Next Version of the ATP Forehand

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Brian Gordon's article, "Next Version of the ATP Forehand"

[seano]

My first question for Brian is: When you talk about forearm involvement with a bent elbow, are you talking about external rotation of the shoulder, forearm supination and ulner deviation in the pre-transition phase of the forward swing. Turning into internal rotation of the shoulder, forearm pronation and radial deviation post-transition point?

[seano]

My second question would be: I can guess what your opinions are but if you could elaborate on your strong opinions about the higher, flowing elbow and the pre-acceleration into the flip, then continuing forward with a more bent elbow? Maybe the hybrid technique is the good compromise.

One observation, not so much with Jack Sock but with Krygios, it seems like he takes his elbow further back in the backswing, where someone could see it on the other side of his back. I remember Rick Macci saying that he should never see the elbow on the other side of the body, thoughts?

[stotty]

I cannot see any benefit in the new swing over the traditional ATP swing, none. The great thing about Roger's type forehand is it can cope with virtually any incoming ball. It's super efficient. It's the most versatile forehand imaginable.

I wonder how the new ATP forehand has come about? Is it need in some players to feel flow? Is it because balls are bouncing higher with increased topspin in the game today? Maybe it's just a style, a style that has caught on?

I always find it interesting how the early phase of Nadal's forehand has morphed around over his career....racket tip up and then later with racket tip pointed more severely forward. In both cases the end result seemed equally good. I prefer his racket tip forward because it gets the elbow away form the torso early in the stroke...better.

Anyway, I prefer the traditional ATP forehand over the new. Be sure not to promote the new one, Brian. You have 3000 coaches over here in the UK hanging onto your every word. You've reached cult status over the pond. I am sure it wasn't your intention but you have. What you say goes...so be careful what you say.

Roger's forehand is amazing, but there is a lot of Roger in it and only Roger is Roger. I watched him last year at Wimbledon and the 'feel' he has on his ground shots and serve is phenomenal and like no other player. I would love to borrow that forehand for an afternoon in a league match and play those irksome opponents I've never beaten before. Now that would be fun.

[bottle]

What a great post (# 4). But please consider the whittling down of the ATP forehand I explore today over at "A New Year's Serve," consider it as well. Maybe it's just for geezers or for this geezer. I may be letting my dream cloud my judgment (it has happened before), but also feel right now that I'm getting simpler and simpler, which I like.

[kenh]

I have seen this fh and it is nice and smooth. But I have a few questions about it. 1. it seems like it generates a lot of spin and Bryan, I would like your opinion on how much spin variation it has. 2. I ask this question with Li Na in mind. She recently got to 2 in the world at an advanced age with a relatively flat 80's game. so I wonder if all the spin, while secure and safe, is really sacrificing the ability to drive the ball and penetrate the court and if it is necessary and even the ultimate weapon? Hope this makes sense.
Following the same thought pattern, I would ask if it is good to make this fh an innitial part of the teaching progression or if the fh should originally be taught with a simpler flatter stroke to get more of a feel for driving the ball. I think Lansdorph uses to be big on that.
Thanks

[doctorhl]

How does the new ATP forehand square with hitting a forehand stroke volley which is becoming a bigger part of the game.

[stroke]

Brian, would you think Fognini is in the ballpark of this "hybrid" ATP forehand you speak of?

[teachestennis]

Is this even a real difference or just an added flourish to the standard ATP stroke? Just a slight variation of which there are endless possibilities?

[BrianGordon]

Greetings all:

As a technical trend emerges I owe it to myself as a stroke researcher and my players as a coach to understand it and honestly assess pros and cons in a basic and applied sense.

This trend evolved as all do, I think, as individual interpretation and extrapolation of previous stroke technique characteristics. It is clearly a variation of the traditional model as teachestennis points out and various degrees exist. But at the extreme, the variation differs so much from the original that important mechanical differences arise - at that point I classify it as its own entity.

And the characteristics of this adapted style have become quite wide spread - it can be seen in several pro players and I see a lot of it at the college and junior level. When something emerges that seems to work the replication process is kicked into full gear at all levels. The argument could be made that even Fed has played with the possibilities when he started positioning his racquet in different configurations exiting the backswing.

I have never been one to accept something just because it works for isolated players unless I understand why it works and can verify it in the field. I always try to keep an open mind, if we didn't high jumpers would still be going over the bar belly down. On this one so far, however, I agree with Stotty and see no benefit over the traditional model ( I am happy that coaches there listen to what I have to say - on this side of the pond even my dog doesn't pay attention to me - lol).

In fact, I see many detriments compared to the traditional model. Referencing Stotty again, it does not seem to have the versatility of the traditional model. Really that sums it up perfectly. More particularly and briefly it is far more complicated, adapted positioning of the hand exiting the back swing (required for different incoming balls) is compromised without destroying the loop, variability in speed/spin ratios on out going shots is compromised without significantly changing the swing, the long term implications of the radical flip loading seems problematic from a safety perspective,... I could go on and on.

Clearly, this technique is capable of impressive shot outputs and there MANY ways to hit the ball but I would never teach it to developing juniors - if components emerge in their swing later I'll assess the implications on a case by case basis as I always want my my players to make the stroke their own while still adhering to the biomechanics. As a postscript, we eliminated (are working to eliminate) the shoulder drop from the girl in the piece - it is wasted motion, caused her to be late at contact and destroyed her ability to attack high balls without re-elavating the hand prior to the forward swing.


Seano Question 1 - yes but for the wrist movement. Question 2 - hope I answered that above. Elbow positioning is not an issue in the modern version because of the it's motion in space - Macci speaks of the traditional version.

Stotty - great post - thanks - who knew.

kenh - hope my diatribe above addresses your questions.

doctorhi - I find the new version is detrimental to swinging volleys for reasons I mentioned.

stroke - Fognini seems to be a hybrid - minimal elbow drop but a hint of pre-acceleration into the dynamic slot position.

teachestennis - hope I answered your question above.

[seano]

Brian -
Thank you for answering our questions and the interaction, it really brings a enjoyable element to your videos, great stuff. Just makes me hungier for more knowledge.

[stroke]

Thanks Brian, Stotty and I have both long been a fan of Fognini's fh technique, and your explanation of this trend in the ATP forehand really shed some light on the small differences in Fognini's fh vs the gold standard of Fed,

[johnyandell]

Brian, Let's look at some footage of Sock and Krygios when I see you at the end of the month and maybe explain a little more about what happens in the descent in the backswing. Not sure I understand the differences with Fed---yet. And yes fans, that means more articles from Brian are coming.

[arturohernandez]

Very interesting exchange. It seems to me that bashing big forehands has become the status quo. Versatility has taken a back seat. Anyone see Zverev, Edmunds or Kyrgios yesterday. They cannot play inside the court. They simply sit back there and wait for a shot they can bash. Maybe this new stroke is not for done to create better feel but rather to create more power. I also wonder about the trade off between big and small backswings. Mischa, the other Zverev,has a really short backswing. It’s designed to get him to the net. I agree that Feds is still the best compromise!

[stroke]

Very interesting exchange. It seems to me that bashing big forehands has become the status quo. Versatility has taken a back seat. Anyone see Zverev, Edmunds or Kyrgios yesterday. They cannot play inside the court. They simply sit back there and wait for a shot they can bash. Maybe this new stroke is not for done to create better feel but rather to create more power. I also wonder about the trade off between big and small backswings. Mischa, the other Zverev,has a really short backswing. It’s designed to get him to the net. I agree that Feds is still the best compromise!

Certainly noticed what you are saying. Interesting to me technique wise is Dimitrov. His fh appears to be a carbon copy of Fed, yet he cannot take the ball nearly as early as Fed to me. For that matter, his bh is identical also, same grip that has the heel of his hand not as far behind the handle as Gasquet, Wawrinka, etc, which is a superior grip for taking the ball early.