Two Forehands

John Yandell

In the first two articles in this series we looked at the real fundamentals underlying all good forehands. Good preparation (Click Here) and good extension in the forward swing. (Click Here)

The internet world is obsessed with the question: what is the modern forehand and do I have it? What are the secrets I need to get it? Do I have an ATP backswing? Do I pat the dog? Do I lag and snap? Do I have a straight arm at contact? Do I finish with a lasso over my head?

To me, a modern forehand is a forehand that has the best possible fundamentals as modeled by the best modern players. The technical advances in modern stroke production, the variety of grips and the new strings have produced a bewildering number of variations at the pro level. Forehands can reach 100 mph and 3000 rpm in spin and higher.

But the increases in racket speed to generate these new levels of power are all based on fundamentals, fundamentals that have evolved to new levels of efficiency across the variations.

These fundamentals are increments better than the fundamentals of previous generations. They also serve as the best models for players at all levels to emulate. The challenge is identifying them in the diversity of the modern game and applying them across age and ability.

The reality is that many of the "secret" elements players torture themselves trying to develop happen naturally if these fundamentals are sound. Instead many players try to artificially manufacture them to the detriment of what really matters. This means that most of the complex questions players ask about the internal mechanics of are irrelevant and counterproductive.

In this article let's look at two sound technical forehands of two players I worked with recently, both based on the principles I identified in the previous two articles.

In appearance these two forehands could not seem more different. One is from Ken, a successful club and league player with an eastern grip, a neutral stance, and a simple, vertical finish with the racket on edge. The other is from Ash, an open level player with a much more extreme grip, a semi-open stance, big forward shoulder rotation and a wiper finish.

You might call one classical and the other modern. I say they both have modern fundamentals based on the core commonalities of the great players.

Discovering the Pro Turn

When I started teaching I believed that when the shoulders turned on the forehand the opposite, left arm should point straight ahead at the opponent, which was a commonly accepted teaching key.

That all changed in 1997 when we did our first high speed filming at the US Open. Reviewing the footage with a number of coaches at USTA Player Development we were all astonished to see that the left arm actually moved across the body and pointed at the sideline, not the opponent.

It had been right there in front of our eyes all the time, but we weren't seeing it until we looked at the high speed footage of players like Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras frame by frame. In the 20 years since, virtually every elite player we have filmed had some version of this same left arm move.

But we saw more—the left arm stretch was part of a complex of movements. The body turn generated a significant part of the backswing. The shoulders turned 90 degrees to the net or usually a little more.

They set up was on the outside or right foot in a semi open stance. But the shape of the backswings were various and individual, what Nick Saviano deemed a matter of "flair," less important that the fundamentals of the body turn--what I began calling the full turn or the pro turn.

Outside Backswing

The next advance came with Brian Gordon's groundbreaking quantitative work. What Brian discovered was that although a high level forehand could be hit with backswings of various shapes and sizes, the stroke could be turbocharged with a compact, outside backswing similar to Andre Agassi or Roger Federer with the hitting arm staying on the player's right side. (Click Here for more on this from Brian himself.)

To Brian, Federer was the pure example. The hand moving up and back and to the outside on a slight diagonal. The racket face slightly beveled down toward the court at the top. He called it the ATP backswing.

This backswing, Brian found, allowed the shoulder muscles to generate maximum force. The seeming contradiction was that it was also minimalistic. More power with less motion. Brian smashed another common belief in teaching that the backswing should be circular and the bigger the backswing the more racket speed.

I tried this backswing myself and immediately felt the difference and have used the concept ever since in my teaching. I am not rigid about the exact shape and size and whether the racket stays absolutely totally on the right side, especially with lower level players.

First Commonality

This compact outside move is one of the core "modern" commonalities we see with the forehands of Ken and Ash. Watch Ken's backswing go back and slightly up. See that the face of the racket is slightly closed or titled slightly downward toward the court.

Watch the shoulders turn about 90 degrees. Watch the set up with the right leg and coiling from the knee bend. Watch the left arm stretch and point across the body at the sideline. See that the hand and racket are on his right side.

Now watch the same elements for Ash. His shoulder turn is 90 degrees plus. He coils in a semi-open stance with the weight on his right leg. His backswing is slightly higher but still compact with the face at a slight downward tilt. The hand is also well on the right side of his body.

What are the differences? For one, a matter of degree. Ken is over 60. Ash is about 30 and has a deeper more powerful leg coil. He has a little more shoulder turn as well.

A second difference is the angle of the racket shaft. This is a function of the difference in their grips. Ken is classically eastern with the palm of his hand behind the handle. This means his racket shaft points basically straight back.

Ash has a strong semi-western with much of his hand under the handle. This means the racket face is laying partially across the palm, naturally angling the racket shaft back behind him. But both players have the fundamental elements of the pro turn.

Forward Swing

When we look at the other fundamental I identified in the second article—the forward swing-- there appears to be extreme differences between the two players.

Ken typically steps into the ball with a neutral stance. Both feet stay on the court. His front foot stays flat on the surface and he comes up on his back toe. This is all perfect for the type of incoming balls he gets when he plays, balls that don't usually bounce much above waist level.

Ken's forward body rotation is about 90 degrees, finishing with the shoulders parallel to the net. At contact his shoulders about 45 degrees to the net. His racket face stays basically vertical to the court or on edge out through the shot, a classic eastern swing. His wrap decelerates the motion moving directly up and back and over his shoulder.

Ash hits from a semi-open stance. His contact points against most opponents are considerably higher, mid chest to shoulder level. He usually comes off the court with one or both feet.

His shoulders are parallel to the net at contact, and his back shoulder continues to rotate until it is facing the net or close, a total rotation about twice Ken's, roughly 180 degrees.

Ash's normal swing has a full wiper rotation with the racket face turning over, going from pointing at the right sideline at contact, to pointing at the left sideline as he extends his swing. His wrap is around the shoulder, not over.

Similarities?

That's a lot of obvious difference in the forward swing. But are there any similarities? The answer is yes. One critical one. And that's the other core "modern" commonality. This is the extension point on the forward swing.

The swing on all good forehand drives, whatever the level, extends outward toward the target before the wrap. This is regardless of stance, body rotation, wiper, wrap.

This is the forward swing fundamental Ken and Ash share. Extension. The checkpoints are simple.

The wrist reaches about eye level. The racket hand comes across to about the left edge of the torso.

Most important is the spacing. There is usually 2 feet of space or more between the racket hand and the torso.

Why is this important? As we have seen in other articles, the racket moves on a three dimensional arc. Extension is what keeps this arc close to the shot line and maximizes racket speed.

Bent Elbows

And note one other commonality. The bent elbow at contact. The same as Agassi. The bend varies somewhat with the grip—typically the more extreme the more bend. This means a little straighter for Ken, a little more bent for Agassi, more bent for Ash.

Yes, Federer, Delpo, Hyeon Chung, Nadal and others have straight arms. Brian Gordon says that that's the most powerful and efficient arm structure at high levels. But recently, talking to him in Florida, he explained how few players really have the ability to do that. Look forward to the two coming articles I did with him in which he discusses this and many other issues as his work with elite players has continued.

I am not saying you can't try for the straight arm—you might be one of the gifted few. But in working with these two players I felt the core commonalities were exponentially more important.

So which style do I prefer? Both. I love starting players with an eastern grip, an outside backswing, and a simple forward swing like Ken's. But most high level players will develop elements similar to Ash as they progress and compete. Between the two extremes there is a lot of room for development and variation.

Ash wants to play aggressive, one strike tennis. He can rocket his forehand 85 mph. He can generate heavy spin. He can deal with velocity and spin in return.

Ken is a successful league singles player at the 3.5 level. He can hit the ball 65mph and hit winners, but his biggest strengths on his forehand are precision and consistency.

He forehand is so simple and repeatable that he never misses. There are a lot of guys at his level trying to play more like Ash. But imagine being on the other side of the net when one ball after another comes back with that solid, smooth swing. Until one of Ken's would be power opponents hits the ball out or into the back fence.

So the Modern Forehand: Where Are We Now? We've worked through the commonalites and now seen how to apply them.

Ken and Ash are decades and levels apart. But both have successful and effective forehands because of rock solid "modern" fundamentals. After all our filming and study, it's great to be able to identify and use them in teaching.