Kimiko Date Defeats Safina!!!

[gzhpcu]

The problem is, she is the only one playing that style. Just as Fabrice Santoro's personal style. He had some good wins, but you don't see anybody copying it on the tour.

[GimpyGrumpy]

Yes if I were you I would stop posting too. Again you have the facts wrong--the left arm stretch is independent of stance. I am sure there is noting wrong with different styles of teaching but when they ignore or teach the wrong technical facts, then you have a creability problem as a professional who is being paid (allegedly) for expertise. Not to mention trumpeting these mistatements in a forum.

Here is what a good neutral stance turn looks like--except of course for Kimko...

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/roger_federer_09/rf_forehand/rf_fh_center/rf_fh_center.html?RFFHCenterNeutralStanceFront.mov

[gzhpcu]

You are obsessed with Date and one match. This is a fluke, just like Santoro, as I have mentioned. Show me a large percentage of players playing like this and you might have something. Otherwise, it proves nothing. Just an anomaly.

Think how much better results she would have had playing like, say Henin...

[GimpyGrumpy]

That's not even the correct opposite arm position you show for Nadal. This has degnerated into you just spinning around in circles trying to justify your lack of knowledge. Why not try reading something on the site and learn something? There are a lot of examples in YourStrokes of players at all levels improving their forehands, stretching the opposite arm. It is illogical to say that because Date won one match her forehand which is technically different from almost every other tour player is the model. But oh yeah I forgot you aren't talking to me anymore because I insulted you with the truth.

[johnyandell]

OK guys I have had enough of both of you.

Grumpy you are living up to your name. Choko do not alter Forum pages in the future. To elaborate:

I scanned briefly the technical issues and I think the confusion is this. Date takes the ball early with a compact swing and flat style and there is nothing wrong with that even if it is uncommon in the pro game. I would say simpler swings are better for the majority of people--if not necessarily the idea of hitting on the rise which is difficult at any level.

I understand why Grumpy is frustrated however by your presentation Choko because it does come across as rather strident, first, but also because there is, at minimum some confusion about technical elements. Maybe you wouldn't be getting the responses you are if you didn't make such strong claims or if you could address the technical issues better.

If there is one point that is a constant in the study of the forehand across all levels it is the value of the full turn which is associated with the use of the opposite arm. This is a point which really can't be disputed in my view. I have seen literally hundreds of players improve by building this element into the forehand and my own opinion Date could improve hers dramatically as well.

There are many elements that have to be evaluated carefully for lower level players--wiper, stances, body rotation, grips, etc. But the role of the opposite arm is not one.

So, Choko, I suggest you go back and look at some of the articles on this site that address that. You can reject the point if you like but you are overlooking what a majority of the experts on this site believe, including myself.

And if you you want to ignore Grumpy's posts that's fine but just ignore them and do not I repeat do not try to manipulate the forum pages.

As for Grumpy, I tend to agree with most of your technical points, but not necessarily your confrontational style. I think others can judge whether contributors in this thread have addressed them properly. In the future if you continue to post, stay on the technical points please.

John Yandell

[johnyandell]

As I said your strident style has irritated many people. Grumpy was more directly insulting perhaps. But I think you should examine why you--and a limited number of other posters--have illicited such strong negative responses. There are no victims here, and I have better things to do than be reading all posts in the forum--that's why I have my own area. I think it is about a wash between you two.

As to the forehand there is a fallacy in your argument which is that if a player can win a match at a high level that somehow proves the technique is perfect or couldn't be improved. I could make similar criticisms of other tour player's forehands on this issue and have. Same with the other strokes, particularly women's serves. The issue isn't who beats who, the issue is what are the commonalities in the best strokes and how applicable are they at other levels.

So yeah I think you are off base if that is something you don't incorporate into your teaching, although, frankly, there are many other teaching pros who are in your boat. The opposite hand thing is quite well established though and virtually every high level coach who has studied pro technique recognizes this. It's easy to develop at all levels. Personally I have had great success with some of my girls' high school team players--and a couple of college players, and a top 100 player in the world. So that is my opinion. And unless I have to come back and ask one of you gentlemen to leave, I am done with this thread.

[GimpyGrumpy]

I have been properly chastened. Therefore allow me to make the following points within the guidelines:

I thank Mr. Yandell for his attention to this thread and his detailed response.

I think his response is clear and perfectly fair.

I do not believe Mr. Choko has understood the response.

[GimpyGrumpy]

A fitting end to this thread. A question and the request that no one answer the question. In fact the question has been answered, but the answer has been disregarded by the questioner. Please do not question me or upset my belief system. That is the underlying message I take away from this poster.

[GimpyGrumpy]

I see getting the last word in is your goal. I believe you were asked not to alter the thread. But as you are not the moderator you do not control who can post and when. Once again for the record I disagree and think the evidence is on my side. Date's forehand lacks a key technical component shared by virtually every other good forehand.

[bowt]

two words : womens tennis

you would never see a top male player with average technique that date has

safina also has enormous back swings on her ground strokes

[chuck62]

Appreciating Choko

Seems to be quite a bit of disagreement in this thread, but I think Chokos comparison does have value in that it raises the point : do some players need to evaluate what technique works best for them ? Kimiko Date has figured out that using a flatter stroke and taking the ball on the rise is the only way she can compete with big strong players like Safina. Some of the top Chinese women are using a similar style. Maybe the flat style is not for everyone, but for certain players like Date, Bartoli, Li Na, and Oudin it has proven to be a style that can allow them to beat some of these physically stronger players.