Thanks for Doug King's intriguing article about the role of the wrist in the serve. You solved a mystery that attacked me when I watched several matches of Stefan Edberg on youtube. I thought: 'What is Stefan doing with his backswing? It looks so weird.'
But as you see, he does EXACTLY at the beginning of his serve what you describe in your video. The side of the racket he is going to hit with, is pointing up, then sideways, and reaches to 'ready to throw'-phase in a total different way than you would imagine. He is supinating his wrist! And we all know what tremendous spin Stefan put on his ball.
That is a wonderful clip of Edberg. Thank you for that. You can clearly see how supinated the wrist is (much like Raonic, who might be even more exaggerated, at least at the start). Edberg had such an amazing kick on his serve, which he would follow up with such blanketing presence at the net, and then perfectly placed volleys. What a challenge to try to break him for even the best of returners. Thanks also for the nice comments. I look forward to your next piece in TennisOne.
All the best,
I found the article (Forearm lag and double bend) and Coach Smith's instructional videos to be very helpful. I have been struggling to develop a consistent forehand — especially against harder hitting opponents - and was able to identify several corrections from the articles and videos to work on that had not connected with me mentally from other sources.
I had been trying to incorporate a loose wrist and snap or rolling of the wrist that was giving me all kinds of control and consistency problems.
I am also trying to develop a shorter back swing which seems to be more likely to come from the type of stroke explained by Dave — which seems to keep the elbow in close to the body rather than by straighten the arm on the backswing and through the shot.
Thank you for the note and sharing your insights to hitting your own forehand better.
Yes, keeping things simple within the execution of any stroke will help create a more reliable and repeatable swing pattern. As with your forehand, extraneous movements will not only detract from consistency, but as you play opponents who hit harder shots, you will indeed find yourself struggle to get the ball back in play--let alone hit some effective shot yourself.
Examine the many video clips found here at TennisOne and you should start to recognize the commonalities of the top forehands. These forehands are not unreachable. It is just a matter of recognizing what they are doing, emulating the movements with some level of accuracy of motion, and then drill the stroke so it becomes automatic and the timing and rhythm become natural.
Thanks again for writing!
David W. Smith
Senior Editor, TennisOne
Enjoyed Doug King’s volley video. What is he using (recommending) for grip pressure? Sometimes it looked very firm, sometimes it looked much softer. Thanks!
First let me express my thanks for your comments. In regard to your question about grip pressure on the volley, the timing and application of pressure through the hand will vary greatly with the type of ball that is being played. The grip should always be quite relaxed coming into contact (almost as though you are going to play a drop volley) and then just before contact pressure will be applied in different ways. If pressure is applied more forcefully (tighter) on contact, the racquet will accelerate more quickly and the ball with shoot off the racquet faster and with more pace. The subsequent drive or “hold” on the ball will be shorter (less extension to the target and “follow through”).
Going into contact, if the pressure is applied more gradually and somewhat lighter, the ball will tend to push back on the racquet more and therefore will have less spring off of the racquet. This will give the ability to drive or guide the ball a bit more and in many cases this will be evidenced with a bit more extension towards the target, or a longer follow-through.
I hope that helps.
Again, thanks for writing,
Just read David Smiths article on The Two-handed Forehand Revisited.
Even though I'm sure he knows more about tennis than I do I am still not entirely convinced about this as she doesn't hit anywhere near as well as she was with the 2 handed forehand.
My daughter is 3 and because she is so small and her racquet was a little big for her I taught her to hold the racquet with 2 hands. I didn't really give any more thought to this as at the time it seemed logical and she seemed to do it well. She has just started taking 1/2 hour tennis lessons each week on top of time I spend with her practicing at home.
I noticed at her last 2 tennis lessons the coach has got her hitting with 1 hand.
I asked the coach about this and he said that the double handed forehand is too restrictive and not too many top players do well using it.
Should I just let him get on with the job or ask him to go back to teaching her using the double handed forehand?
I have attached a link to a very short video. If you have a moment could you please take a look at it.
Thank you for sending me your questions and video of your daughter hitting tennis balls, (and enjoying it!)
At 3, it isn't too early to develop the fundamental swing pattern as long as she enjoys the short sessions. (I only spent no more than 5 min every few days developing my daughter's swing when she was about 5.)
Please be sure to look at my series, "Training an 8-Year Old" on TennisOne as it will give you many drills, progressions and tools to use with your own daughter. Also, if you don't have my book, Coaching Mastery, this would be an excellent guide for all the progressions, drills, and variations that would help you. (available at all Barnes and Noble stores, Amazon, and TennisWarehouse.com as well as Synergy-books.com.)
Ask your pro if the two-handed forehand was so restrictive, why did Marion Bartoli win Wimbledon this past year? Obviously, it CAN be taken to the highest levels, and there are several other top players using a two handed forehand. (Peng Shaui, Akiko Morigami, and a number of others.)
Even if later, (and I'm talking ten or twelve years later), your daughter, after learning the two-handed forehand, wanted to switch, it is very easy to do...and, the two-hander helps kids (and adults), learn to move better, shorten their backswing naturally, create a repeatable reliable swing path much faster, and hit with better topspin with consistency.
For your daughter, I suggest two quick things I noticed: try to have her keep her front foot down during the follow-through; also, have her switch her hands to make it a true two-handed forehand. (Instead of a left-handed backhand as she is doing now.)
Finally, have her keep her left elbow in near her body and let the right arm extend out and then over her shoulder.
If you do these things, she will have a solid foundation with her natural coordination. I hope this helps. Please keep me posted on her development over the next couple years!
Senior Editor, TennisOne
Just my few (annual) words of feedback thanking Dave for his sound advice on progressing your tennis to higher levels in a structured manner. The big question about online learning (and I have followed a few of your online courses) is can you improve without being followed by a regular pro.
The answer I think is yes, but the two key parameters are perseverance and time. Take my serve. I've followed advice from Jeff, Jim and Doug for 2 years. A year ago I despaired about making a difference, then about 3 months ago, Doug's advice just kicked in. I must have doubled my service speeds, lot more slice, spin and kick is the next challenge. I'm 69.
With a full time coach (like you guys) I could have done this in a few months. Online, trying to fit this into my 3 times a week match sessions, you need to be persistent, forget about winning as the first goal, and give yourself 2/3 years.
You know I'm not sure the local coaches appreciate my telling them what I want them to do (based upon your techniques). I see that your tuition is a lot more analytical and profound..and I play in Justine's club over here.
Take the concept of split step. I have never heard a coach say this ( in French) over here over 20 years. I watched a young coach training
a talented 8 year old at the club last night. He made this kid go through the motions of standstill to hitting the ball over 20 times. Never a mention of split, just an OK when he got the ball back hard and firm.
Anyway, good luck to you all. One of these days I'll come back and ask you if the online tennis training business model is a success — I can see that you have huge investments in website, video recording and promotion. But does it pay?
Thank you for taking the time to share feedback on our programs as well as how you personally have gained from each.
While every teaching pro is different and has a different skills-set based on diversity of experience, training, and education, I believe that each pro is working towards what they feel is in their student's best interest. Unfortunately, there are some pros who are either ignorant or stubborn in their openness to learn more from others or even take the time to attend lectures, read books or study what others are saying within resources such as TennisOne.com and other on-line formats.
Because of this, we see limitations in many pros; I've seen many examples of this within my 40 years of teaching tennis. Many pros, because of these self-imposed limitations, can only teach within a certain, limited skill-set...much like a used car salesman who only has a limited number of cars to sell on a lot: they will tell you only what will help them sell their car…not necessarily what the consumer wants or needs.
With the power of the programs that are now available through TennisOne.com, (and yes, we are heavily invested in creating the most useful, informative, and cutting-edge methodology that can be helpful to all who partake!), you can take so much information into your lessons, clinics or workshops, and evaluate what the teaching pro is telling you. You can question some advice and get much more pertinent feedback from the pro because he or she will know more of what you understand. Also, it can help you determine if a pro is worth his or her fees! It is like going to the car dealership with all the car-facts before the salesman starts his spiel!
Regardless of whether our programs "pay" for themselves, the goal of TennisOne and all of our staff writers, is to help individuals just like yourself, reach a far greater level of understanding. Personally, I know that individuals most often fail to reach their potential not because of a so-called lack of athleticism, but a lack of true understanding. Because tennis balls can be hit a multitude of ways over a net, there can be a misleading sense of progress when a player successfully makes the ball go over the net. Most of the ways a player can indeed hit the ball over the net will generally stagnate a player at lower levels once they want to increase the effect, gain more consistency, or defend more effective shots by opponents. Thus, if the way I first hit a successful shot is not conducive to becoming a more "skilled player", then that success is faulty in terms of being a stepping stone to more prolific play. In other words, you will indeed have to 'change' your methods at some point…and this is difficult.
You mentioned it took you a year or more before you grasped the information and translated that into more successful serves. You are the exception as many players would give up on the necessary patience to master a new method or technique. However, as you have found, there are indeed BETTER ways to execute shots, ways that will give you the ability to reach higher skill levels and competitive play.
I hope your success will inspire others to stay with their goals; persistence does indeed pay off IF players will take the time to understand what they are trying to achieve, and work hard towards that goal. And at TennisOne.com, we are here to help provide the foundation of understanding ALL the principles related to achieving those goals.
Thanks again, Terry, for writing and sharing your thoughts.
David W. Smith
Senior Editor, TennisOne.com
I met Maureen Connolly in 1964 or 65 when I was 10 or 11. She came to the St. Petersburg Tennis Club to give a clinic for Wilson Sporting Goods. Jack Staton, the many time national age group champion and Florida Wilson rep. was the host for the event. She mainly talked about tennis and demonstrated strokes. I remember her saying that it didn't matter much what you did on the back swing, but that you needed to swing through the strike zone or hitting area. I was fortunate and honored to have been allowed to hit with her one on one for a minute. In our last rally I hit a ball and rushed the net and put away a volley, which she probably fed right to me. The spectators watching had a laugh seeing this little boy hit against her like I did. I'll never forget that day.
Thanks Lil Mo!
Just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed your well-written TennisOne appreciation piece, "Remembering 'Mo' -- First Woman's Grand Slam Champion." Regarding the ignorance and apathy of some young players, I suggest the USTA give leading juniors the history book, We HAVE Come A Long Way by Billie Jean King.
Excellent Article on "Little Mo".
It is unfortunate concerning the history of our game and industry, that many do not recognize or at times respect the efforts of those who went before us to build our great sport into what it is today.
More articles such as this one need to be published in our current mode of communications for younger members of our sport. They need to be exposed and educated on the efforts of the icons of tennis to gain from their history how they contributed to the popularity and growth of the game. This can be said not only of players, but past volunteers and administrators of the game as well.
Due to my age I have been aware for a number of years. However, Your detailed account of her (Maureen Connolly) amazing career touched me deeply. Thanks for bringing her to life once again.
Thank you for your article on Little Mo. I did not know she had won 18 slam titles by the age of 19 and I am somewhat a student of the game.
this brings me to something that has bothered me for a long time. Our national tennis center is the Billie Jean King tennis Center. Our court there is the Louie Armstrong court. If you go to the Aussie open you see the names of their greatest champions: their grand slam winners, Rod Laver and Margaret Court, dominating the venue. It bothers me that here in the USA that the USTA does not celebrate our greatest champions. LIttle MO and Don Budge with their grand slams and Connors, with the most pro titles of any man are side bars at the best in Flushing, NY. Maybe if the USTA respected and celebrated excellence and winning more instead of "causes" we would not be sinking further and further into tennis mediocrity.
I agree the odds favor Nadal and Djokovic. And I do agree that Federer will have a hard time winning as he does not get a day off between matches. But I would not entirely count him out because there is no smarter player out there and if the stars line up for him, and he plays flawlessly in the final who know. His chances are better against Nole then Nadal. I don't think he believes he can beat Nadal.
I would love to see Del Potro win. We need a new player in the mix and he has everything it takes to be number one.
There is no one else in the field who poses a threat (Is Murray skipping the tournament?).
As for the odd winners such as Corretja in 1998 and Kuerten in 2000 they played brilliantly. Kuerten was a great player. He beat Agassi who said Kuerten was hitting balls so deep he couldn't return them. Kuerten was an underrated player. As for Corretja, he also played well. And if there wasn't a fifth set tiebreaker at the U.S. Open he would have beaten Sampras as Sampras couldn't have gone on.
David L. Levine
Thanks for your email. I always thought Kuerten had a lot of game as well (what a backhand he had!). The surprising thing -and this applies for Corretja too -was his being able to put it together to win an event of that magnitude on such a fast surface against players like Agassi and Sampras, when most of his successes by far came on clay. That said, he did win Cincinnati the following year, so it was clearly no fluke.
I'd say though, that anyone other than Djokovic, Nadal or Federer winning on Monday would be greater surprise.
I scanned your newsletter below but didn't find what I believe is the root cause of tennis players competing at older ages. My answer is MONEY. The prize monies are much greater than in the days of the past players you mentioned. With larger pay-outs now, the players who are currently winning the tournaments have the incentive to keep playing and use some of their money for coaches, trainers, etc., so they can keep on winning. It's somewhat like other businesses — the rich get richer. I don't think that is bad, but just a fact that goes a long way to answer the question you asked. Professional players in other sports (football, baseball, basketball, hockey and more) are also playing longer than previously for the same root cause.
J. T. Madell
Interesting observation, however, I don't believe money alone can explain this phenomenon. After all, the younger players get the same prize money if they win.
Can any one player or coach be credited for each stroke innovation? The two handed backhand, the pronation serve, the swinging volley, the jump forehand and backhand, squaring up move and other footwork patterns, open stance, buggy whip forehand etc etc.
It will be interesting to know who were the original players who started using these techniques and where and who taught them.
Good question, not sure there is a clear answer here. Certainly Michael Chang was one of the first to make use of the jump two-handed backhand, but was he first? Hard to say.