Interactive Forum: October 2008 Ernests Gulbis Forehand

[John Yandell]

Sure send it in.

[grimmbomb]

That is quite a bit different. Funny thing about the wrist injuries, I have been getting pain in my wrist shortly after starting play lately. I thought it was due to buying a racquet with a leather grip, since it feels a little harsh despite a lower flex. I'm hitting the forehand well though, so I will stick it out for a bit longer. Maybe I will send video of my forehand to Mr. Yandell!

Awesome! And thanks for the quick reply. I have been trying to use a forehand motion with a take back similar to Murray or Gulbis. I feel like I have a better idea of the racquet face angle at contact with this motion. Fortunately there is an insane amount of Murray videos here!

Thanks again.

I'm not sure if you're referring to the older Gulbis footage or not, but Gulbis since John's filming and clips on here has changed the angle of his face on the takeback considerably, and it now reflects more of what you see with the rest of the top 10 players in the world minus Del Potro. It is interesting to note as well that both Murray and Del Potro have had wrist issues in the past with this differently angled face position. Murray since that time has closed his face off more as well, but not as dramatically as some other players you might see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7mSKTVoWlk

In this clip at the 9 second mark when he hits the forehand you can see the big difference in the angle of the face if you pause it in his backswing at the top.

And in this next clip from the front view you can see just how far he's actually closing it most recently at Bangkok. So either it's naturally evolved or the Gulbis camp has been video taping his forehand and comparing it to some of his peers. Judging by the angle of the face in the Bangkok footage it almost appears he's gone a bit overboard, but he's obviously spent time working on it. His ranking has also gone up dramatically in the last year so it's not that shocking, and other factors certainly like better shot selection/patience and work ethic pay off as well, but removing technical limitations on a stroke is also a factor at the highest level.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPx_v66q4f8

You can see the angle of the face on various forehand here at 20 seconds or so in.

[grimmbomb]

Yes! It would help if he would win more matches when we are trying to film him--like Cincy and IW...we have some footage--a couple more matches at IW would do the trick.

Awesome! And thanks for the quick reply. I have been trying to use a forehand motion with a take back similar to Murray or Gulbis. I feel like I have a better idea of the racquet face angle at contact with this motion. Fortunately there is an insane amount of Murray videos here!

Thanks again.

[John Yandell]

Yes! It would help if he would win more matches when we are trying to film him--like Cincy and IW...we have some footage--a couple more matches at IW would do the trick.

[grimmbomb]

And what technical deficiencies do you see?

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

Just wondering if Ernests Gulbis is still going to show up in the Stroke Archive eventually.

Thanks!!

[uspta221281867]

the key is the laid back wrist at the top of the backswing or the set as i call it, this needs to take place to really maximize the flick at contact point, gulbis is hitting his forehand 75% because he does not get into this proper set position like big three

[0403]

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

I think that he is stiff during the start of the frontswing and therefore doesnt get fully extended and he may have problems with getting the real twirl on the ball if he gets a low slice

[John Yandell]

Oliensis, that pretty much hits the nail.

[julian]

Forehand

John,
In response to your comment I just looked at Jack Kramer's forehand (video in stroke archive). My impression is this: because Kramer is using an eastern grip (looks almost like an Aussie grip (between Eastern and Continental)), his shoulders are at about a 45 degree angle to the baseline when he contacts the ball. By contrast, the modern forehand, with its bigger shoulder turn, more extreme grip, and larger range of motion cranking the hips and shoulders through the stroke, results in the shoulders being more square to the baseline at contact. And because of that difference (I don't recall if you or someone else wrote an article on your site that discusses this difference in the relation of shoulder angle to baseline at contact), the modern forehand results in an earlier "release" of the static front foot in a neutral-stance forehand, relative to Kramer's classic forehand. In fact, Kramer's left foot does release, but just a bit later than Gulbis' neutral-stance forehand in the video.

In my view the windshield-wiper follow-through is also a consequence of the more open relationship of shoulders to baseline at contact point. I also think that the reverse forehand follow-through is a consequence of stopping the rotation of the shoulders prematurely, so the racket releases while the shoulders don't, often as a result of running hard to the right (for right-hander) when hitting...the rightward momentum stops the shoulders from rotating through as they normally do.

My $0.02.
AO

Probably you know
https://www.tennisplayer.net/articles/

[oliensis]

John,
In response to your comment I just looked at Jack Kramer's forehand (video in stroke archive). My impression is this: because Kramer is using an eastern grip (looks almost like an Aussie grip (between Eastern and Continental)), his shoulders are at about a 45 degree angle to the baseline when he contacts the ball. By contrast, the modern forehand, with its bigger shoulder turn, more extreme grip, and larger range of motion cranking the hips and shoulders through the stroke, results in the shoulders being more square to the baseline at contact. And because of that difference (I don't recall if you or someone else wrote an article on your site that discusses this difference in the relation of shoulder angle to baseline at contact), the modern forehand results in an earlier "release" of the static front foot in a neutral-stance forehand, relative to Kramer's classic forehand. In fact, Kramer's left foot does release, but just a bit later than Gulbis' neutral-stance forehand in the video.

In my view the windshield-wiper follow-through is also a consequence of the more open relationship of shoulders to baseline at contact point. I also think that the reverse forehand follow-through is a consequence of stopping the rotation of the shoulders prematurely, so the racket releases while the shoulders don't, often as a result of running hard to the right (for right-hander) when hitting...the rightward momentum stops the shoulders from rotating through as they normally do.

My $0.02.
AO

[John Yandell]

Ok rather than askiing Socratic questions, here is what I think.

The massive rotation of the shoulders on the forward swing on most modern forehands makes it impossible for players to hit a traditional square stance forehand with the foot remaining in place.

[John Yandell]

OK since nobody else bit, how about the differences in the stance? What happens to his front foot at what point when he steps in and why?

[airforce1]

You may find
https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...-his-forehand/
interesting to read

very interesting read.
It seems to jive with what the earlier poster said about the Gulbis takeback having limitations. Is the poster the same as the writer of the article?

[julian]

the Nadal"s forehand

And Nadal doesn't muscle the ball?

You may find
https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...-his-forehand/
interesting to read