Have a Question for Me?

[johnyandell]

You don't ask a controversial question, now do you? I have spent way too much time arguing about this on the TW boards, looking at video, learning from Brian Gordon...

BUT the answer is not simple. The myth of the wrist article made the point--still correct--that the huge majority of forehands are hit with the wrist laid back. But some of the extreme grip forehands are hit with neutral wrists--though not all--and my continued video analysis shows the amount of lay back also varies from shot to shot. An inside out forehand--most lay back. A short crosscourt, closer to neutral.

So what then? If I understand Brian G., the motion of the wrist is like a hinge. As the racket pivots this motion adds racket speed due to centripetal force. But also if I understand Brian, the actual muscle activity of players is not a forward flex that makes this happen. In fact the players are actually contracting against this flex to slow it down.

Why? To orient the racket at the right angle for the shot line at contact. Confused yet?

I think that keeping the wrist back all the way through the swing is the simplest way for lower level players to develop a forehand. But if the arm is relaxed and the wrist releases the right amount at the right time, it probably does add racket speed--but not from the conscious effort to snap.

[tennis_chiro]

The wrist should be a passive hinge which may or may not add some power to the shot; the primary role is to control the shot, not to power it.

don

[stotty]

Role of the wrist

You don't ask a controversial question, now do you? I have spent way too much time arguing about this on the TW boards, looking at video, learning from Brian Gordon...

BUT the answer is not simple. The myth of the wrist article made the point--still correct--that the huge majority of forehands are hit with the wrist laid back. But some of the extreme grip forehands are hit with neutral wrists--though not all--and my continued video analysis shows the amount of lay back also varies from shot to shot. An inside out forehand--most lay back. A short crosscourt, closer to neutral.

So what then? If I understand Brian G., the motion of the wrist is like a hinge. As the racket pivots this motion adds racket speed due to centripetal force. But also if I understand Brian, the actual muscle activity of players is not a forward flex that makes this happen. In fact the players are actually contracting against this flex to slow it down.

Why? To orient the racket at the right angle for the shot line at contact. Confused yet?

I think that keeping the wrist back all the way through the swing is the simplest way for lower level players to develop a forehand. But if the arm is relaxed and the wrist releases the right amount at the right time, it probably does add racket speed--but not from the conscious effort to snap.

The wrist should be a passive hinge which may or may not add some power to the shot; the primary role is to control the shot, not to power it.

don

Points taken and understood. I skipped over to the ATP 3 article by Brian Gordon and states this:

Yes, the motion of the wrist joint is bringing the racquet head around, and yes this is contributing to racquet head speed in a significant way. But is this the result of the player’s decision to forcibly "snap" the wrist forward?

The answer appears to be no and this is one of the surprising result of our 3D research. There is no conscious forward wrist snap. - Brian Gordon.

And yes this is where tennis gets complicated...biomechanics. Probably too complicated for Stotty but I like to have a go at improving my understanding all the same.

[johnyandell]

Stotty,

I feel certain you are up to it.

[jimlosaltos]

Standing racket on its head

[QUOTE=johnyandell;2]

John,

I've noticed more instances of ATP players hitting low forehands with their racket almost on end, that is the head pointed at the court, the handle vertical. Their wrists aren't merely laid back, but the racket pointing down. What are your thoughts on this, and is it a deliberate technique or an accident of court position? Something to emulate, or avoid?

Perhaps I've been unobservant, but I don't recall seeing this happening constantly in the past. Two photo examples I took at BNP Indian Wells. I suppose one could argue that Raonic is simply jammed, but Fed had plenty of time to create more space if he wanted to. Thank you! / jim

1) Raonic. Note that he's hitting from outside his doubles alley.

BNPIW15Raonic9 by james.fawcette, on Flickr

2) Fed, at midcourt.

Fed Forehand Low vertical takeback 018 by james.fawcette, on Flickr

end.

[johnyandell]

It's the start of an extreme windshield wiper. The hitting arm and racket are rotated down--they will rotate up to the contact and continue to rotate in the finish. It's part of what Brian Gordon would call an extreme flip.

[johnyandell]

It's the start of an extreme windshield wiper. The hitting arm and racket are rotated down--they will rotate up to the contact and continue to rotate in the finish. It's part of what Brian Gordon would call an extreme flip.

[privas]

One-handed backhand weight transfer

Mr Yandell, you have put together some great video lessons on the one-handed backhand over the years in your Advanced Tennis section. You've explored just about every aspect of this mysterious stroke.

Forgive me if I've missed and/or skipped this particular lesson. However, I don't think I've seen a lesson devoted specifically to the footwork involved in the one-handed backhand weight transfer: slice vs drive, down-the-line vs cross court. What is the back foot supposed to be doing, besides guiding the torso, getting to the unit turn, and maintaining position to keep the torso turned during the stroke? When should the back foot go up in the air vs being dragged? When does the back foot stay still through the stroke? Is there a difference between down-the-line vs cross court? Is there a role for high speed video for this? Just a thought. Because I can't think of anything else you haven't covered yet!

--Pedro

[johnyandell]

You ask great questions. Most need more research...but you might like the articles on the stances that address some of this. A lot of the questions don't have straight yes or no answers. CC v. Down the L for example is a matter of a few degrees change in the angle of the racket face while stance and biomechanics seem identical in most cases.

Here is the stance article: the animations visually address many of the issues:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/avancedtennis/john_yandell/modern_backhand_stances/one_hander/

[jimlosaltos]

link

It's the start of an extreme windshield wiper. The hitting arm and racket are rotated down--they will rotate up to the contact and continue to rotate in the finish. It's part of what Brian Gordon would call an extreme flip.

Thanks. I can find one reference on TPN here:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/biomechanics/brian_gordon/developing_an_atp_forehand_part_01/index_2.html

By my unscientific observation, this seems much more widely used of late.

[johnyandell]

Look at this:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/avancedtennis/john_yandell/your_forehand_and_the_modern_forehand/hand_arm_rotation/hand_arm_rotation.html

Could be happening more or not or maybe you just are noticing it more, but it's been around for a decade or more as a regular element.

[stroke]

You don't ask a controversial question, now do you? I have spent way too much time arguing about this on the TW boards, looking at video, learning from Brian Gordon...

BUT the answer is not simple. The myth of the wrist article made the point--still correct--that the huge majority of forehands are hit with the wrist laid back. But some of the extreme grip forehands are hit with neutral wrists--though not all--and my continued video analysis shows the amount of lay back also varies from shot to shot. An inside out forehand--most lay back. A short crosscourt, closer to neutral.

So what then? If I understand Brian G., the motion of the wrist is like a hinge. As the racket pivots this motion adds racket speed due to centripetal force. But also if I understand Brian, the actual muscle activity of players is not a forward flex that makes this happen. In fact the players are actually contracting against this flex to slow it down.

Why? To orient the racket at the right angle for the shot line at contact. Confused yet?

I think that keeping the wrist back all the way through the swing is the simplest way for lower level players to develop a forehand. But if the arm is relaxed and the wrist releases the right amount at the right time, it probably does add racket speed--but not from the conscious effort to snap.

John, I remember in Brian's articles he stated that more eastern type grips led to more wrist extenison on on the forehand. I have always felt that this wrist extension(and resulting wrist flexion), along with the straight arm configration, was one of the main defining attributes that seperates Nadal and Federer's forehands. Then along comes Jack Sock who definately has a different forehand from Nadal and Fed. I was watching some tournament on TV that had spin tracker technology and showed that Sock was getting slightly more spin on his forehand than even Nadal.

[johnyandell]

Well he hits a lot of spin. Very extreme grip. Double bend. I wouldn't say that spin levels is what makes a forehand great though.

[gzhpcu]

John, is this enough pointing of the left arm to the sideline?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEsU_dePZS0

[johnyandell]

Looks great.