Have a Question for Me?

[John Yandell]

Look at this and tell me what you think:

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/elena-dementieva/

But then:

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/elena-dementieva/

Here's probably closer again to the norm--although maybe a bent bent could be further back:

https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/novak-djokovic/

[stotty]

Thanks, John. Well, those clips are an eye-opener. The contact point on all three is in front of the body, and the hips are opening right up on the contact point. I think this is where I am going wrong when i teach the stroke because I get kids to stay more 'clued' in their stance, which locks them up rather.

I tried it today with my son and it worked quite well.

I feel coaches have to teach the open stance b/h early in a child's development or they won't take to it. There seems to be a lot of skill and balance to the shot and it takes some learning.

We are very behind here in the UK...no coaches teach this shot.

Thanks again JY

[John Yandell]

Great to hear. This is exactly how Tennisplayer is supposed to work. Love it.

[don_budge]

Just a couple of questions...JohnY

John...

Please grant me the privilege of posing a couple of questions to you.

1 In your opinion what are the factors that have contributed to the decline in American tennis?

Question no. 1 in a series of 6.

[John Yandell]

DB,

I don't know if it's possible to say definitively. The one fact is that, for whatever reason, no Americans have emerged with the pure talent to play in the top 5. That's a god given thing. You can't turn a pig's ear into, etc etc.
Not to say Isner and Querry aren't unbelievable compared to the 6 billion people on the planet. But look at the very few who make the top ten. Those that do tend to stay for years. So this is very very small number of players.

A lot of discussion goes into coaching, USTA, etc etc. Is it possible that the next great child was repressed, driven from tennis, taught the wrong grip, etc etc? I guess but again I think players like AA, Pete, Mac, Connors, those guys were destined to emerge. None of them were developed thru the USTA. So the USTA can't be "failing" to continue to produce what it never did produce. Could it be the start of a new source of players--sure. But again the best coaching in the world can only make a player as great as his potential.

Is that we aren't attracting great athletes to tennis? Again, maybe, and maybe it will take more NBA style athletes in the future. Possibly more could be done there and Quick Start may do that.

Personally I don't care if the best players are American to be honest. I just like to study the best players.

John Yandell

[don_budge]

Just a couple of questions...JohnY

John...

Interesting answer...thank you. Question no. 2...

2 In your opinion do you think that somehow the importance of the serve is currently being overlooked in professional tennis?

Question no. 2 in a series of 6.

[John Yandell]

Jesus, 5 more questions?

"Somehow" is the serve being ignored? Not sure about the blanket statement there. Maybe you've been looking at it more closely than I have.

The one thing that is apparent to me is that despite the incredible velocity, a 120mph serve to the right spot is still an ace. Fed proved that at the top. His serve was much more of a weapon in the true sense than say Roddick.

You have to think from a distance too that with the talent in the game someone could serve more like Pete and hit those 120mph kicks and get in at least sometimes. But read the copoly article for an interesting view.

The women's game is something else. As I have written it will be very interesting to see if any more of the top women move toward the men's model like Henin and Stosur. Based on my experience this isn't going to occur though thru the receptiveness of the tour coaches or players with a guy like Craig Kardon being an exception.

[don_budge]

Just a couple of questions...JohnY

John...

Two down, only four to go. Thank you for your answer. Question no. 3.

What do you think of the depth of professional tennis as compared with 1973, for example? The classic era vs. the modern era.


Question no. 3 in a series of 6.

[John Yandell]

Uh, who were the top 10 in 1973?

[don_budge]

Before your time?

Sorry...this may of been before your time. You must be a bit younger than I. Here's the top 100 from 1973 and 2011.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx?d=23.08.1973&c=&r=1#

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx?d=16.05.2011&c=&r=1#

[John Yandell]

Well, it's not before my time but I am not a stats guy.

I saw all those guys play.

It was the days of wood. Stan Smith was #3. That says a lot. Obviously Stan was great. Could kill 99.9999 of all players today, but simply was not in my opinion an athlete at the level of the top players of today. If you are related to him, please do not share this.

But seriously I don't think you can compare eras easily. Maybe in terms of achievement but not ability.

A young Connors was #10. But you have to wonder if with the modern equipment even his incredible game would still work. Did you hear what Agassi said? It's a different game today even from his era.

When I see Gonzalez move or even Budge, I think that maybe those guys would adapt and hold their own. But in general no. It's like most sports--the level progresses with time. For a different view go read Ed Atkinson's pieces in the history section.

[don_budge]

Just a couple of questions...JohnY

John...

Good points...well played. Thank you. Question #4...

Who are the coaches, teachers and players that have contributed the most to your teaching model?

Question no. 4 of 6.

[John Yandell]

What's your plan with all this info?

[don_budge]

No plan...no agenda, just curious.

John...

I have no plans. Your thread is entitled "Have a question for me?" and I had six questions just off the top of my head. Originally I asked all six questions in one post...but I decided to ask each individually, so I guess I was using a bit of an interview technique. I thought that might be interesting and entertaining but I only seem to be succeeding in annoying you. I was sincerely curious about what your views were on some things with regard to tennis and I was hoping that you might expound on your thoughts a bit. I thought they were interesting questions. I think you must be an interesting guy with some interesting things to say. Do you see where I was going with it?

But you seem to be suspicious of my motivation...so please forget I asked. Excuse me. Thanks for the great website and the interesting forum that is great fun to participate in!

[John Yandell]

Not annoyed just curious. If you want to ask the rest feel free.