The 4 Pillars of the Type III ATP Forehand

[johnyandell]

Let's get your thoughts on Dr. Brian Gordon's latest article, "The 4 Pillars of the Type III ATP Forehand"

[rthodges]

I found the article to be extremely helpful in my visualization of the type III forehand. Before the covid-19 pandemic I had put up some video of my forehand and was getting great feedback. The change I was most focused on was not over rotating into contact, and the explanation of having both the vertical and horizontal speed come from the shoulder when the arm is extended out in front really helps put torso rotation into context for me.

[seano]

Brian - 2 questions

1) Can you give me more insight into hitting "peak hip rotation speed" at 400/500 degrees per sec in the 1st third of the forward swing + hitting "peak torso rotation" at 800/1000 degrees per sec in the 2nd third of forward swing. Not understanding what these figures mean and are there check points one would look for to determine if the sequencing is being done correctly, without having your sophisticated equipment?

2) Juan Martin Del Potro's keeps his racquet head more "on edge" on his forehand and hits a flatter ball. Is his external to internal shoulder coupling comparable to other pro's? Does he just have more forward "non twisting" rotation and less vertical "twisting" rotation?

SeanO

[BrianGordon]

Thanks rthodges - glad you found it useful.

Sean - good questions as usual.

The values were given to illustrate that in a properly sequenced motion the speeds escalate along the chain. Without the advanced equipment it would not be possible to determine the values or exact timing but the general pattern is readily observable with video (and real time with some practice) and therefore is trainable.

Your second question is a very good one - I'll make a couple of observations:

The twist orientation (flat or more on edge) of the racquet entering the forward swing is a function of grip and wrist configuration and does not significantly impact the flip mechanism though it can produce minor complications.

The ext/int coupling is a variable and the true genius of the traditional (type III) ATP forehand. The pulling force at the start of the forward swing will "tend" to rotate the racquet - it is the player's choice on a given shot how much to allow the racquet to rotate. More rotation in the flip corresponds to more internal rotation in the roll generating a shot with a higher spin to speed ratio. Less leads to a lower spin to speed ratio.

The implication is that any spin to speed ratio (and trajectory) is possible by simply regulating the flip (and associated roll) with no other changes to the swing pattern. This is not true of any other swing type. Del Potro chooses low spin to speed ratios in general so he mutes the flip and associated roll to produce a flatter ball - he could easily change the shot characteristics by regulating the flip depth (more racquet rotation) and likely does on some shots.

Hope this answers your questions - these things are very difficult to explain in writing which is why I opted to put my antiquated mug on video in this article - sorry about that.

[seano]

Brian -
Looking at the time of day that you respond to questions, you must be a horrible sleeper, like me. )

[stroke]

Brian, I think your video instruction along with the writing was very effective. It answered some questions I had certainly. I am now kind of realizing (I think) that there are not that many type 3's even on the ATP Tour. Obviously Fed(the prototype), Grigor, Verdasco, Nadal, Del Po, Tsitsipas(I think), come to mind as examples. You emphasising that it is all about the forward swing was very revealing. I also really liked it that you addressed this newer generation type backswing used by players like Kyrgios and Thiem.

[BrianGordon]

Brian, I think your video instruction along with the writing was very effective. It answered some questions I had certainly. I am now kind of realizing (I think) that there are not that many type 3's even on the ATP Tour. Obviously Fed(the prototype), Grigor, Verdasco, Nadal, Del Po, Tsitsipas(I think), come to mind as examples. You emphasising that it is all about the forward swing was very revealing. I also really liked it that you addressed this newer generation type backswing used by players like Kyrgios and Thiem.

Thanks for the input stroke - demonstrating is generally clearer than my writing I'm told (as much as I hate being on video). Yes, many strokes have most of the elements but few have all... then again it is only a model - the ones you mention are great examples. To me Thiem is more traditional ATP than new generation - a form I believe will be more of a blip in history for many reasons but that is a whole other discussion.

[stroke]

Looking back at the history of this type 3 forehand(all elements), I am thinking maybe Carlos Moya was one of first ATP players to have it.

[stotty]

So I get home exhausted after a mammoth day of coaching (not sure how much longer keep this up at my age) and after a bite to eat I login to Tennisplayer. My wife asks what the hell am I doing logging in to write on the forum at this late hour..."haven't you had enough tennis for one day", she says. No, I said, BG has posted an article and I simply have to see what it's all about.

I think coaches struggle to identify the key components in the Type 3 and this article goes a long way to explaining things better. The pillar 4 clip is terrific... seeing the racket rotate and the shoulder engage is the one thing that tells me that everything has come together. I find it a visible thing and the difference in effortless power it creates compared to the other forehand types is uniquely noticeable. It is the non-muscular side of the shot which I find so fascinating...you get more for less.

I have a ridiculous question: Is Roger's forehand totally perfect, or is there an slight element that might be a minuscule better? I think it's the most beautiful shot I have ever seen. I swear it couldn't be any better.

[stroke]

So I get home exhausted after a mammoth day of coaching (not sure how much longer keep this up at my age) and after a bite to eat I login to Tennisplayer. My wife asks what the hell am I doing logging in to write on the forum at this late hour..."haven't you had enough tennis for one day", she says. No, I said, BG has posted an article and I simply have to see what it's all about.

I think coaches struggle to identify the key components in the Type 3 and this article goes a long way to explaining things better. The pillar 4 clip is terrific... seeing the racket rotate and the shoulder engage is the one thing that tells me that everything has come together. I find it a visible thing and the difference in effortless power it creates compared to the other forehand types is uniquely noticeable. It is the non-muscular side of the shot which I find so fascinating...you get more for less.

I have a ridiculous question: Is Roger's forehand totally perfect, or is there an slight element that might be a minuscule better? I think it's the most beautiful shot I have ever seen. I swear it couldn't be any better.

Great question Stotty. I too am very curious what Brian thinks. Grigor's forehand (and backhand for that matter) look nearly identical to Fed's to me to the naked eye, but to me, he cannot take the ball on as early on either side as Roger. Roger also appears to be able to apply more spin, more bend to the ball than Grigor. I have always felt the only real argument for a possibly superior forehand to Fed's is Nadal's. Truth be told, Roger really does everything better than Rafa except maybe the forehand. Nadal's great results have pretty much been because of that one shot me. That is certainly an argument for Nadal. Nadal has certainly improved his backhand through the years, as has Roger, but to me, Roger's slice, also one of the best slices ever, gives him the backhand edge over Nadal.

[ten1050]

Hello Brian,
I believe pillar lV was particularly helpful. The clear demonstration of the external to internal rotation of the arm coupled with the importance of the straight arm makes this pillar abundantly instructive. Do you believe that youngsters have an innate ability to simply watch great players and then simply imitate them after thousands of hours of deliberate practice. I will always remember the story of Frances Tiafoe who literally lived at a tennis club but could not afford the lessons that were going on all around him. He nevertheless made himself into a world class player. Your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. And thank you for this outstanding instructional series.

Sincerely,

Norman Ashbrooke

[stotty]

Great question Stotty. I too am very curious what Brian thinks. Grigor's forehand (and backhand for that matter) look nearly identical to Fed's to me to the naked eye, but to me, he cannot take the ball on as early on either side as Roger. Roger also appears to be able to apply more spin, more bend to the ball than Grigor. I have always felt the only real argument for a possibly superior forehand to Fed's is Nadal's. Truth be told, Roger really does everything better than Rafa except maybe the forehand. Nadal's great results have pretty much been because of that one shot me. That is certainly an argument for Nadal. Nadal has certainly improved his backhand through the years, as has Roger, but to me, Roger's slice, also one of the best slices ever, gives him the backhand edge over Nadal.

Your post is thought-provoking as always. I think there is no doubt Nadal's forehand has the edge over Roger's (more secure...though he goes for less than Roger) but I just find Roger's so beautiful and, importantly, more versatile than Rafa's. I sometimes also ask myself if Rafa's forehand would be as good/effective if he were right handed. But Rafa's is a monster.

Two intriguing forehands for me are Fognini's and Verdasco's. Verdasco's is in the archive somewhere. I shall have to dig it out and see where it sits on the continuum of Type 3 perfection.

Thanks for the input stroke - demonstrating is generally clearer than my writing I'm told (as much as I hate being on video).

You are an excellent writer, Brian, and have great clarity. Have no doubt about that.

[BrianGordon]

Thanks for the kind words gentleman!

Stotty - I would have to agree the Fed forehand is as close to perfect as one could get in the context of my model and period. Verdasco's is tremendous - his body rotation sequence is superb. I know the feeling well of struggling home after a long day on the court so thanks for taking the time to view the article - I'd have popped a couple pints instead.

Stroke - I think all of these guys are great type III models. To me what defines greatness is the ability to make a very difficult motion look easy - in this regard Fed is second to none but I'd rather face Fed's incoming than Nadal's in general.

Norman - yes, I think that is possible (and this ability exists) and I also believe the others mentioned here developed their forehands largely through trial and error and the "school of hard knocks " without explicit detailed instruction. This method just requires some intellectual curiosity and a lot of discipline - worked for me having one lesson my entire life (though world class never happened).

[bobbyswift]

Great article as alway. What advice do you give your player to help facilitate the roll.

[stroke]

Your post is thought-provoking as always. I think there is no doubt Nadal's forehand has the edge over Roger's (more secure...though he goes for less than Roger) but I just find Roger's so beautiful and, importantly, more versatile than Rafa's. I sometimes also ask myself if Rafa's forehand would be as good/effective if he were right handed. But Rafa's is a monster.

Two intriguing forehands for me are Fognini's and Verdasco's. Verdasco's is in the archive somewhere. I shall have to dig it out and see where it sits on the continuum of Type 3 perfection.



You are an excellent writer, Brian, and have great clarity. Have no doubt about that.

We are on the same page. Verdasco's fh is a top 5 no doubt. A lefty obviously like Nadal, but it appears to be overall not as opressingly blundeaning as Nadal's. Fognini has long been a top 5 forehand to me that appears to fall in that maximum 165 degree bend that Brian mentioned. His countryman Berrenttini, obviously a bigger stronger guy than Fognini, seems to have similar technique to Fognini and an even more opressive forehand to me.