klacr Strokes

[klacr]

Sorry I couldn't get my two cents in sooner, but I wanted to at least make an effort here.

First of all, on flat balls.
If you hit the ball 60 mph (88fps) and, for argument's sake, meet the ball at the baseline, it takes 39/88 (=.443) sec to get to the net. In that time, gravity drops the ball at 32 fps/s reaching a downward velocity (strictly due to gravity) of 14.18 fps (=.443 x 32). So the average downward velocity for that time is 7.09 fps (= 0 + 14.18/2). That means gravity alone dropped the ball 3.14 feet (= 7.09 fps x .443 sec). These principles apply whether you shoot a bullet or hit a tennis ball. There are other forces at play like the spin of the ball, but gravity is always present and usually the largest force (downward). If Kyle meets a ball at 4 or 5 feet off the ground and hits it at 60 mph (could be more, but that is pretty good, even at 80 mph it would drop over 2 feet). There has to be some lift or the ball will not make it over the net (effectively 6 feet, not 3 feet high).

Your body knows all this better than you do, so when you hit those flat strokes where the racket doesn't come up toward the contact point, the body intuitively opens the face of the racket ever so slightly to give the ball some lift. To get the solidest hit on the ball that transfers the most momentum to the ball, you need to the imaginary arrow perpendicular to the face of the racket and the string bed to be the same as the arrow representing the momentum of the head of the racket. The full momentum of Kyle's racket is moving almost horizontally through the ball. The power that goes into the ball is actually just a portion (a large portion of course) of that full momentum. From a physics point of view, you would just take the cosine of the angle represented by the two arrows where the momentum of the horizontal swing is the hypotenuse. So as big as he is hitting the ball, it is still just a glancing blow. His hits would actually feel solider to him if he dropped the racket somewhat below the ball. Of course, if he left the racket face open, the ball would be long; but if he squared it up appropriately, he could use a little of the extra energy in spin as the ball slipped down off the strings.

Bottom line for me, that forehand is a bit of a slap. We only have 4 thousands of a second, but believe me, if Kyle let the head drop a little more, he would actually feel the ball more, and I would argue, hit it even bigger.

If Kyle is on my court, I would start out by first trying to get him to feel the strings in the palm of his hand a little more (see my article here at http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...cket_head.html). He says he swings the tip of the racket, so no, I don't think he is holding the racket too tight, but I think he needs to be more in touch with the center of the string bed sweetspot via the palm of his right hand. It's a subtle difference, but that is where I would start.

Second I would probably try to have him hit a few balls with the "Wrist Assist" or Greg Norman's "Secret" to take the wrist flexion out of the hitting zone completely. Not that we are going to end up taking Kyle's wrist out of the shot, but the feel of a solid hit would lead him to reduce the amount of "slap" I think he has in that stroke.

That is where I would start. I don't know who said it first, BobbySwift, 10sPlayer or Stroke, but I think they were on the right track talking about the upright racket shaft position at the end of the unit turn. If you hold the racket shaft in a vertical position, you can balance it easily and feel little inclination for the racket head to drop. As soon as the racket head moves away from vertical, (here goes the physics again!) the lever arm of the weight of the racket head around the fulcrum at the wrist is increased and you will really feel the weight of the racket head. (If anyone has trouble feeling this, try it with a slightly weighted racket head). That increased racket head weight (seeming) will make you more aware of the position of the racket head and make it easier for you to drop it below the contact point. Sensitivity to the position of the racket head in the downward arc as the elbow extends (as BobbySwift recommends) is critical to having an effective, repeatable loop that gives you power and consistency as you drive up into the ball after you have experienced the associated SSC.

It's easy enough to poke some holes in the "facts" I've tried to lay out here. First of all, when Kyle hits the ball on the rise, it's initial vertical velocity is not zero. That changes the situation. If he hits his forehand 5 feet inside the baseline, that cuts off more than a proportional share of the downward movement due to gravity because gravity is accelerating and has a lot greater influence in that last five feet (another reason it's important to move up to short balls rather than reach down for them). Still, this is how I would start to try to get Kyle a better feel for the ball and an even heavier ball: feel the racket head sweet spot in the palm, reduce the wrist flexion by forcing the issue with something like the "Wrist Assist" and try to get him to move the racket to at least 60 degrees instead of 90 at the end of the unit turn so he can feel the racket head a little better.

don

tennis_chiro,

I appreciate your observations, time and thoughts. Happy you are able to add to the thread as I know you are full of ideas, opinions and experience.

First and foremost, I'm glad you're a genius to figure it out because I don't get any of the physics calculations/numbers. Not the best math student

Great information about getting below the ball. I'm well aware of its importance but have the fear in back of my mind that if I start brushing up and through the ball it becomes too loopy and I'll lose the pace and penetration. Is there a spectrum for how much topspin is necessary for players of certain heights? A range of correctness if you will for how much spin I can possibly hit while still maintaining aggression and driving through the shot. It's all degrees and vectors and angle of approach I'm sure but taller players can get away with less, no? If I was 5'6" instead of 6'6" would I have these issues? Probably not.

I love the fact you mention your article on timing and feel. It's actually one of my favorites and I reference it often. Maybe instead of referencing it to my friends and students I should start following it. To be honest, I thought I was. I really do feel like I feel the racquet head and certainly much more than many of my contemporaries. My timing is there as it has to be to hit the ball like I do, no?

I do have the wrist assist at my club and have used it on myself and my students. Using it, I still hit the ball "flat". I really like to push my shoulder into the shot when I should probably use my legs and hips. They are very strong and those are my moneymakers after all.

At the end of the day, it's about getting my racquet head below the ball. When I'm playing points and pushed back with more time I can manage it but in a neutral position or given any time I step up, in and like to slug it.

Seeing my strokes on video is an eye opening experience and creates so many more questions. I love it.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[bottle]

Body Bow or Body Angle

With an overhand loop arm can flow into slight body bow similar to a golfer at address and hitting shoulder then rotate solid downward before it banks up (as in aeronautical banking).

Am talking about how a golfer bends from the hips before he even hits the ball. Am thinking that a tennis player hitting his forehand ought-- frequently-- to do the same thing but probably as a fleeting moment embedded in a lot of other stuff. Am thinking, klacr, that you do this already on many of your forehands. I saw such in many of the videotaped sequences but doubt that you are very pronounced or conscious about it. Of course not, not an excellent player like you.

So should I or anyone be so stupid as to tell you to mess around with more body angle used more often? Probably not. I always remember a remark by Ben Ford, a tour technician whom top players used to hire (maybe still do) when a technical flaw suddenly arose and they didn't know what to do about it.

Ben, after observing a virtual spat between Bungalo Bill and myself, suggested that we both knew enough tennis to be dangerous.

There is a big beware in that. But I liked it. I'd like to be dangerous. How can anybody change anything particularly in their own game without being a bit dangerous?

Let me put my stress on body angle a different way. I am fooling around with more body angle myself and am simply reporting on the experiment. That way I don't have to be a critic (although you specifically requested my criticism). I just prefer learning new technique through the aha moments you mention hoping they don't too often turn into ono moments.

Terminology: "body angle." It's from rowing, crew. It's about straight and strong back hinged at the hips. The word "bow" in serving I'm afraid may be different if we mean long bow from archery with its suggestion of bend spread out from one tip of the bow to the other.

JY for one certainly teaches straight strong back in VISUAL TENNIS as a serving basic. He imagines a ruler running from hips to back of head.

I want that on a forehand too. Firm spine slightly tilted from the hips only.

Okay, but in what direction? NOT forward. NOR backward. Sideward as in "keep your ass away from the ball," which Bill Tilden of all people reportedly said quite famously is my guess.

I can't find my book showing Tom Okker's huge loop for topspin hit with composite grip but am very sure that it's done with body angle about as pronounced as that of Rory McIlroy.

You, klacr, went fishing specifically for possible new ways to get your racket under the ball. Well, here is ONE such possible way. Arm comes down from a loop. Suddenly it becomes solid with the whole body, i.e., a lowering of head and shoulders occurs from the hips.

This is a new one on me, a real aha. I've fiddled around before with arm flourish blending into body swing-- not the same idea at all.

The arm flourish blends into a same speed lowering of the head. Head goes toward right fence. Butt goes toward left fence.

Now the head stays still as the shoulders rotate about it on a slant (banking).

The slanted axis puts low point further forward. You find yourself swinging down a little before you swing up, which teaching pros other than myself have never recommended for me. In fact, they told me not to do it. (Whoops, I just called myself a teaching pro.)

So how does the package of overhead loop and head lowering followed by shoulder lowering beneath the still head blend together? Answer: Surprisingly well.

The whole notion of this comes from thinking about Alexander technique with its full body extension from snout to toes as if one is a leaping dog.

I must admit that I turned to the golf channel late last night after much dancing at a great wedding in Grand Rapids where I did my John Cleese walk. The tour golfers had the body angle and slantwise swing of shoulders but surprised me by how long they stayed down.

If Alexander technique is to matter, some of it must happen right on the ball, as in the golf swing of the Scotsman Aubrey Boomer and the writing on this by his brother Percy.

But whether Alexander ragtime happens or not, racket does get farther under the ball in a swing like this, and the swing will have body in it too from fixing body and arm together at least for a while.

[tennis_chiro]

The timing holds it together

My point was you can rectify a discrepancy with a higher toss by micro adjusting the swing to meet the ball. You cannot do this when you are hitting at the apex. A lower toss may be easier to get right but it can still be fractions out. It's the split second timing of the very low toss which makes it tricky for most of us. It's a rarity on the tour. Good luck to Klacr for pulling it off.

I've always felt the deeper into a match you go, the greater the benefit of the longer, flowing, rhythmic swing with a higher ball toss. I feel it will stand a player in better stead, better stead on both first and second serves, better stead in accuracy and weight. I feel that low tosses and ultra abbreviated swings can be more explosive but not as dependable over the long haul...in the forth and fifth.

No evidence...just a hunch...happy to be corrected.

I have a little different take on this, Stotty. I think the ideal serve is hit right at the top or within about 2 inches of the top of the toss, but not on the way up. Hit at the top, it looks like it is hit on the way up, but this is rarely the case. When you hit the ball at the top of the toss, you catch the opponent a little bit off guard because they are so used to focusing on the ball after it reaches the top of the toss and starts to come down. But you have to get to full extension; I don't think Kyle quite makes that. We really need some good slomo that we can watch frame-by-frame. His neck issues could be clouding the situation a bit.

But for me, when you catch the ball right at the top of the toss, everything has to fit together perfectly, like a Swiss watch. I like the simple front-back-front motions of Krajicek, Stitch and you, Stotty. The rhythm holds everything together like a lynchpin. And when you catch the ball right at the top of the toss, that lynchpin has a very exact fit. Tough to learn, but once you have it, it works really well, like a Swiss watch.

In reality, however, Kyle does not have the same rock as Stitch or Krajicek. He is actually more like a Sampras just going from back to front. Although he apparently starts with his weight forward, his hands don't move until he has brought the weight all the way back. It's a good consistent rhythm, but I don't like the fact the ball bounce is actually part of the overall motion. I always say if the ball bounces off a bump to a different spot it changes your whole motion. I want to start in exactly the same way every time.

Kyle, I would make you hit a few deep bounce overheads. I'd be feeding you standing right next to you and I'd have to toss or hit the ball pretty high to make it bounce high enough for you to settle under it (hopefully in a trophy/overhead position) and reach up to full extension feeling the full drive of your legs on that shot. Hit a few like that and feel your leg action (presumably you would not have been jumping) and then put that leg drive into your serve.

that's all for now, but you really ought to try some of my "feet together forward figure 8" hits. Look up some of my drills on youtube at my channel, GlobalTennisDC or go to the video lessons at http://silviahosokawa.smugmug.com/Sp...rosseau-tennis.

I really need to get that stuff better organized so I could send you to the right place. We are working on my website and for the first time in 5 years, I am actually making progress.

don

[tennis_chiro]

Kyle's forehand

Sorry I couldn't get my two cents in sooner, but I wanted to at least make an effort here.

First of all, on flat balls.
If you hit the ball 60 mph (88fps) and, for argument's sake, meet the ball at the baseline, it takes 39/88 (=.443) sec to get to the net. In that time, gravity drops the ball at 32 fps/s reaching a downward velocity (strictly due to gravity) of 14.18 fps (=.443 x 32). So the average downward velocity for that time is 7.09 fps (= 0 + 14.18/2). That means gravity alone dropped the ball 3.14 feet (= 7.09 fps x .443 sec). These principles apply whether you shoot a bullet or hit a tennis ball. There are other forces at play like the spin of the ball, but gravity is always present and usually the largest force (downward). If Kyle meets a ball at 4 or 5 feet off the ground and hits it at 60 mph (could be more, but that is pretty good, even at 80 mph it would drop over 2 feet). There has to be some lift or the ball will not make it over the net (effectively 6 feet, not 3 feet high).

Your body knows all this better than you do, so when you hit those flat strokes where the racket doesn't come up toward the contact point, the body intuitively opens the face of the racket ever so slightly to give the ball some lift. To get the solidest hit on the ball that transfers the most momentum to the ball, you need to the imaginary arrow perpendicular to the face of the racket and the string bed to be the same as the arrow representing the momentum of the head of the racket. The full momentum of Kyle's racket is moving almost horizontally through the ball. The power that goes into the ball is actually just a portion (a large portion of course) of that full momentum. From a physics point of view, you would just take the cosine of the angle represented by the two arrows where the momentum of the horizontal swing is the hypotenuse. So as big as he is hitting the ball, it is still just a glancing blow. His hits would actually feel solider to him if he dropped the racket somewhat below the ball. Of course, if he left the racket face open, the ball would be long; but if he squared it up appropriately, he could use a little of the extra energy in spin as the ball slipped down off the strings.

Bottom line for me, that forehand is a bit of a slap. We only have 4 thousands of a second, but believe me, if Kyle let the head drop a little more, he would actually feel the ball more, and I would argue, hit it even bigger.

If Kyle is on my court, I would start out by first trying to get him to feel the strings in the palm of his hand a little more (see my article here at http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...cket_head.html). He says he swings the tip of the racket, so no, I don't think he is holding the racket too tight, but I think he needs to be more in touch with the center of the string bed sweetspot via the palm of his right hand. It's a subtle difference, but that is where I would start.

Second I would probably try to have him hit a few balls with the "Wrist Assist" or Greg Norman's "Secret" to take the wrist flexion out of the hitting zone completely. Not that we are going to end up taking Kyle's wrist out of the shot, but the feel of a solid hit would lead him to reduce the amount of "slap" I think he has in that stroke.

That is where I would start. I don't know who said it first, BobbySwift, 10sPlayer or Stroke, but I think they were on the right track talking about the upright racket shaft position at the end of the unit turn. If you hold the racket shaft in a vertical position, you can balance it easily and feel little inclination for the racket head to drop. As soon as the racket head moves away from vertical, (here goes the physics again!) the lever arm of the weight of the racket head around the fulcrum at the wrist is increased and you will really feel the weight of the racket head. (If anyone has trouble feeling this, try it with a slightly weighted racket head). That increased racket head weight (seeming) will make you more aware of the position of the racket head and make it easier for you to drop it below the contact point. Sensitivity to the position of the racket head in the downward arc as the elbow extends (as BobbySwift recommends) is critical to having an effective, repeatable loop that gives you power and consistency as you drive up into the ball after you have experienced the associated SSC.

It's easy enough to poke some holes in the "facts" I've tried to lay out here. First of all, when Kyle hits the ball on the rise, it's initial vertical velocity is not zero. That changes the situation. If he hits his forehand 5 feet inside the baseline, that cuts off more than a proportional share of the downward movement due to gravity because gravity is accelerating and has a lot greater influence in that last five feet (another reason it's important to move up to short balls rather than reach down for them). Still, this is how I would start to try to get Kyle a better feel for the ball and an even heavier ball: feel the racket head sweet spot in the palm, reduce the wrist flexion by forcing the issue with something like the "Wrist Assist" and try to get him to move the racket to at least 60 degrees instead of 90 at the end of the unit turn so he can feel the racket head a little better.

don

[stotty]

It is the Roscoe Tanner toss. I always loved it. I find that the lower the toss, the easier to achieve practically the same position to hit the serve. The higher the toss, the more the discrepancy gets magnified. Also Kyle's serve, just like Roscoe's robs time from the receiver to respond.

My point was you can rectify a discrepancy with a higher toss by micro adjusting the swing to meet the ball. You cannot do this when you are hitting at the apex. A lower toss may be easier to get right but it can still be fractions out. It's the split second timing of the very low toss which makes it tricky for most of us. It's a rarity on the tour. Good luck to Klacr for pulling it off.

I've always felt the deeper into a match you go, the greater the benefit of the longer, flowing, rhythmic swing with a higher ball toss. I feel it will stand a player in better stead, better stead on both first and second serves, better stead in accuracy and weight. I feel that low tosses and ultra abbreviated swings can be more explosive but not as dependable over the long haul...in the forth and fifth.

No evidence...just a hunch...happy to be corrected.

[klacr]

Efficiency. Every movement has a purpose.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[hockeyscout]

Gretzky reminds me of how Fed moves: smooth, fast, easy, disguised fakes.

Its all about teaching field speed, and those two have it. I've always been impressed with Agassi's "tennis speed". Not the fastest guy, however, he's perfect economy in motion just like Gretzky was in his day.

[GeoffWilliams]

Gretzky reminds me of how Fed moves: smooth, fast, easy, disguised fakes.

[hockeyscout]

I ran across this quote that one of our members out on the perimeter wrote in an obscure post about I don't know what. The tennis player must learn to adapt. It isn't the strongest, the smartest…or the strongest and the smartest. It is the one that is most adaptable to change. I thought that was interesting. Thank you charlesdarwin. Very astute of you.

That about sums up every athlete in every sport. Wayne Gretzky is the perfect example of this in theory in action.

[don_budge]

Going Forwards…from charlesdarwin

"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change."

I ran across this quote that one of our members out on the perimeter wrote in an obscure post about I don't know what. The tennis player must learn to adapt. It isn't the strongest, the smartest…or the strongest and the smartest. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.

I thought that was interesting. Thank you charlesdarwin. Very astute of you.

[GeoffWilliams]

As usual 100 percent on the mark Geoff. I'm setting my daughter up exactly in the matter you speak, as I see your vision.

She has to learn how to serve and volley, and attack. The only way to do that is to practice it a lot, and have faith no matter how many times she gets passed and beaten. Learn the double bow, bow backwards, and bow forwards, on all serves and groundies. Numerous volley types can only be learned by coming into the net a lot.

[klacr]

Young man, you are a good egg. Your enthusiasm, the way you conduct yourself, and put yourself up for scrutiny is commendable. Coming from an old warhorse in the business, we need more young men and women like you in the industry. Kudos...

I agree with you, there are members here whom will benefit (to a greater degree then you) from this thread.. Hell, you'll figure it out. There are a lot of good minds on this site that you have tapped into, for the betterment of all.

Thanks for kind words 10splayer. I try my best. That's what any of us can hope to do. Excited to work on my forehand. Anything you see on my other strokes? Fire away

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[hockeyscout]

Ivo lead the tour in aces for six years. No one else for more than three. (Becker.) Sampras for only two years. This thread, with 635 views in a couple of days has set a record for the most views in the least amount of time! Your attacking style, and quick serving motion, is designed for a big man who enjoys net domination, and should not be changed much. The best thing about your serve, the quickness and fluid motion, (a double bow, one back, and one forwards), can be added to the ground strokes: more fluid rhythmic motion and fluid weight transfer, more "body fly" shots, more knee bend, more commitment into attacking the shot with a little higher margin of safety. More coil, not less coil. More forward wt. transfer, not less. A deeper knee bend on hitting foot, not less! More bow back, and more bow forwards. It's the flatter topspin that penetrates and stays lower for the net men.

When they try the spinny top, they get passed easily. (Raonic.)

As usual 100 percent on the mark Geoff. I'm setting my daughter up exactly in the matter you speak, as I see your vision.

[klacr]

Ivo lead the tour in aces for six years. No one else for more than three. (Becker.) Sampras for only two years. This thread, with 635 views in a couple of days has set a record for the most views in the least amount of time! Your attacking style, and quick serving motion, is designed for a big man who enjoys net domination, and should not be changed much. The best thing about your serve, the quickness and fluid motion, (a double bow, one back, and one forwards), can be added to the ground strokes: more fluid rhythmic motion and fluid weight transfer, more "body fly" shots, more knee bend, more commitment into attacking the shot with a little higher margin of safety. More coil, not less coil. More forward wt. transfer, not less. A deeper knee bend on hitting foot, not less! More bow back, and more bow forwards. It's the flatter topspin that penetrates and stays lower for the net men.

When they try the spinny top, they get passed easily. (Raonic.)

Thanks Geoff. All points noted. Glad you are a fan of my serve.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[10splayer]

don_budge,

I hear your words loud and clear. This makes so much sense to me. I went out on the ball machine quickly and just tried it. What a difference. Can I replicate it naturally yet? Nope. But will I? Yes. I have the image of Federer ingrained in my head and will continue to work on it. I am a perfectionist. For so long people would always say I use to much arm on my forehand. Personally, I never felt like I was, it didn't seem that way and my arm never felt fatigued or overexerted. But seeing my strokes on camera I pick up on what it is you are saying.

This is a great tip and I appreciate you and everyone else sharing their knowledge. Geoff, stroke,
10splayer, Phil, Stotty, botttle and anyone I forget to mention I'm sorry.

This post has been up for less than 3 days and already received a boat load of views and replies. Most on just my forehand. Which is scary, but in a good way.

Your compliments and critiques of my strokes are humbling and a bit surprising for how many of you loved the quirkiness of my serve. I guess we are our own worst crtics of our own game.

don_budge, thanks for the lesson. No offense taken. You say you're not telling me how to hit a forehand, but clearly you are, and I love that. If you have opinions on my other shots, and I know you have opinions, let me hear them. Thats how we all learn and get better. It may help much more than just me. maybe some subscribers in the shadows are reading this and having an "a-ha" moment as well.

Stroke and 10splayer, Your input has not gone unnoticed. Thank you thank you thank you.
No one before you guys and this website have tried to figure out my forehand or other strokes. Just the vague comments that are obvious to see such as "you hit very flat" and "you need to hit more spin" and my personal favorite "just change your grip and swing higher". Uhhhh....Thanks but no thanks. The sign of a good teacher is being able to explain the the purpose for the adjustment and how "we" (Student and teacher are a team working on same goal) are going to accomplish it. My strokes came from watching TV and did what I saw my favorite players do but obviously with my own unique LaCroix twist.
Let's keep it up. You guys should do this for a living

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Young man, you are a good egg. Your enthusiasm, the way you conduct yourself, and put yourself up for scrutiny is commendable. Coming from an old warhorse in the business, we need more young men and women like you in the industry. Kudos...

I agree with you, there are members here whom will benefit (to a greater degree then you) from this thread.. Hell, you'll figure it out. There are a lot of good minds on this site that you have tapped into, for the betterment of all.