Have a Question for Me?

[stotty]

Role of the wrist

You don't ask a controversial question, now do you? I have spent way too much time arguing about this on the TW boards, looking at video, learning from Brian Gordon...

BUT the answer is not simple. The myth of the wrist article made the point--still correct--that the huge majority of forehands are hit with the wrist laid back. But some of the extreme grip forehands are hit with neutral wrists--though not all--and my continued video analysis shows the amount of lay back also varies from shot to shot. An inside out forehand--most lay back. A short crosscourt, closer to neutral.

So what then? If I understand Brian G., the motion of the wrist is like a hinge. As the racket pivots this motion adds racket speed due to centripetal force. But also if I understand Brian, the actual muscle activity of players is not a forward flex that makes this happen. In fact the players are actually contracting against this flex to slow it down.

Why? To orient the racket at the right angle for the shot line at contact. Confused yet?

I think that keeping the wrist back all the way through the swing is the simplest way for lower level players to develop a forehand. But if the arm is relaxed and the wrist releases the right amount at the right time, it probably does add racket speed--but not from the conscious effort to snap.

The wrist should be a passive hinge which may or may not add some power to the shot; the primary role is to control the shot, not to power it.

don

Points taken and understood. I skipped over to the ATP 3 article by Brian Gordon and states this:

Yes, the motion of the wrist joint is bringing the racquet head around, and yes this is contributing to racquet head speed in a significant way. But is this the result of the player’s decision to forcibly "snap" the wrist forward?

The answer appears to be no and this is one of the surprising result of our 3D research. There is no conscious forward wrist snap. - Brian Gordon.

And yes this is where tennis gets complicated...biomechanics. Probably too complicated for Stotty but I like to have a go at improving my understanding all the same.

[tennis_chiro]

The wrist should be a passive hinge which may or may not add some power to the shot; the primary role is to control the shot, not to power it.

don

[John Yandell]

You don't ask a controversial question, now do you? I have spent way too much time arguing about this on the TW boards, looking at video, learning from Brian Gordon...

BUT the answer is not simple. The myth of the wrist article made the point--still correct--that the huge majority of forehands are hit with the wrist laid back. But some of the extreme grip forehands are hit with neutral wrists--though not all--and my continued video analysis shows the amount of lay back also varies from shot to shot. An inside out forehand--most lay back. A short crosscourt, closer to neutral.

So what then? If I understand Brian G., the motion of the wrist is like a hinge. As the racket pivots this motion adds racket speed due to centripetal force. But also if I understand Brian, the actual muscle activity of players is not a forward flex that makes this happen. In fact the players are actually contracting against this flex to slow it down.

Why? To orient the racket at the right angle for the shot line at contact. Confused yet?

I think that keeping the wrist back all the way through the swing is the simplest way for lower level players to develop a forehand. But if the arm is relaxed and the wrist releases the right amount at the right time, it probably does add racket speed--but not from the conscious effort to snap.

[stotty]

I was reading this article and get what it is saying.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/articles/

I guess someone like McEnroe backs the article up in a way because he has virtually no wrist lay back and as such his shots appear wristless. That said, he is unique and has exceptional timing...he's very gifted after all. No one else has ever done this since, and when I try (persevered for weeks) I get no power at all.

Are we sure the wrist isn't responsible for any power?

[John Yandell]

https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...dern-forehand/

https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...rehand-part-2/

Yeah it's interesting. I have seen and filmed Brian's and Rick's juniors. Those kids hit it great. But it's a long way from being pretty good in the Florida juniors to number one in the world and the talent part is something those guys (and everyone else) can't coach.

I bet however that we will start to see it eventually on the tour. Is it ultimately superior? Will it become dominant? Can't answer those.

[stotty]

Wait a minute. How could I forget this!

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin...ead.php?t=2075

Yes, she hits one fully straight; the rest mildly bent. Online there are matches where she appears mostly bent (though the bend isn't as pronounced as most women).

It's strange women women tend to have less advanced mechanics than men (and not just on the forehand) and yet BG and Macci tell us these things aren't strength related...doesn't make sense in some ways.

And where is the article about the grips? You know the numbered bevels, etc....can't find it?

[John Yandell]

Wait a minute. How could I forget this!

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=2075

[stotty]

Stosur, but we don't have her up, yet. It's a good question! And the bigger question, why? Brian Gordon has some teenage girls that smoke it.

Interesting. I don't think it is ATP 3 related because I use a straight arm forehand and am not ATP 3. It might take some explaining...

[John Yandell]

Stosur, but we don't have her up, yet. It's a good question! And the bigger question, why? Brian Gordon has some teenage girls that smoke it.

[stotty]

Women with straight arm forehands

This may seem a daft question because I don't follow women's tennis all that much. Are there any women who use a straight arm forehand or are they all double bend? The archive seems loaded with double benders.

[John Yandell]

Great. Will look forward to it.

[stotty]

Good question...I have no idea. Send me some other clips of this if you can find them.

Of the oldies there is just what's in the archive. But Nastase, Newcombe, Roche all take the racket out way to the right fairly soon after the swing commences. All the lateral pinpoints seem to do it. That said, so does David Ferrer...and his back foot starts way left of the front one before going to pinpoint.

I'll check out the entire archive and post the results. Might take a week or two.

I am going to call a modern server one who has the toe of back foot inline with the heel of the front foot or beyond. Most oldies are one foot directly behind the other.

[John Yandell]

Good question...I have no idea. Send me some other clips of this if you can find them.

[stotty]

Associated technique question...

I notice from the archive that the oldies who have lateral pinpoint stances take the racket off significantly to the right (left for a lefty) as they commence the swing.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/rod-laver/

Is this an associated technique (where's Doug when you need him!) or is it just coincidental to the serves in the archive?

Federer and others with platform stances tend not to do this, or at least not so acutely. Is this because taking the racket off to the outside of the body doesn't suit the stance as much?

I really need to look at Tsonga's serve so hurry and fix those clips...

[John Yandell]

Working on Lindsay but notice the approach sequences are working which probably includes most of the (few) volleys we have for her.