Interactive Forum: October 2008 Ernests Gulbis Forehand

muscles the ball

I think if you look at Nadal's videos you will see that he takes his racket back with an open racket face also. He eventually gets it closed but it starts open. I'm not sure that has too much to do with it. I think Gulbis muscles the ball too much and that is what causes those errors.

And Nadal doesn't muscle the ball?

[airforce1]

Murray managed to win with his erratic forehand

Yes, he wins for many reasons with his well rounded game. He manages his weaknesses very well at this point in his career, as all top players do.

Would you say that blasting short and mid court balls to the corners with a driving FH is something he is known for?
I know I don't think of that when I think of his strong points.

[julian]

Murray vs Fed

Any side views of his forehand? Very similar to Murray in his technique, and erratic because of the technical deficiency.

Murray managed to win with his erratic forehand

[julian]

Murray vs Fed

Any side views of his forehand? Very similar to Murray in his technique, and erratic because of the technical deficiency.

Murray managed to win with his erratic forehand

[julian]

Open initial position

I think if you look at Nadal's videos you will see that he takes his racket back with an open racket face also. He eventually gets it closed but it starts open. I'm not sure that has too much to do with it. I think Gulbis muscles the ball too much and that is what causes those errors.

An initial open position allows to hide a possible slice-see
a second set vs Simon today

[airforce1]

I think if you look at Nadal's videos you will see that he takes his racket back with an open racket face also. He eventually gets it closed but it starts open. I'm not sure that has too much to do with it. I think Gulbis muscles the ball too much and that is what causes those errors.

See your point, about the top of the take back, but clearly you can see how Rafa after his big motion, eventually gets there with the face on the way down of the bk swing. Gulbis never quite gets there. Rafa's may be more to delayed in his process of getting further below his CP.
Quite a clear difference in my view and clearly a mechanical shortcoming in the motion for Gulbis as the other poster noted.

[plebedevs]

I think if you look at Nadal's videos you will see that he takes his racket back with an open racket face also. He eventually gets it closed but it starts open. I'm not sure that has too much to do with it. I think Gulbis muscles the ball too much and that is what causes those errors.

[airforce1]

Good question - do tell. Do you really mean deficiencies or would choices be a better critical approach?

I think deficiency is reasonable, as his racket prep is weaker (akin to Bradens waiter platter position on the serve take back) therefore susceptible to error when he attempts to go for more power.

[julian]

Gulbis

Maybe I shouldn't say deficient per say, but he doesn't hit the same technical checkpoints that Nadal, Djoko, and Fed do. The main issue is the position of the racket face in the top of the backswing. IMO it's critical to have a partially closed/closed face during that portion of the backswing and Gulbis like Murray has the face in a similar position (what I call neutral). To me the forehands of Gulbis and Murray will both be more error prone when going for big shots compared to the top 3 because they don't have as technically clean of a forehand groundstroke. Murray is smart about it, he started to spin his forehand more heavily this summer to increase his margin. It even looks like he might be on his way to closing the face in that part of the swing like the big 3.

Unlike Murray Gulbis tees off on nearly everything but you'll notice he has a rough time keeping his errors down over the course of a match. Just look at his match with Rafa a few days ago. On an indoor hardcourt he should be able to take Rafa off the court, but the forehand is very error prone so I find it funny that he steps around his technically superior backhand to hit his technically inferior forehand from the inside position (inside out/inside in). Can't the latvian tennis association afford a video camera?

I guess I'm just ultra picky with technique, but I consider guys like Fed, Djoko, and Rafa to have nearly 100% efficient forehand technique. Having even one part of the forehand technique wrong like Murray/Gulbis puts you IMO in the 85-90% efficient range and that means you're just more prone to it breaking down when you push the limits of pace and aim. It's too bad because Gulbis has such a big game otherwise but I see this technical flaw as holding him back in terms of competing with guys at the very top of the game week in and out. Unlike Gulbis Murray reigns it in and spins it more playing more of a defensive style while using his backhand and rally skills to win points. Recently Murray has stepped it up, and I'd be curious to see if his technique is changing more towards that of the top 3.

As far as a joke about a camera goes Gulbis is coached in Germany,NOT Latvia

Adam,

It's somewhat similar and I like the observations about the finish of Gulbis. I just looked at the Agassi footage, Gulbis if even ever so slightly has his face more open in that part of the backswing while Agassi actually closes it. Granted Agassi doesn't close it as much as many of the modern players we see today, but it's considerably more closed than Gulbis. It also closes at a much earlier point in the swing. Gulbis is in this new wave of players like Murray and Gasquet that seem to have technically solid backhands but weaker forehands that could use some improvement.

The problem with this is that at the top of the men's game no matter how good your backhand most players will still run around and attack with the forehand when given the chance. While the top 3 have technically sound games and stick out in the rankings because of that and other factors I don't see any of these newer players winning anywhere near the slams or putting up consistantly solid results. The top 3 stick out to me because they basically have no technical weakness in their game.

I thought this months article about Djokovic/Roddick at the US Open was spot on. Roddick lost that match and pressed because he couldn't hang with his backhand during the rallies against Djokovic who's smooth as butter on that side. So when you realize you can't hang you press and make bad choices or you give the opponent opportunities because your technique isn't as efficient and gives the opponent short or attackable balls.

I think Gulbis has great potential, but can he hit the big forehand 5 times in a row without missing? Not on a week in week out basis with his current technique. If you want the next technically sound player that could join that top group of players look at Nishikori. Off the ground his technique is top notch and at such an early age, he's very clean.

[oliensis]

With all due respect, the position of Gulbis' racket head at the top of the backswing is remarkably similar to Agassi's. I do not think that that has anything to do with much of anything. Personally, I like to close the racket face there, as it somehow pushes me to turn my left shoulder (I'm right handed) and hips further across the line of the ball, and helps me to key in to a free-er motion hitting through the ball. But there are plenty of great forehands with all variety of racket-face positions at the apex of the backswing. Moreover, Gulbis does close the racket face during the first phase of moving the racket forward in the swing.

What I notice about the Gulbis forehand is that the forward swing looks somewhat tight and constricted rather than free. And as a consequence of that the follow-through is short and tight, coming across the ball quickly rather than following after the ball before windshield wipering across.

To my thinking the purpose of the backswing is most importantly to establish keys that help you load and store potential energy, which can then be unleashed ballistically. Gulbis' forehand could, in my view, be less muscular and more ballistic...and the longer follow-through would be the result/consequence of that...as would a more forward weight transfer through the ball.

Even Fernando Gonzalez, who is, in a way, very muscular on his forehand (in T'ai Chi they call it "Li" (outer strength), as opposed to "yi" (ch'i based strength) is much free-er and more ballistc through the hitting zone.

In edit: I just looked at the Gulbis video again and one more thing I notice, that's related to what's above is that his shoulders and hips come through his forehand as one piece. His shoulders don't turn further than his hips on the backswing, and as a result his hips and shoulders move through the forehand as one piece, which prevents there being more acceleration in the whip of the kinetic chain.

That's my 2 cents.

Adam Oliensis

And what technical deficiencies do you see?

More views to come when we put him up later in the Stroke Archive.

Maybe I shouldn't say deficient per say, but he doesn't hit the same technical checkpoints that Nadal, Djoko, and Fed do. The main issue is the position of the racket face in the top of the backswing. IMO it's critical to have a partially closed/closed face during that portion of the backswing and Gulbis like Murray has the face in a similar position (what I call neutral). To me the forehands of Gulbis and Murray will both be more error prone when going for big shots compared to the top 3 because they don't have as technically clean of a forehand groundstroke. Murray is smart about it, he started to spin his forehand more heavily this summer to increase his margin. It even looks like he might be on his way to closing the face in that part of the swing like the big 3.

Unlike Murray Gulbis tees off on nearly everything but you'll notice he has a rough time keeping his errors down over the course of a match. Just look at his match with Rafa a few days ago. On an indoor hardcourt he should be able to take Rafa off the court, but the forehand is very error prone so I find it funny that he steps around his technically superior backhand to hit his technically inferior forehand from the inside position (inside out/inside in). Can't the latvian tennis association afford a video camera?

I guess I'm just ultra picky with technique, but I consider guys like Fed, Djoko, and Rafa to have nearly 100% efficient forehand technique. Having even one part of the forehand technique wrong like Murray/Gulbis puts you IMO in the 85-90% efficient range and that means you're just more prone to it breaking down when you push the limits of pace and aim. It's too bad because Gulbis has such a big game otherwise but I see this technical flaw as holding him back in terms of competing with guys at the very top of the game week in and out. Unlike Gulbis Murray reigns it in and spins it more playing more of a defensive style while using his backhand and rally skills to win points. Recently Murray has stepped it up, and I'd be curious to see if his technique is changing more towards that of the top 3.

[uspta146749877]

Rick Macci and Gulbis

Good question - do tell. Do you really mean deficiencies or would choices be a better critical approach?

Rick Macci in the current tip of the week of www.uspta.org covers three possible variations of forehand.They do have different stances and a different foot on which a player lans first.it would be good to see whether
Gulbis has these three variations

[uspta2753242588]

And what technical deficiencies do you see?

More views to come when we put him up later in the Stroke Archive.

Good question - do tell. Do you really mean deficiencies or would choices be a better critical approach?

[John Yandell]

And what technical deficiencies do you see?

More views to come when we put him up later in the Stroke Archive.