Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Criticisms by Heath Waters?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Criticisms by Heath Waters?

    John, I came across this online exchange between Heath and one of his students. All I can say is I don't agree with his thoughts, and I think he's insanely dogmatic, and even more insane to insist that Agassi's forehand is outdated and thus, defective technique.

    Addendum: I re-read Heath's post, and he states that high speed video shows that the wrist is at a neutral handshake position upon contact. This simply is not true, because at impact, it is plainly obvious that the racket is at a 90 degree angle to the forearm (when viewed from the side). This is unachievable, anatomically, with a neutral, handshake wrist position.



    Heath's Student: The double bend is the key forehand structure that ALL pros use to hit their forehands. The double bend is a term coined by John Yandell, author of Visual Tennnis. Double Bend refers to a 45 degree bend in the elbow and a 45 - 90 degree bend in the wrist. You must lock into this double bend structure as you lower your racket in the backswing, and you must maintain this structure all the way to contact, and just after contact.

    and when i try to strech my wrist to the back my arm become stiff so i lose the double bend



    Heath's Response:
    all i can say is wow. in my opinion this is outdated information that you have received. this is information that might have been true several years ago but this does not hold true with today's biggest forehand strikers such as federer, nadal, saafin, haas, blake, gasquet, and so on.

    have you seen the frame by frame PROnalysis videos on the the forehand stretch shortening cycle? these clearly demonstrate the PROPER and undeniable wrist action that occurs in the majority of the male players on tour.

    so many coaches are being misled all over the world because of a lack of coaches keeping up with the current game and many are still coaching to lay the wrist back and lock it into position and as you say "maintain this structure all the way to contact, and just after contact". this could not be further from the truth and of course you will not be able to maintain this so called "double bend" because you are not supposed to maintain this double bend stucture. just look at federer, nadal, tursonov, safin, haas, nalbandian, coria, blake, gasquet, moya, ferrero, hewitt, etc etc... and you can clearly see that not one of them have a laid back wrist at contact and definitely not after contact. please observe that these players are in the act of pronating from the supinated position achieved in the bottom of the downswing. if ever it looks like the wrist is laid back it is merely that the pronation was late and the player did not obtain the desired nuetral wrist postion (hand shaking position) by time of ball impact. of course when these players hit down the line or insideout there will be an appearance of wrist extension at contact but remember to look at the whole picture of the wrist movement. they are actually pronating from a supinated extended position at the bottom of the downswing through contact.

    HOWEVER many girls on tour still have this issue typically due to old style coaching (sharapova, davenport you can see in the PROnalysis video "men vs women") doing this laid back and locked wrist structure and agassi whose technique is beautiful but outdated by today's standards as he primarily finishes over the shoulder with his ending as do most of the women using the old style of "legs to drive the ball and more linear style swing with linear forces used of yesteryear".

    in todays game however on the male side of the tour the forehand is what we call in the ace system, the "millennium forehand", where open stances, supination/pronation (wrist action,rotational forces, and angular momentum are the key factors in the forehand of today. so this "double bend" structure you are talking about did exist but has been on the way out for several years now as the millennium forehand has taken over and continues to advance in it's form.

    if you are still primarily ending over the shoulder with your finish then i recommend giving the millennium forehand endings a try as well as the stretch shortening cycle wrist action and see what a difference it will make in achieving vast racquet speed with little effort compared to that of the "locked wrist" structure you mention. when the wrist is laid back prematurely the wrist flexors are prestretched too soon and one does not gain the rubber band effect of the stretch reflex. people who tell you that their is or should be NO WRIST movement during the forehand are merely not up on the latest advancements in the game or simply cannot see them. it is my job as a professional tour coach (a current wta/atp registered tour coach), to keep my players on the cutting edge of technique, and anything that i share with you here on our site has already been tested and proven.

    remember anyone can give an opinion on tennis, but an opinion is an opinion, and one must make sure that they test these so called theories or opinions out for themselves and see if they work for them. i would caution all readers to make sure to test out all theories or opinions for themselves whether they are from me or any other person who claims to have an opinion and let your eyes be the judge of what is fact or fiction :
    )
    Last edited by evikshin; 01-30-2007, 01:37 PM.

  • #2
    There's already been a big discussion on that on tennis warehouse forum:

    and the end of the discussion is quite positive between Heath and John, no need to provoke a new fight IMO...

    Comment


    • #3
      I wasn't aware of the discussion. I wasn't trying to provoke anything, merely bringing attention to some pretty damning accusations on the part of Heath.

      In that case...no need for this thread to go on I suppose.

      Comment


      • #4
        No, I did read that thread and, true, there were some words exchanged on the TW Boards, but in the end I called Heath in Atlanta and we agreed that the fight was running both our weekends, so we agreed to disagree and actually had some positive, clarifying emails back and forth.

        He claims he's going to take me out to dinner at Indian Wells. He's passionate and so am I and we can probably learn from each other. Even though I get a little riled up at times the debates force me to clarify my own thinking and grow as a student of the game.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mdhubert
          There's already been a big discussion on that on tennis warehouse forum:

          and the end of the discussion is quite positive between Heath and John, no need to provoke a new fight IMO...
          I was very happy to read this (most entertaining) thread, as it included this post:

          Quote
          One thing I would like to point out is that the camera angle plays tricks in a lot of videos. Many of the strokes look as if the primary motion is forward with a slightly upward component, when viewed from the side, as in some of JC's videos. In actuality, the racquet head moves in an arc - starting near the body, going outwards, and then back inwards in the follow through.

          The reason I am pointing this out is that this was a revelation for me. I used to push forward and upwards with my arm in the double bend position. When I changed the motion to a circular swing, my power and consistency just shot up. This type of motion lends itself to forearm pronation and the resulting wrist action more easily and naturally than the straight and upwards push, at least for me. The ball is addressed from the side, not head on, so some sidespin is also imparted. I think the arm naturally assumes a double bend position, but I don't think about that while playing.

          Note that using this method, the plane formed by the racquet head does not change - all pronation does is add extra acceleration to the upward movement of the racquet head - so this doesn't contradict the statements by JC and TAJM. The ball can still be contacted in the center of the strings (or wherever you want). One big difference is that this circular motion employs different muscles than those the forward/upward motion brings into play, and for me, the circular swing results in a more powerful and consistent stroke.

          Not being a coach, I have to add - YMMV.
          End Quote.

          I had danced around the edges of this sort of swing thought in the past and would get my forehand to work because of it for a day or two, but, due to attributing the success to some other aspect of the swing change, the success would quickly disappear. This time it seems to be sticking, and, for a number of reasons, I believe it will continue to stick.

          The battle that I've been fighting for twenty plus years is based, I believe, on exactly what "Cyberhound" pointed out in the interactive stroke archive, under "The Women's Modern Forehand" in post #28:

          Quote:
          Regarding linear, if you pick up "Tennis for the Future", you can read where Vic Braden says that rotation on the swing is bad--pulls the ball off target horizantally and you can't hit down the line. The palm and arm must stay in line with the intended flight path of the ball. All force should be lifting up or moving along the flight path. All backed up Biomechanical research and high speed filming. Although I guess it is all rotational, just different axis a horizantal axis instead of vertical axis. The old bowling ball swing.
          End Quote

          Just try mixing a "bowling ball" swing up to the point of contact, and then trying to put the type of follow-through on the swing that good modern forehand hitters use. No wonder I keep getting on your nerves.

          Since going with this new sort of swing thought, it no longer feels "affected" to me to do the big unit turn with the left arm stretched across, nor to load up my back foot to spring into the stroke, as these things now happen naturally when I try to start my swing "from the inside out". Sounds like a good golf swing, eh? Inside to square to inside. I was "coming over the top" by trying to use a modern finish with a Vic Braden vertical swing plane. Nice "L"-shaped, manipulated swing with my elbow flying out. Jeesh. I bet it's even clear on the earliest strokes I sent in.

          Another reason that I believe this sort of swing thought to be robust is that, by emphasizing the same initial "inside out" path forward with my already dependable one handed, topspin backhand, I've made it even more consistent and can better control its trajectory and depth.

          I love the still photos of Jeff Counts's "rainbow arc" that shows five or six racket positions of the follow-through in one photo. What I'd really like to see is the *previous* 90 degrees of that arc - *especially* shot from above. I think that that shot would, if I'm correct, show how important this "inside out" initiation of the swing is.

          Maybe this isn't really anything different than what you've already pointed out among the "commonalities", but it sure seems important to me, and I've managed to miss it for a very long time. Or, maybe I'm just full of it, again. Anyway, it's sure been a lot more fun playing tennis lately without my forehand tied behind my back.

          Kevin
          Savannah

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mntlblok

            Maybe this isn't really anything different than what you've already pointed out among the "commonalities", but it sure seems important to me, and I've managed to miss it for a very long time. Or, maybe I'm just full of it, again. Anyway, it's sure been a lot more fun playing tennis lately without my forehand tied behind my back.

            Kevin
            Savannah
            Originally posted by johnyandell
            The hand disappears but what you are seeing is an inside out arc, as in all groundstrokes. It can probably vary and might be less in this one, but it's hard to see.

            I wouldn't worry about that. Make the position at the bottom of the backswing and at the finish. The arc should take care of itself.
            Went back and looked but didn't find anything on this in the Modern Forehand section in Advanced Tennis, but did find the above quote in Advanced Tennis in January under "One Handed Backhand".

            Maybe this "inside out arc" is just totally obvious to most, but my little brain had completely missed it to date, and I can't help but wonder if it might be a common problem amongst us club players, and maybe deserving of some emphasis.

            Kevin
            Savannah

            Comment

            Who's Online

            Collapse

            There are currently 76242 users online. 8 members and 76234 guests.

            Most users ever online was 139,261 at 09:55 PM on 08-18-2024.

            Working...
            X