Chris Lewit Future Trends in Tennis: Part 1

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Chris Lewit's latest article, "Future Trends in Tennis: Part 1"

[arturohernandez]

It is definitely thought provoking. I will give Chris that.

Okay, my thoughts.

On the increasing height. Bigger is better but only up to a certain point. How many GS champions do we have in the last 25 years that are not between 6-6'4" feet tall? My count is two but I could be wrong. In either case, I think that 6'1" is still the ideal height for tennis. Mobile enough to handle playing aggressively inside the court. But can stand their ground against the taller players. Tall players are vulnerable to low balls and so coming to the net is not always a great idea. I put my money on Thiem, Shapovalov, and Felix AA (i.e. FAA) as the next big players to crack the big 3. Not as high on Zverev and Tsitsipas as they are too tall. Not sure they can be aggressive inside the court. Tennis changes but finishing at the net and attacking are still crucial skills and doing it at 6'6" is a tall order (I know but I couldn't resist).

More evolution. What if tennis is like music? All the good bands were in the past and what we will hear over and over is a rehashing of the old. Could we be at the end of originality? I really like Chris emphasizing that original players come from unexpected places. Fits in nicely with Lansdorp's ideas. I think original players may not come as often as before. Tennis has become big business (in fact everything has including music). To make it requires money and as soon as money comes in we get to results and as soon as results come in we sacrifice long term development. It's a trend in everything. I am less optimistic that we can move back to a non-commercial model for anything. In our Twitter-based world the only thing that matters is what you have done lately. Wish I could be more optimistic.

[nytennisaddict]

great article, thx.
it's nice to see variety creeping back into the game, especially as the players are getting more and more athletic, and are very adept at defending bashers from behind the baseline.
this is making the tactic of attacking for the forecourt, more high % (drop shots, short chip slice, sharp angle topspin, s&v, etc...)

love seeing young guys like faa, not afraid to venture to net.

[chrislewit]

Symmetrical Tennis Technique Training!

Dear Friends and Tennis Minds:

Here is a modern pro tour example of an ambidextrous player whose technique and footwork is symmetrical.

https://youtu.be/8iosXeyBb9U

I’’m considering starting a special project——a group of young players based in NYC who play symmetrically. Team Symmetry.

I want to train mirror image or close to mirror image technique on both sides to maximize power and spin, with two forehands—and movement efficiency with two open to semi open stances.

Players will have either have dual two handed forehands or dual one handed forehands.

In addition, I would like to train this group of players to be dual handed servers, both lefty and righty—I call them Ambiservers.

If any serious parents would like to participate in this Symmetry Project, please let me know.
I can also work remotely with coaches and parents through our online school platform CLTA.teachable.com. I can advise symmetrical player development through video, WhatsApp, and email.

I would also like to get thoughts and feedback from the coaching community.

I have stated for a long time now that symmetrical training could be a major future trend in technical tennis coaching.

There are a lot of doubters, but I want to prove that symmetrical technique and movement training can be a viable—if not a better—approach to building high level players.

In my view, more power, spin, and better movement efficiency will come from a symmetrical teaching approach, and the body will be healthier, with fewer physical imbalances. Furthermore, forces and loads will be distributed more evenly across the muscles and joints, helping to reduce overuse injuries, which are very common in tennis.

These are radical ideas, but I believe they are viable. We simply haven’t explored this type of systematic training yet.

Once players demonstrate that symmetrical training is possible, the current asymmetrical approach to building technique may be regarded as a quaint period in tennis history, the way we view classic continental grip strokes and play from the early 20th century now.

Here are some additional thoughts on the subject from my blog:

http://prodigymaker.com

[chrislewit]

I will check in regularly everyone. Thanks for sharing! Vamos!

[nytennisaddict]

Symmetrical Tennis Technique Training!

Dear Friends and Tennis Minds:

Here is a modern pro tour example of an ambidextrous player whose technique and footwork is symmetrical.

https://youtu.be/8iosXeyBb9U

I’’m considering starting a special project——a group of young players based in NYC who play symmetrically. Team Symmetry.

I want to train mirror image or close to mirror image technique on both sides to maximize power and spin, with two forehands—and movement efficiency with two open to semi open stances.

Players will have either have dual two handed forehands or dual one handed forehands.

In addition, I would like to train this group of players to be dual handed servers, both lefty and righty—I call them Ambiservers.

If any serious parents would like to participate in this Symmetry Project, please let me know.
I can also work remotely with coaches and parents through our online school platform CLTA.teachable.com. I can advise symmetrical player development through video, WhatsApp, and email.

I would also like to get thoughts and feedback from the coaching community.

I have stated for a long time now that symmetrical training could be a major future trend in technical tennis coaching.

There are a lot of doubters, but I want to prove that symmetrical technique and movement training can be a viable—if not a better—approach to building high level players.

In my view, more power, spin, and better movement efficiency will come from a symmetrical teaching approach, and the body will be healthier, with fewer physical imbalances. Furthermore, forces and loads will be distributed more evenly across the muscles and joints, helping to reduce overuse injuries, which are very common in tennis.

These are radical ideas, but I believe they are viable. We simply haven’t explored this type of systematic training yet.

Once players demonstrate that symmetrical training is possible, the current asymmetrical approach to building technique may be regarded as a quaint period in tennis history, the way we view classic continental grip strokes and play from the early 20th century now.

Here are some additional thoughts on the subject from my blog:

http://prodigymaker.com

good post.... i've seen the vid of kim play before... would love to see him do well...
i read elsewhere (maybe the top tennis training guys) the the drawback of 2fh is the time to switch grips, which seems to be the case for kim (ie. when rushed, he hits a 2hbh)

i've definitely practiced my left (to the 3.5 level) specifically for the reasons you noted (develop a health symmetric physique, elim imbalances, and guessing that the left/right has to do something for brain development :P)

[chrislewit]

https://www.facebook.com/10000114519...377983?sfns=mo

Another example of symmetrical tennis—. Two forehands. High level junior national player

[chrislewit]

https://www.facebook.com/100001145192967/posts/2130028573711962?sfns=mo

5 star junior with 2 forehands

[chrislewit]

good post.... i've seen the vid of kim play before... would love to see him do well...
i read elsewhere (maybe the top tennis training guys) the the drawback of 2fh is the time to switch grips, which seems to be the case for kim (ie. when rushed, he hits a 2hbh)

i've definitely practiced my left (to the 3.5 level) specifically for the reasons you noted (develop a health symmetric physique, elim imbalances, and guessing that the left/right has to do something for brain development :P)

We have developed a special way to hold the grip so there is no lost time or reach. That’s important!

[chrislewit]

Let's discuss Chris Lewit's latest article, "Future Trends in Tennis: Part 1"

Amazing interview with Jimmy Arias. Wonderful history and some important lessons there for technical coaches.

It’s amazing to me that even today there are still coaches fighting the evolution of the modern forehand.

[chrislewit]

It is definitely thought provoking. I will give Chris that.

Okay, my thoughts.

On the increasing height. Bigger is better but only up to a certain point. How many GS champions do we have in the last 25 years that are not between 6-6'4" feet tall? My count is two but I could be wrong. In either case, I think that 6'1" is still the ideal height for tennis. Mobile enough to handle playing aggressively inside the court. But can stand their ground against the taller players. Tall players are vulnerable to low balls and so coming to the net is not always a great idea. I put my money on Thiem, Shapovalov, and Felix AA (i.e. FAA) as the next big players to crack the big 3. Not as high on Zverev and Tsitsipas as they are too tall. Not sure they can be aggressive inside the court. Tennis changes but finishing at the net and attacking are still crucial skills and doing it at 6'6" is a tall order (I know but I couldn't resist).

More evolution. What if tennis is like music? All the good bands were in the past and what we will hear over and over is a rehashing of the old. Could we be at the end of originality? I really like Chris emphasizing that original players come from unexpected places. Fits in nicely with Lansdorp's ideas. I think original players may not come as often as before. Tennis has become big business (in fact everything has including music). To make it requires money and as soon as money comes in we get to results and as soon as results come in we sacrifice long term development. It's a trend in everything. I am less optimistic that we can move back to a non-commercial model for anything. In our Twitter-based world the only thing that matters is what you have done lately. Wish I could be more optimistic.

Good thoughts. 6ft 1-3 inches is the common wisdom. I predict we will see more big dudes and women winning grand slams in the next decades and the 6ft 1in idea will fade away.

[chrislewit]

The naysayers always claiming novel strokes will cause injury or won’’t work under pressure. Direct parallels to Borg’’’s technical journey and Sergi Bruguera’’s story too. Everyone told Luis Bruguera in the 80’s that his son would ruin his wrist with that forehand!

Coaches today still arguing and fighting the modern evolution of the stroke.

---

[doctorhl]

If anyone remembers the game of "handball", it had to be played with single hands on each wing. Pro level players were absolutely symmetrical with arm motion and footwork. Court coverage was quick because of stepping with outside foot on most shots.Never got to ask a handball player if he ever was successful in trying single hand tennis swings on each wing.

[nytennisaddict]

If anyone remembers the game of "handball", it had to be played with single hands on each wing. Pro level players were absolutely symmetrical with arm motion and footwork. Court coverage was quick because of stepping with outside foot on most shots.Never got to ask a handball player if he ever was successful in trying single hand tennis swings on each wing.

hehe, growing up and going to school in the bronx, i sure do remember handball. gosh my left has terrible :P

[GilbertColeman]

Me and my friends who love Tennis often chat with each other on fm whatsapp before going to the game