirmation of a principle?

I can show you eleven-teen videos of Federer doing a beautiful job of getting down to the ball...and hitting a much better ball ...like this one:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/rogerfederer/rogerfederer_forehand/rogerfederer_fh_short/rogerfederer_fh_short.html?FedererFHShortCourtLevelRear1.mov

[carrerakent]

What the f***k?

One ball that he doesn't get down to and you take that as affirmation of a principle?

I can show you eleven-teen videos of Federer doing a beautiful job of getting down to the ball...and hitting a much better ball ...like this one:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...LevelRear1.mov

is he extending still? of course. he doesn't get his body down to the ball, now does he? that was my point. he keeps an erect torso. as does my coach by hitting a ball lying on the court. erect torso and arm extension. he doesn't bend his legs to further emphasize his point of extension. of course we teach getting low with the legs.

that first video example...i'd like to see a double bender hit that ball with any pace. my point is as always, extension produces more racket head speed in more varied contact point instances.

[oliensis]

OK. Extension is often a good thing, in general.
And erect torso is usually a good thing as well. I concur on those points.

Glad to hear that you agree that getting down w/ the legs is a good thing.
No bones of contention on these points from me, then. I misunderstood.