The Gravity Step

[marius hancu]

very useful the point made in the lesson by M. Friedmann on the gravity step. it indeed lowers the center of gravity and thus allows an easier lateral movement.

the only problem is that once dropped, you must remain down low, until the shot, or you'll be losing time with the up-and-down motions, thus it's quite demanding athletically.

[johnyandell]

Gravity or not?

I think the patterns of the steps is one thing and what to teach may (or may not) be another... I'm fairly sure that gravity steps happen naturally especially for the top pros and other players too...
The question is when to teach what and what to just let happen. I'm no footwork expert, but I can say we'll have a lot more articles addressing some of these mysteries in upcoming months.

[CraigC]

NO NO NO!!!! 30 years ago we were taught to shuffle back to the center of the court. Now we recover with a crossover step because it's quicker.

Today we are teaching the gravity step. Does that mean it's right. A baseball player stealing second base, starts in a split step position and is ORDERED by basestealing coaches NOT TO USE THE GRAVITY STEP.

I will throw this out for discussion because I have had arguments with many coaches on this topic. Both gravity step and no gravity step are right.
Here is my view:

On lateral moves, if I am in a split step position with neutral balance, then I will have to use the gravity step to create the lean and momentum. On a forward step, if my weight is neutral and I am expecting a deep ball, I will have to use a gravity step to create the lean and momentum. BUT:

I believe these are inefficient ways to move, because the balance on the split step is not correct. Try this--Stand crosscourt and be in a split step position. Now get ready for a ball hit down the line from your opponent. Notice your weight shift slightly to the inside leg (the one closest to the ball). If one started in this position, with the weight already slightly unbalanced towards the open part of the court, then one wouldn't need a gravity step. Now, imagine the weight is still on this inside leg, it is actually ALSO easier to go back to the crosscourt ball from your opponent, as your right leg is now loaded to push.

Still disagree. Try this. Stand at the baseline in a split step position. Have someone drop a ball in front of you. 99% of players take a step backward first, before going forward, to load and create lean. I believe this is wrong depending on your style of play. (I know about the Stanford study, but I am going way out on a limb and saying they are wrong).

A defensive player will always have a neutral split step and will have to use the gravity step to create momentum. Conversely, a player who is ALWAYS looking for a short ball, will have a different balance on his split step, and will make his first step forward. Think about it this way. If this player has to go back on a ball, he will be using a gravity step by going forward first. This whole concept is ridiculous.

If you are an aggressive player, ignore the gravity step to go forward and learn to split step properly.

OH I CAN'T wait for the replies to this one. BRING IT ON!!

CC

[CraigC]

One more thing. The only two players I have seen, who regularly DO NOT use the gravity step (although at times they do because they are caught in defensive stances) on short balls are Sampras and Federer, two of the greatest movers of all time. Coincidence???\


CC

[johnyandell]

So I think this is a great topic for exploration using the resources of Tennisplayer and also of the people who are involved in Tennisplayer.

I really don't have an opinion about this. That may seem like a cop out and if I was forced to show someone what I think works on the court--we'll it wouldn't be a drop step.

Now, Craig, you say Andre and Pete don't use them on short balls. OK I 'll take your word for it--but maybe I won't until you or I or both of us look at a few dozen clips. Some people would question whether Andre was a great mover anyway--he was sure great at dominating the T. But that may be beside the point. How he played may or may not have affected the type of steps he needed or was forced to take--and that's kind of my point.

If we were to go thru the stroke archive and count out of 15,000 movies what the patterns of steps were and what type of steps were taken by who when--well that would be a start.

And in fact we have a new contributor, David Bailey, an Australian coach who has pretty much done that--and he has found literally a few dozens types of steps and combinations of steps and can document them thru the QT movies--and that includes (if I am not mistaken) a lot of drop steps.

But that still gets me back to my question that I haven't answered for myself--many things happen but what should be taught? On the strokes there are causes and effects in my view and too many people are stressing the later not the former.

Not sure it's not the same in footwrok--if you just tried to keep your center of gravity between your feet and stand up straight would everything else follow??

I was taught to shufffle step and in trying to establish that shuffle and the ready position it yielded, I know I also crossed over. These are the mysteries to investigate in my view. And maybe they have been figured out and if so great and I want to see--and see the movies that go with that--and we can do it here!

[kenknight]

Craig, so you suggest (in place of drop steps) just splitstepping, leaning/loading a leg right off the splitstep, and using that as a base to push off in all directions? (provided you aren't in a defensive position as you said.)

You're clear when you write, I just want to make sure I understand it.

So while the drop step allows you to load the legs, you believe in many situations directly loading the leg from a splitstep would be much more efficient?

Like you said, when viewing video of Federer moving in to attack short balls, he "loaded" and seemed to move without use of a drop step. Personally, so far at least, I do use drop steps, but not constantly and it just happens naturally.

Interesting debate. By the way, in the Stanford study you reference, what's that about?

[CraigC]

Ken-
Thanks for responding because I truly want to solve this issue. THe Stanford study showed that a drop step was more efficient in making a forward move because it created a lean of the body and slightly more power in the leg that drops backward. Thus, the player will be able to push harder and farther into the court on the first step.

My argument is this: The study had the players starting in what I refer to as a neutral split step, meaning the player was standing with his legs bent but with his weight perfectly vertical and not leaning in nay direction. I would argue that the split step for an attacking player should be different. I believe that the split step for a player who is ALWAYS looking to move forward, should be more on the toes and more with the weight leaning slightly forward. This would negate the Stanford study because is involves a different starting position.

Yes there are definitely times when we use drop steps very naturally and I think there is a place for it. When we are pushed on defense, or when we haven't fully recoverd to a split step position, we may need the drop step to create momentum. However, and I believe you phrased it more clearly than I, loading the leg directly from the split proves more efficient, especially when moveing laterally. When moveing forward, it is less a means of loading the leg, than transfering the weight to the toes rather than having it vertical.

Did you try the stance and leg loading that I suggested in my last reply? What were the results? I truly wonder if this will become part of training movement as we progress into the future or if I simply have my head up my....

CC

[kenknight]

Craig, even if it's not the "wave of the future" or you have your head stuck...in your body, it's certainly worth trying out, and footage shows a lot of people doing it.

Bob Hansen says much of the same thing in "The Float" article in the footwork session. Just like you state, he says the move is important for people attacking the net and all-courters. "The Float" is "unweighting", or the splitstep, an immediate loading of the foot farthest away from the ball (or the inside foot) and pushing out with the inside foot while taking a step with the outside foot (or foot closest to the ball).

Unless I'm wrong again, exactly your point.

I read your post this morning, and had the opportunity to try it all out in the four hours of tennis I played today.

I believe I certainly did have results, and felt that I was able to close in on the net just a little bit sooner. At least it certainly wasn't awkward and I played very well while incorporating it.

When moving sideways, the drop steps came naturally and seemed to work better, but that's nothing you didn't state.

Looks like your head wasn't very far up.