A New Year's Serve

[gzhpcu]

I have the book and figure 14 (which Jones admits oversimplifies) does not correspond to reality. There is no racket drop.



I never did get it. Look at the slow motion serve to Tony Trabert. His racket points to the back fence, only at the start of the serve, and then goes into the drop. It does not go up towards the ball from this position...

[bottle]

Suck in the Information like a Vacuum Cleaner, then Come up with a Good Serve

I have always been fascinated by pages 54-5 of TENNIS: HOW TO BECOME A CHAMPION, C.M. Jones, Transatlantic Arts Inc., New York 1968 but printed in Great Britain.

I could go to the library to scan these facing two pages but rather will attempt to duplicate the author’s pinmen with drawing of my own in the file attachment at the end of this post. The moral of this story is to get racket way back behind your neck or away from your head to supply better leverage and improved power vector. There is a lot of math on these pages supporting this contention but I stick with the before and after drawings here, noting that arm, though way back, must get bent to a right angle like a mountain man throwing a tomahawk.

From a video one now (http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/...s-invalid&tt=b) and video two see 7:47 marker to skip extraneous stuff about sharpening the hawk, etc. (http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/...spart=avg&tt=b) I graduate to a question I have rarely heard discussed by teaching pros or anyone else in tennis.

Should a player bend his arm completely together or keep it in the right angle mode of someone throwing the hawk?

The rotorded server has been reminded of his inferiority by all those telling him that he doesn’t get his racket tip down low enough.

He therefore bends his arm completely together in an attempt at longer runway. Is that best? Will this produce more or less racket head speed?

Note how the mountain men go nowhere near the subject of upper arm contribution. They just throw. So bully for them.

A tennis player might have to think more, in that there is no release of the hawk and a tennis racket is suddenly going to rotate to the outside so that its front rim barely misses the ball rather than cleaves it in half.

My final never answered question is whether a rotorded server, stealing from this throwing mode, can add loosening of fingers and hand (wrist) to the backswing to produce more racket tip depth. And whether the consequent tightening of fingers blended with straightening of wrist will add to the force coming from the upper arm as it twists.

[bottle]

Not Much Swing for a Short Angle

Admittedly, I am entering a period of months in which I won't play tennis or even do self-feed.

I therefore expect some thinness of idea. I think I still will have new stroke ideas since they are involuntary by now. But I won't have any way of testing them other than pantomime which sometimes can work and other times be too removed from the reality of oncoming balls.

I start with a suspicion that recreational players who use their ordinary strokes to try and hit severe short angles are apt to fail to get to the outside of the ball even if they are good at this in deep line play.

Is invention of a new shot the answer then? Yes if the invention is simple and easily acquired. I recommend my (>) as possible form.

Last year while in Mexico I invented a backhand which proved worthless once I put it to the test back home.

The same expat who let Hope and me stay in her cool rooftop flat in the center of Puerto Vallarte has invited us again.

Puerto Vallarte happens first, the knee replacement second.

My family physician signing the surgery clearance predicted great things for me yesterday. On the other hand my good friend recently died from a knee replacement and mine is scheduled for Friday, February 13 after which I will believe more in science and less in superstition or more in superstition and less in science.

I would like to think that Frank had more other things wrong with him than I do. He just didn't heal. And the Chrysler people have now removed his pentastar from the top of the Chrysler building on I-75, more than a coincidence both Dr. Eckel and I agree.

Frank's widow Gretchen saw to it that I inherited some of the clothes which didn't fit his son or son-in-law. These include a very fine overcoat good for the Grosse Pointe, Michigan climate.

My ideas for best short angle or any other shot may be thin but so should be contact for a short angle. All of us have seen short angles where the player clouted the ball and won the point but that was low percentage.

For the time being I am advising a minimal swing that is not much more than a double wriggle followed by a firm roll of the forearm.

[bottle]

How Many Times Can Racket Tip Veer to the Right in a Great Rotorded Serve?

No, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

No, what figure should you save for retirement, and what would you do if I told you that you will die the micro-second your dough runs out?

No, what would you do if a man came up to you and asked what you would do if a man came up to you and asked what would you do if...etc.

Hey, I don't want to have sex with the Brit lady in the Viagra ad so omnipresent now on American TV and even in The New York Times. What exactly is wrong with having sex with Americans?

On the veer question now, I envision first veer, an external twist of forearm, just as arm begins to bend.

And second veer from a loosening of fingers which ships racket ahead of humeral twist.

The humeral twist is slow and willing to lose the race because of internal conflict between backward movement and forward muscle action already begun even though the actual forward motion hasn't started yet.

The second veer is mitigated by how two halves of the arm, loose at the elbow, clench together just then in a countering direction.

Third veer is to establish through centrifugality or loose continuation of momentum ephemeral right angle in the arm without which you can never initiate the ruthless efficiency of Glooscap Soccabasin's thrown tomahawk.

Fourth veer occurs right on the ball as passive arm has centrifugated straight and hand and wrist have tightened, and continued internal rotation of humerus sails the racket head out to the right.

[bottle]

New Production Idea for all Camps of Rotorded Serving in the World

The shortfall in everybody's serve, instructors, administrators and student campers alike, occurs as one tries to twist the upper arm axle-like back, i.e., tries vainly to lower the racket tip a significant amount toward the ground.

But, "You use what you got," Vic Braden said.

The troubles henceforth of shortened runway in both directions are practically legion even in the rotorded servers who can't afford to attend the worldwide network of camps for remedial work that includes the crushing of Rotary Club adhesions.

A special problem is that the runways are too short for other projects such as turning the racket tip outward on its way up to the ball before internal rotation sets in.

So turn the racket tip outward soon or sooner than that or even at address, just get this important swerve out of the way!

If one turns forearm just as arm starts to bend, one unclutters the down runway for humeral resistance.

Humeral resistance is the buildup of forward muscular effort in the humerus (the upper arm) even as it is twisting BACK.

We would like to say DOWN rather than BACK, but BACK is frequently the word we need to use when discussing rotorded serving.

The proposal here is for an uncluttering of downward runway which in fact will enable a loosening of fingers for more racket tip lowness at the same time.

The idea comes from Glooscap Soccabasin, a North American Indian who developed his style while tomahawking white persons between the shoulderblades at 20 paces.

Other Indians kept a firm grip on the handle right up to release.

Glooscap's throw was basically from the twisting humerus just as theirs, however he added a loosening and tightening of fingers to the mix.

Note: This reference to Glooscap, a peaceable figure in Indian mythology, applies only to the humerus.

I have not sung "Hail to the Redskins" since Joe Gibbs refused me an interview once I brought up the word "redskins" in discussion that would have veered toward stereotype.

Still, making oneself into an Indian at 20 paces tomahawking a white person between the shoulderblades could be helpful fantasy and good tennis tip.

[bottle]

Knowing Where the Racket is

Ha-ha, but I do talk about where the racket and racket tip is.

But I will keep the other firmly in mind.

So that, for brief moments, I can forget where the racket and racket tip is, on my way to the next plateau where I never think about that.

Thanks for the response.

[hockeyscout]

I don't think the answer is all one way or the other.

The mechanical, like a "set-piece" in theater, could be the part that is most repeatable and reliable.

The organic, on the other hand, is the part where one makes distinction and adjustment and expresses oneself.

In the Federfore I've already posed (and this also is a post) that left arm goes high and next falls a small amount whether this comes from overall body action or the arm itself or both.

To summarize: Left arm falls to roughly parallel to court.

That is a mechanical guideline. Imprinting the guideline in one's electrical system may take a short while but with any determination one will get it.

The more complex right arm-- in a Federfore-- performs a loop of distinctive nature not the same as the distinctive loop of Ivan Lendl.

Me, I've been preaching against loop because I think that any loop tends to become overly mechanical, and also because I've developed some loopless alternatives that I know work well and sometimes better.

I now subtract the "against" part but keep the rest.

The challenge here is to sensitize this loop, to slow it down and imbue it with feel.

The irony is that one's loop then may seem hydraulic, but don't be fooled.

When one slows loop from hand separation the loop becomes the agent of one's sensitivity while providing better because more delayed timing for mondo and wipe.

Of course, as Roger Federer points out in his old Charlie Rose interview, footwork is the main determinant of excellence.

He also suggests that footwork should be so natural that no one notices it.

And I suggest that (movement to and from the ball), and, (stroke mechanics and organics) are absolutely equal as two conceptual entities.

So, does my credibility seem the same as Roger's? No since I play at a lesser level. But is marching out some nation's tennis labeling system ever the proper way to determine either credibility or athletic potential? Nope.

What is the truth?

Yes, you have tremendous validity and credibility with me for one reason. You are not dogmatic and you've got the patience to explore the new, and the next.

I am constantly dumfounded by how everyone is always trying to fix the racket, when the cause is ALWAYS 100% related to collarbone, posture, abdominal, belly button and hip positioning.

Roger even says it, when I miss it is because of my feet. I don't think in terms of feet, I actually think in terms of collarbone, ribcage, belly button and hip positioning, however, he's right.

Bottle, I completely ignore the racket. Trust me the racket does everything it needs to do when muscle groups have been correctly synched, and the athlete understands proper sequential loading techniques.

I see so many coaches asking players to bend the knees. The player bends the knees, and five other muscle groups go awol, and more issues are created with the racket head. If an athlete knows what muscles to load, and when, it is a piece of cake to do any athletic sport!

If I ever see a tennis coach make reference to the racket head, I know he's not understanding what went wrong in the chain, and what the cause was, and it'll be impossible for consistency to be set up in that player, it will break down in matches and the player will lose it time and time again (and the pro will blame another pro), and its a never ending chain.

The Bo Jackson's, Dion Sanders, Roy Jones Junior and Floyd Mayweathers are great because they understand how to properly connect the pieces, and it results in smooth athletic function.

Bottle, a superb thread, and their are great nuggets in here, and we read this everyday first thing so keep up the great work!

[bottle]

How Much of Somebody's Forehand Should Feel Mechanical?

I don't think the answer is all one way or the other.

The mechanical, like a "set-piece" in theater, could be the part that is most repeatable and reliable.

The organic, on the other hand, is the part where one makes distinction and adjustment and expresses oneself.

In the Federfore I've already posed (and this also is a post) that left arm goes high and next falls a small amount whether this comes from overall body action or the arm itself or both.

To summarize: Left arm falls to roughly parallel to court.

That is a mechanical guideline. Imprinting the guideline in one's electrical system may take a short while but with any determination one will get it.

The more complex right arm-- in a Federfore-- performs a loop of distinctive nature not the same as the distinctive loop of Ivan Lendl.

Me, I've been preaching against loop because I think that any loop tends to become overly mechanical, and also because I've developed some loopless alternatives that I know work well and sometimes better.

I now subtract the "against" part but keep the rest.

The challenge here is to sensitize this loop, to slow it down and imbue it with feel.

The irony is that one's loop then may seem hydraulic, but don't be fooled.

When one slows loop from hand separation the loop becomes the agent of one's sensitivity while providing better because more delayed timing for mondo and wipe.

Of course, as Roger Federer points out in his old Charlie Rose interview, footwork is the main determinant of excellence.

He also suggests that footwork should be so natural that no one notices it.

And I suggest that (movement to and from the ball), and, (stroke mechanics and organics) are absolutely equal as two conceptual entities.

So, does my credibility seem the same as Roger's? No since I play at a lesser level. But is marching out some nation's tennis labeling system ever the proper way to determine either credibility or athletic potential? Nope.

What is the truth?

[bottle]

Expostulation of a Postulation

The Federer/Federfore/ATP3 left arm points and falls but only falls a little. Well, how does it fall, independently from shoulder or as solid connection to a taking of body angle just then, and does that matter?

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/roger-federer/

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/roger-federer/

What role do the knees play?

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/roger-federer/

[bottle]

A One-Hander Learns Two-Handed Philosophy

My age, 75, seems appropriate.

Am partial to III-- the only Type worthy of exploration at this historical point?

Have played against so many mediocre two-handers that I probably distrust everybody who has one.

Still, reader, if you have a good one and can explain the source of your smoothness please do.

I don't plan to use my two-hander once I've learned it. I am doing this out of curiosity only. Of course if the new stroke proved outstanding I might throw it in here and there probably on service returns of high kick serves.

Not enough commitment, you say? Most likely you are correct. But I'll start with right hand function only, swinging my racket around the house with left hand dangling by my side.

By alternating one-handers (which open out with acceleration) with this play version producing deceleration and restricted arc, I hope to stay honest and never see one stroke decay the other. Am also counting on the contrast between them. A too similar stroke is the one that robs neuronal pathways from the other creating an electrified mudpuddle.

Play version one-hander: Arm straight early takes stored power from the shoulder and spears the racket forward.

The racket butt has barely started to spear when arm begins a muscular bend like that of a sculler creating a vacuum behind his blade so that it cleanly pops out of the water.

This produces a restricted arc from left to right in front of my head with arm squeezed to only a right angle.

The whole act feels like a jet plane decelerating on top of an aircraft carrier.

Hope I'm right. That's enough for today.

[bottle]

Forehands where the Two Hands Speak, then don't Speak, next do Speak again

tennischiro has been arguing/writing/essaying for less or no pause at lowpoint in a looped forehand.

A lot of good forehands but no great ones do this (pause).

The way I personally want to aspire to greatness is by making left hand go faster while right hand goes slower.

Such generality could be helpful although the specifics of the challenge are more complicated.

Both hands to begin with are on the racket and moving upward at the same speed-- fast.

But as the left hand slides off the racket and continues upward it can keep going at the same fast speed.

Here is where the right hand can slow down even before the dogpat.

Comes the revolution or dogpat, the two arms speak to each other for a second time and fall together.

Note: In a New York Times article Brian Gordon was reported as telling the Times reporter who came to visit him at Macci's in Florida to keep pointing across until his hips cleared.

Pointing left hand higher than one used to and then letting it naturally fall to where it formerly established might help accomplish this.

Treating the left hand as a spoilt child who needs to be more occupied with doing something might keep it from misbehavior.

Yes, give the left hand something extra to do.

[bottle]

This was great tennis. I like all four. But whether you like someone or not, you don't have to make stuff up. Sport takes care of all.

[bottle]

Poor Jerzy-- We Barely Knew Ye

Poor Jerzy Janowicz-- five set points against John Isner in Hopman Cup final, then John has a set point on Jerzy's serve.

Jerzy misses a first serve. He makes a sensational catch of the tossed ball coming back to him. Terrible mistake. He uses up his psychic energy in making the catch and therefore double-faults and a set later loses the match.

The other Jerzy, Jerzy Kosinski, was a great writer. Why did he have to do himself in. THE PAINTED BIRD is my favorite but I am reading and thoroughly enjoying the miss-named BLIND DATE right now with COCKPIT up next. This Jerzy was Polish too I guess but above all an internationalist. Szia (Hungarian).

Aggie upset Serena in three. A very entertaining mixed doubles now with Jerzy and Aggie vs. John and Serena to decide everything.

[bottle]

From “Playing John McEnroe” by Trey Waltke

This brings up a point I try to teach juniors: winning tennis is usually boring tennis. To beat someone of equal or greater ability, you must be willing to do whatever it takes over and over again. Too many juniors get caught up thinking they have to beat someone with big winners. The object is to find that small chink and patiently drill at it at like a dentist slowly filling a cavity. And everyone's got some teeth that are weaker than others -- even John McEnroe.

[hockeyscout]

"Move the hips to the ball and not the racket." -- hockeyscout

Thank you.

Go for the ball, get to it at the proper pace, time and with speed, and that will determine who wins, and who loses.

I do a lot of your self feeds as well, and it is great I might add because it gives the player a mental picture of where they want their hips to be consistently when hitting the ball.

Rather brilliant this thread sir, we read it, and I want my young one always internalizing just the way you do here with this thread. Its a great find just because its a guy using his imagination, and us, throwing in our two cents once in a while.

Keep up the great postings.