Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Questions for Brian Gordon and JY

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Questions for Brian Gordon and JY

    Brian,

    From a biomechanics perspective, would you please help me out with the following questions:

    If I am on the balls of my feet in a split step at the baseline, and I want to retrieve a drop shot with the quickest and most efficient movement possible, should my first step be forward to move to the ball or backward to load a driving leg (a la' sprinters starting position)? The USTA coaches are absolute in advocating the latter, however Federer definitely breaks the mold on this much of the time.

    Does the above answer change if my split step is done with my weight neutral rather than on the balls of my feet?

    Next question: Harvard Men's Tennis advocates a straight-legged split step "high set" rather than a bent-legged lower center of gravity split step. They contend that starting from a higher position means the body will have to lean less in order to get off balance, thereby gaining an advantage in moving to the ball. It seems to me that a "high set" offers no means to push explosively with the legs once the body is off balance. So, this begs the question: When moving right or left from a split step, is the initial move made with a body lean, or with a leg drive --- and then once again, should the initial move be made with the foot going towards the ball, or away from the ball to load a driving leg and to create an imbalance?

    Last question is for John. John, today pretty much everyone is finally teaching the crossover recovery step after...let's say a wide forehand. My question: Based on the time it takes for a player's average rally forehand (let's say 70mph) to reach the other side of the court, would a player have time to perform two crossover steps before converting back to a balanced split step.

    Thanks for your feedback if you can find the time.

    CC

  • #2
    Hi Craig-

    More of a stroke mechanics dude so this is a bit out of my wheel house – also never been associated with great movement around the court – given this disclaimer here is my seat of the pants logic:

    1. The step back is only necessary if the split is neutral (center of mass back) and arguably a waste of time if the split is over the balls of the feet (center of mass forward) – sparing you a convoluted force and torque explanation, the latter will produce ample forward horizontal ground reaction force and forward body rotation via the leg drive – the former will require a step back or initial forward shift of the center of mass (both time consuming) to produce ample horizontal ground force and forward body rotation via leg drive.

    2. Seems to me producing lateral movement out of the split by simply moving the center of mass outside the base of support with straight legs is very physiologically efficient and works well if don’t need to get somewhere quickly – if you do, you want to use, as you say, explosive leg drive – the leg opposite the direction of movement drives like hell, the leg on the side of the direction of movement is repositioned to maintain the accelerating center of mass controllably near the base of support while at the same time being positioned for its impending drive in the next step – that simple to me.

    Not very satisfying to advocates of more intricate footwork patterns I suppose, but at least consistent with my focus on stroke execution – perhaps a movement expert with research in this area could provide a more eloquent explanation - BG
    Last edited by BrianGordon; 05-21-2010, 05:01 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      CC, BG,

      Thanks for starting this, and responding. I saw that high center thing on youtube. CC, do you see Fed and others moving like that? I don't but maybe I am missing something.

      I am going to write to David Bailey and get his take on this. To me stuff like that step back happens when it is supposed to happen because athlete's know how to move. Not sure about analyzing or training it.... But way out of my area of expertise. Let's see if we can get some insight from David.

      What's the url of that high guy?

      John

      Comment


      • #4
        Here ya go!

        Comment


        • #5
          Quite a claim he makes there at the end no?

          Comment


          • #6
            Guys below is a reply on this issue from David Bailey.

            Comment


            • #7
              Had a good look at the Havard Clip and answers made by yourself and Brian

              Here is my take on the 3 areas questioned......remember I am thinking more as a footwork teacher than a biomechanist

              Great movement is all about momentum, anticipation and flow.

              The truly great movers will avoid making a reaction split step (both feet hit ground at the same time) which everyone is talking about and will make what I call an anticationary split step. They will make a "flow split" when moving in the same direction as the opponent strikes the ball i.e. the foot closest to the ball turns in mid air before striking the ground with the leg furthest away from the ball doing 100% of the driving work or a shift split i.e. when moving back in behind a similar movement but the hips shift underneath the body and the body leans towards the direction you have just moved from. When making shift and flow splits you actually cut down a step which is obviously quicker.

              The reason the split times in the 200 meter sprint are faster than a 100 meter sprint (with a crouch start) is because of the "Flying" start in the 2nd 100 meters. So we need to think of a similar situation in tennis.

              The secret to truly great movement is to move in such away that the body is always flowing from one foot to the other and if you can do this you become much more flient and efficent on the court. Federer is the master of this. Bruce Lee the famous martial artist always said 'Be Like water" when moving.

              When analysing movement we always have to talk about the approaching ball and where is the player recovering from..... and is the player in a situation where they are rallying, defending or attacking.

              If you are moving to a inner ball (less than 3 steps away and not pressed for time) and....want to keep your body alignment then you tend to move with a heel strike first because in a sense you are power walking to the ball. If you have to run or cross over to an approaching ball you tend to lead with your nose (lean the body) and drop the closest foot to the ball under (drop step or gravity step) so you are on the ball of the foot and thus run or cross to the ball.

              Thus my answer to the Havard question is you need to master both. I do like the "high set" when you are in control of the point you don't always have to move a hundred miles an hr to every ball. On the Havard clip they are showing players moving only one or 2 steps but when you need to move quickly I believe you to have to get low.....and this will happen by widening your base and sticking you butt back and get good angles in the legs......especially if the ball is wide and low...It is like the open and closed stance debate you need both to play well....the live ball vrs fed ball debate ....both should be used in training.....and the side skip verse crossover recovery step debate....you need to be great at both skills. All are good and have there own merit. So in summary when rallying High Set (prevents injuries,fatigue as mentioned) but get low and flow or shift split when defending.


              In relation to the crossover recovery steps....again I love the crossover but obviously you must leveled out your hips when the opponent hits the ball down the the end so as long as you can make the 2 crossovers and level out before the opponent hits the ball a double cross is faster and better ....but remember not every player has the ability to crossover well.....many of my clients really struggle with the crossovers yet some actually love it and will do it every time ...even when covering short distances. All I am saying is you have to reject, absorb and experiment with every individual client and choreograph what works for them

              It is the same with the the step back when running for a drop step.When analaysing movement you can't just practice something from just a static start. Yes there are times you are very balanced and virtually just standing still but many times you are moving from different parts of the court i.e. think about when someone hits a drop shot ....usually you have been pushed back or very wide ......a good player will not drop shot you when you have good court postion and are standing with good balance.....thus a lot of the time you need to think what is a realistic movement that I will be doing when somene hits a drop shot and practice that..i.e. if you are moving forward after being pushed back you will split and step forward....if you have moved fwd and then moving backwards towards the baseline then you will scissor into a running type stance As mentioned in the question)....if moving laterally you will either flow split or shift split as mentioned above particularly if you have read the cues and clues of the oppnent and anticipate the drop shot

              My opinin is it is dangerous to say their is only one way....as you touched on John.....movement training is about polishing what happens naturally and comfortably for each individual player.

              Comment


              • #8
                The angle aspect is one thing, but the lower center of gravity allows you to move quicker was always my understanding. Isn't this right?

                Comment


                • #9
                  For CraigC

                  Hi,
                  your latest one minute clinics of Tennis Channel are
                  NOT posted/loaded at http://www.tennischannel.com/babolat/
                  Is any chance you can help?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Please see a youtube video

                    Originally posted by gzhpcu View Post
                    The angle aspect is one thing, but the lower center of gravity allows you to move quicker was always my understanding. Isn't this right?

                    I believe

                    disagrees with it

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      And Pat Doughtery disagrees with the above:

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26wKS0udwwg

                      Comment

                      Who's Online

                      Collapse

                      There are currently 8355 users online. 7 members and 8348 guests.

                      Most users ever online was 139,261 at 09:55 PM on 08-18-2024.

                      Working...
                      X