Federer's game going forwards

[crosscourt]

Am I alone in thinking that the Roche changes aren't all working? The forehand didn't seem to me to be too flat. And the effortless serve has declined over the last two years. Look where his ball toss is now -- way further over to the left than before.

There are some good things -- more volleys in particular. But the backhand isn't really playing its full part. Who now believes that it isn't a weakness?

Anyway, on to Roland Garros. Maybe without the pressure of being the favourite (I guess) he will find it easier to play. Does Baghdatis like clay? I am looking forward to seeing him play Nadal.

[bottle]

Attention Ordwellian Hitmen

Yo, goons. It’s been two months. Roger won the Australian because he hits his forehand just like you, right?

I want to hear Jack Groppel say that kinetic chain combined with a forehand finish straight out front was how Roger did it, Welby Horne that Roger’s straight out front finish engendered his exquisite balance, John Yandell that Roger would have reached an ideal first followthrough point if he hadn’t swung so close to his body. I’d love to see more film, too, of Roger or anybody good with their followthrough edited off to show how much they hit through the ball.

You’ve been accused, choreographers, of viewing stroke mechanics from a purely visual model that excludes principles of gravity, torque and air resistance. In fact, one teaching pro who sat behind Roger at the U.S. Open last Fall said
afterwards, “I’ve never seen so much heavy sidespin and so much heavy topspin.”

It’s the characteristic sidespin in the combination that proves the argument once and for all. Beyond the friction he needs, Roger doesn’t hit through the ball. He deflects it. And if you brush with enough torque, you get more dwell than in a flat (conk) shot. You start to generate again the pace you loved—and more.

I’ll read any response in two months.

[bottle]

Source

It was Oscar Wegner. Oscar did it. He's the one who said those most critical things (except for the ones I said).

Spater (two months from today).

[bottle]

Attribution

I give you the Oscar:

1. You’ve been accused, choreographers, of viewing stroke mechanics from a purely visual model that excludes principles of gravity, torque and air resistance. In fact, one teaching pro who sat behind Roger at the U.S. Open last Fall said afterwards, “I’ve never seen so much heavy sidespin and so much heavy topspin.”

2. Beyond the friction he needs, Roger doesn’t hit through the ball. He deflects it. And if you brush with enough torque, you get more dwell than in a flat (conk) shot. You start to generate again the pace you loved—and more.

Anything else is Bottle.

a viszontlatasara (two months)

[Fingers]

The thing I am noticing about Roger's game is that he isn't playing all out in the first sets. He seems to be saving his best game for the final set or two (if necessary).

He appears to be playing more steady safer tennis in the early sets and then unleashing on his opponents later in the game, similar in the spirit to Ivan Lendl.

Roger's best tennis appears to be seen in the final set, not the first set and I believe this is reflecting his growing emotional and intellectual maturity.

[johnyandell]

OK let's just get down to the real truth. All this is just the chance for Bottle to posture and pontificate, and spin out meaningless words about tennis that he obviously doesn't understand himself. He likes to hurl insults, try to provoke as many people as possible, and then play the victim when people call him on it.

Yes truly "we" are the goon squad (more on the conspiratorial "we" later) and so is anyone who challenges his preposterous assertions. Watch he will probably type in Oscar's name 50 times in a row this time instead of just 10 like the last time some of his arguments got shredded.That's just who he is and that's OK. It's not against the law to be annoying and dishonest.

Bottle claims to be a serious writer, but he violates the most basic ethical principle of journalism. This principle is to seek the actual facts with an open mind, respect them, and base what you write on them. It means realizing that sometimes you don't know everything and that it is OK and in fact morally admirable to admit this when it happens and try to improve.

Instead, Bottle likes to make use of what was called "the big lie" strategy back when the world was in the spell of Joseph McCarthy's "accusations." The way McCarthy worked it, before he was exposed and disgraced, was to allege that there was an organized, monolithic block of conspirators working against him, bent on overthrowing the right and good and installing their godless alternative.

Hence the "we" of the goon squad. Yes Bungalow Bill, Jack Groppel, Welby and I are having regular meetings. I admit it. We plot and discuss how we can insert a virus on the internet that will seek out and destroy every Oscar Wegner DVD ever made. Oh that will be a sweet day. (But he forgot to expose Rick Macci, Robert Lansdorp, Scott Murphy and a few others who are our co-conspirators. They come to the meetings too and that Robert Lansdorp is hysterical when he does his Oscar impersonation ).

Again I am writing this for my own amusement and hopefully that of everyone else on the board, because I can guarantee you Bottle will not address any of it and will just spin out yet another even more ridiculous series of pronouncements of tennis ultimate truth combined with more "accusations" about his persecution. For those of you who also enjoy the TW boards, you know this is not just some isolated exchange, but the way he operates in the world.

So let's see how the big lie theory works. First I am "accused" by uunamed but seemingly knowledgeable and powerful experts. These experts include a teaching pro who actually attended the Open and saw Roger play--that's big --and possibly even Oscar himself ! My crimes are not understanding "principles of gravity, torque and air resistance."

First of all an "accusation" is something that happens in the legal system, not on a tennis discussion board. Even if he were right I don't think I can be incarcerated for my failures of understanding--at least until they elect Oscar Wegner President. Then, yes, I could see detention camps for the disbelievers. Bottle could be his Dick Chaney. Or maybe Karl Rove.

The genius of the big lie is to make multiple, vehement statements that are all so contrary to obvious fact as to be ridiculous. But when there are enough lies, something interesting happens and an entire web of delusion is created. It's difficult to unwind the web because there are so many lies to expose. The more lies, the more believable the case. It becomes hard to believe that there isn't anything to any of them. That's the genius of the big lie. It's very cunning because you know you can count on people of good will taking you at your word. Because they would never think of stooping to that level themselves, they don't suspect that you would.

Bottle's last couple of posts here are an example of "big lie" tactics because the things I am "accused" of not understanding are in fact areas in which I have done some of the first (and in some cases only) original research, research that has been widely accepted and validated by others.

We were infact the first to ever quantify the effect of "air resistance" on ball speed in pro tennis, something later confirmed by the Shot Spot technology. (To add a bizarre note, Oscar Wegner personally praised this work to me in New York after one of the first presentations of the results at the U.S. Open in 1998.)

So far as not understanding sidespin, Advanced Tennis has done the only quantitative measurements of sidespin and topspin ever done in pro tennis. Again this work has been widely accepted and validated by people like Howard Brody and others.

And when it comes to Roger, the work I did on his forehand published on this site devotes great length to the hand and arm rotation that is such a pronounced aspect of his forehand--what Bottle calls torque. In fact we report for the first time the incredible levels of spin on his forehand. Bu again I am portrayed as the one who doesn't understand something for which I have developed the only existing hard data, and done the most detailed explications anywhere. Nice!

Bottle backs up these big lies about my work,with his own whopping mistatement of facts--such as arguing that "dwell time" is a variable from ball to ball in pro tennis--something that respected experts in tennis physics have also debunked. He disregards the hundreds of video clips on this site that show that Federer can hit thru the ball longer than anyone--and that on the next ball, he can then break off the swing and finish more across the body than anyone--all in the same rally. Instead Bottle accuses me of arguing something in black and white terms where my actual opinion actually encompasses (and transcends) his.

You get the idea. What am I going to do about it? A few people suggested I just block him from the board and delete his posts. They'd be glad not to see him again because his irresponsible statements cause confusion and acrimony.

But it's a free country and a free board. I will continue to let him post, even his mistatements and personal attacks. Over time, I think most people are smart enough to recognize pure bs when they read it.

I wonder if Bottle would do the same if he were running the tennis world?
Let's see if he really observes his self-imposed month (or is it two month?) exile. We can only hope, but I wouldn't count on it.

[crosscourt]

Yo bottle. It shouldn't take you two months to read this response, but here goes. What is your point?

[CrazyLefty]

Who is Oscar Wegner?

I am confused. I have been watching tennis for twenty-five years and have never heard his name mentioned once. He must be the man behind the man.

CL

[stroke]

John,

I was just curious if you had an idea about the amount of sidespin vs topspin Roger has on his forehand. I know on your serve articles on Rusedski and Sampras serve and spin, you pointed out that Sampras had slightly more topspin vs sidespin than Greg, even though per your diagram, both had predominently sidespin. What is your take on the racquet directional on Roger's forehand, 4 o'clock to 10 o'clock, for example?

[johnyandell]

That's a great question and one to which we may eventually have an answer. I think we would assume that the more "wiper" the more total spin, and also the higher sidespin component. We are working on new spin data now that may give some insight into this.As to who is Oscar? Well, the light and the truth to some, that's for sure.