A Web site of Lansdorp

[uspta146749877]

Does link www.lansdorp.com work for anybody?
Lansdorp has a shirt with this link in the latest issue

[John Yandell]

Nope does not exist...did for a while. just like Robert to wear that to confuse people--probably a little joke between him and himself...

[kmoranon]

yes Robert is that .. but the academy ball article is right on as usual ...

[oliensis]

I got a particular chuckle out of the contempt that seemed to spray out of the back of his throat on the pronunciation of the "k" sound in "academy ball." Always followed by a disclaimer to the effect that the "accch-ademy" ball has its place, its uses...but never without the gutteral disdain...if not for the "acccch-ademy" ball itself, then for the institutions of learning after which it is named....

[airforce1]

yes Robert is that .. but the academy ball article is right on as usual ...

I'm going to have to go out on a limb and disagree with Robert on this issue. I also think he has made an unfortunate choice on this and his stance on grips, as it pertains to his legacy. He may not have meant to choose these as his main platform, but with vids like the one in the new issue, it is probably going to work out that way.

My own experience from attending events in Miami and US Open is very different that what he seems to be saying. I even took my 14 yr old son to NY for the US Open early rounds so that he could see up close and personal, just how high above the net that 90% of the Pro groundstrokes clear. He was astounded as we leaned against the fence watching several top 20 men that day. My son tended to hit more like Robert described in the vid, which left him open to far too much net risk.

IMO the Key in this issue comes down to "Paired Objectives". Paired Objectives is where you take two seemingly contradicting objectives, and pair them to work together, often in a way that is more effective than either of the objectives by themselves. In this case it would be pairing an aggressive fast Topspin ball (much like his pro drive) with the goal of hitting 3-5 net clearance (more like his academy ball). I didn't catch Robert explaining that his shot was for finishing points, so we must summarize that his is discussing aggressive baseline rally shots.

As for the academy ball- it seems to be on a much better track, as they are teaching the framework for what really happens in the pro game. Over time and with good instruction, the students learn to hit more forcefully and with greater TS, to develop a very effective high level rally shot for building points.

[uspta146749877]

For airforce1

Please click

http://www.tennis.com/features/gener...aspx?id=182550

julian mielniczuk
usptapro 27873
Courtside Tennis Club,Bedford,MA

https://www.julianmielniczuk.usptapro.com

juliantennis@comcast.net

[airforce1]

Please click

http://www.tennis.com/features/gener...aspx?id=182550

julian mielniczuk
usptapro 27873
Courtside Tennis Club,Bedford,MA

https://www.julianmielniczuk.usptapro.com

juliantennis@comcast.net

bad link

[John Yandell]

It's an interesting question! We are hoping to get access to some shot spot data that would actually allow us to compare net clearances. Having just come back from Cincy I was actually noting how much flatter the trajectory appeared for Djokovic and Fed, verus Nadal, with Murray somewhere in the middle.

One thing for sure there is a wide variety among all the top players--the question might be is there a difference when they are going for it--taking the offense or trying to finish. Think that is Robert's big point, that kids have to learn to drive the ball with as much pace as they can but still get the ball in the court and that lower trajectory is part of this.

[airforce1]

It's an interesting question! We are hoping to get access to some shot spot data that would actually allow us to compare net clearances. Having just come back from Cincy I was actually noting how much flatter the trajectory appeared for Djokovic and Fed, verus Nadal, with Murray somewhere in the middle.

One thing for sure there is a wide variety among all the top players--the question might be is there a difference when they are going for it--taking the offense or trying to finish. Think that is Robert's big point, that kids have to learn to drive the ball with as much pace as they can but still get the ball in the court and that lower trajectory is part of this.

Yes the lower trajectory with DJ and Fed was quite noticeable IMO as well. Not sure, but expect it was still higher than it looked on tv. You were there, so maybe you had a better position to judge and also, getting shot spot data could be excellent.

If he is talking about mid court ball attacking/finishing shots, well his 1-3' over the net would make lots of sense,
But then,
why would we be even talking on this, cause every even avg Jr player is doing this, right?
Does any coach on this forum have a kid in the top 20-30 in their state who not flatten it out some to finish?? I can't say I've seen that ever except from "out and out" pushers, which were usually newer players that were not in the mix yet.
On the other hand I often see players that tend to flatten too much, too early in points. Maybe it's a Cali thing hitting 10' high?? I just don't believe it's happening in the East. Anyone (even in the 10's) hitting 6-7' over the net ( 9-10' high)
is called a moon baller around here and it's scoffed at even as a mixed in tactic. It's never been taught as a rally ball in any of the academies where my children have trained (Everet, Macci, SDA, etc.... It's hard to even get them to hit a few of these at the BH side or when pulled out of court to recover, which I think can be very effective at times.

For me it's clear that he is talking about using the Landsdorp Drive in baseline rally shots building points, which I find very questionable. If he is talking about finishing, well that makes sense, but I don't see where everyone is not already doing that, except really rank beginners. Just one persons observations.