Understanding Professional Forehands Part 1 and 2

[stroke]

And I am going to try to resist the urge to ask Brian any more questions about the particular technique a player is using, but I am going to say from what I have seen this far at US Open, Berrenttini has the biggest weapon in the tournament forehand wise. He does seem to have a positional takeback, I think he does maybe get some independent arm movement in his forward swing, but he does get model elbow extension(but not completely straight).

[morespin]

John, it makes sense that Laver would have a straight arm. It would be really difficult to make any topspin with a bent elbow and a continental grip Seeing Philippoussis using a straight arm and a strong eastern/semi-western grip must have been weird.

[postpre]

A straight arm forehand seems much more difficult to pull off the more extreme the grip. Eastern grips like Federer/Delpo/Dimitrov can adapt easier to the straight arm. Guys are still crushing the ball (See Felix last night against Murray), with a slight blend but huge whip.

[BrianGordon]

Hi Brian, thanks very much for this series of articles and videos on ATP forehands. They have helped me realise that my objective on every stroke, forehand, backhand and serve, should be to experiment with joint angles until I find the moment of inertia of the arm/racquet system that permits my muscles to develop maximum force for the maximum time. And that if I succeed in doing so, I will produce the maximum change in angular momentum of the racquet/arm system and hence maximum racquet speed. What was not obvious to me before studying your articles is the (slightly counterintuitive) fact that muscles produce their maximum force when contracting slowly, so increasing the moment inertia of the arm/racquet system is a good thing (up to a point). I find the benefit of this approach most clearly on serve, where I now try to keep good separation between the racquet and the shoulder joint (elbow angle near right angle). And small changes can have quite an impact, because moment of inertia is equal to mass*radius squared. (It was your mentioning of throwing a baseball vs. throwing a ping pong ball that made this concept click for me.)

Hi glacierguy - Do you have a background in mechanics? These are very good observations - the essence of the serve backswing really.

I saw in a another post you are from St Andrews. I've had the opportunity to walk the old course while my mother played - amazing place. Both sides of my family are Scottish - also have had the opportunity to visit the home of my apparently pretty notorious ancestors on a couple of occasions - Huntly. Hope to return someday.

Sorry folks - guess that doesn't have much to do with pro forehands lol.

[glacierguy]

Hi glacierguy - Do you have a background in mechanics? These are very good observations - the essence of the serve backswing really.

I saw in a another post you are from St Andrews. I've had the opportunity to walk the old course while my mother played - amazing place. Both sides of my family are Scottish - also have had the opportunity to visit the home of my apparently pretty notorious ancestors on a couple of occasions - Huntly. Hope to return someday.

Sorry folks - guess that doesn't have much to do with pro forehands lol.

Hi Brian, yes, kind of - I studied physics at uni, and went on to work in that field for a while (a long time ago). Thanks for your reply. Really it's me who is thanking you though, because without your articles and John's video analysis, I wouldn't know what I was trying to practise when I go out to practise.

If you ever come to St Andrews again, I'd be delighted to meet up and show you around (the uni here has a beautiful new indoor tennis centre).

[stroke]

Hi Brian, thanks very much for this series of articles and videos on ATP forehands. They have helped me realise that my objective on every stroke, forehand, backhand and serve, should be to experiment with joint angles until I find the moment of inertia of the arm/racquet system that permits my muscles to develop maximum force for the maximum time. And that if I succeed in doing so, I will produce the maximum change in angular momentum of the racquet/arm system and hence maximum racquet speed. What was not obvious to me before studying your articles is the (slightly counterintuitive) fact that muscles produce their maximum force when contracting slowly, so increasing the moment inertia of the arm/racquet system is a good thing (up to a point). I find the benefit of this approach most clearly on serve, where I now try to keep good separation between the racquet and the shoulder joint (elbow angle near right angle). And small changes can have quite an impact, because moment of inertia is equal to mass*radius squared. (It was your mentioning of throwing a baseball vs. throwing a ping pong ball that made this concept click for me.)

glacierguy, what is this ping pong vs baseball concept?

[seano]

Stroke - you're demonstrating that you haven't watched the videos it's in the "elbow angle" video.

[glacierguy]

Thanks Seano, I was away, but that's the answer. And then I googled a bit on that topic...

[morespin]

Here's another hypothesis regarding straight arm forehands:

Straight arm forehands are the most biomechanically efficient way to create racquet head speed which can be used to create speed, spin, or both much like a one-handed backhand, right? One-handers can create tons of speed and spin concurrently, much more so than a two-hander.

So, why aren't there more one-handers in the top 100 of the ATP or WTA? It's superior in terms of creating spin and/or speed.
Because it's TOO FREAKIN' HARD to get it right under the kind of pressure that opponents will subject it to.

Some of the most dominant number 1s on the ATP tour have been one-handers (Sampras and Federer). So, why not teach our players to be one-handers? Because a player has to be a freak to be able to have an excellent one-hander. A freakishly good one-hander is as good as a pretty normal two-hander.

Players use a two-handed backhand because it's structurally stronger, quicker because it has a shorter radius, super stable against a hard hit ball, and easier to adjust at the last instant. A two-handed backhand is pretty much a double bend forehand.

Maybe it's the same with straight arm forehands vs. double-bend forehands?

Wow! That makes Federer even more freakish

[johnyandell]

More Spin,
These are valid questions! If you look at the absolute dominance of the two-hander in the juniors I would say what is amazing is how many elite players have one handers. Fed, Dimitrov, Thiem, and others.
If the goal is to win in the juniors I understand two handed mania. Robert Lansdorp says if you want a one-hander hit a one-hander! Watching league tennis in cal I see a lot of former junior players whose two-handers don't look so great anymore...
So I don't think this argument will ever have a conclusive conclusion. But the overwhelmingly vast majority of players who start tennis will never play on the tour.

[morespin]

I agree with your observation regarding two-handers winning a lot in the juniors.

A one-handed backhand is beautiful if it is hit well. It takes either a huge amount of time to develop one or someone who is just naturally a one-hander. If not one of these two it's usually funky, ugly, and a massive weakness. I think a one-hander has to be able to swing really fast, too.

No wonder there are so many two-handers.

It's nice to see Thiem, Shapovolov, and Tsitsipas doing well on tour with a one-hander.

I think a lot of former two-handers will switch to a slice one-hander as they get older.
You can go a long way with a good slice. Just use the two-hander for returns and passing shots.

[seano]

It's interesting watching Jennifer Brady (USA) hit her forehand in the US Open. She has an ATP type forehand and hits such a bigger forehand than the other women with their WTA Type 2 forehands. Announcer just commented that one of Brady's forehand winners was 86 mph. Serve + 1 is a good tactic for her, controls the points from the start. Would you classify her forehand as ATP classical or ATP modern?

[BrianGordon]

Based on real time video she appears to go both ways (would need frame by frame access) - she seems to be predominantly classical but demonstrates some modern elements on low balls.

[arturohernandez]

I agree with your observation regarding two-handers winning a lot in the juniors.

A one-handed backhand is beautiful if it is hit well. It takes either a huge amount of time to develop one or someone who is just naturally a one-hander. If not one of these two it's usually funky, ugly, and a massive weakness. I think a one-hander has to be able to swing really fast, too.

No wonder there are so many two-handers.

It's nice to see Thiem, Shapovolov, and Tsitsipas doing well on tour with a one-hander.

I think a lot of former two-handers will switch to a slice one-hander as they get older.
You can go a long way with a good slice. Just use the two-hander for returns and passing shots.

Sorry to derail the forehand conversation but I could not resist inserting this here. I have two kids with one handers, a boy and a girl, and one, a girl, with a two hander. The one hander definitely requires more patience as it develops. It becomes mostly a neutralizing shot at some point either by using variety or by simply spinning differently and throwing people off.

The payoff in volleying technique, backhand overhead and feel is immeasurable. I just don't see any two handers in the juniors who have the kind of feel that my daughter has. They can bash it harder and their returns are rock solid. But the feel and variety is missing. Their backhand volleys are good but I have not see any great ones.

But when the one hander finally arrives in its fuller form at age 16 or so (my daughter is 15). It is a sight to behold. My son used to hit balls that looked like mini lobs that landed inside the lines with all sorts of angles and spins that just boggled the mind.

The backhand has been ruined by the quants who just make everything into a statistic. What about the beauty of the one hander?

Thank god it survived the 00's. All we need is Henin 2.0 to make her appearance.

[morespin]

I would love to see Henin 2.0! That would be awesome. A good one-hander is a beautiful thing.

I teach my players (all of them currently are two-handers) to have a really nice, sliding, biting slice backhand. Just about all of them get the hang of it reasonably quickly. They also learn how to chip and hit one-handed backhand volleys.

You should see how the sliding, biting slice bothers the other juniors (especially the girls). I find it to be a pretty easy shot to teach. Once the kids get strong enough the ball really bites and fades.