Van Horn's "stroke" principle

[uspta4097294361]

I just read Welby Van Horn's first article regarding his teaching principles and was struck by how many of his principals I was taught by my childhood coach Chris Bovett in Houston. Van Horn mentions that "stroke" is the perfect word for tennis because it implies "feel" more than "hitting" the ball does. Bovett actually went a step further by calling his technique for developing feel, depth, and control, "placing and carrying". Anyone that took from Chris had to learn how to place and carry the ball. In summary, he wanted us to emphasize solid contact and a full follow through. So instead of hitting the ball, he wanted you to place the racquet on the ball, then carry it out with the follow through. It also struck me that Van Horn says people accused him of producing clones. Bovett actually heard that criticism all the time. I even had an opponent ask me mid match if I took lessons from Chris Bovett, and when I acknowledged it, be said "yeah I thought so". I have been teaching tennis for over 20 years now and have taught placing and carrying to thousands of people as well. I think it creates a very solid platform from which to build. I agree with Van Horn that players then develop their own unique style, but within the framework of correctness. I use a semi-western grip and a one handed backhand and had no problem integrating more modern stroke techniques into my game as the game changed over the years. Good on you to Welby for teaching sound fundamentals and not the flavor of the week technique, and thank you to Chris Bovett for also recognizing that solid technique is the foundation upon which good tennis games are built.
George Schuldberg,USPTA Austin, TX

[bottle]

I just read Welby Van Horn's first article regarding his teaching principles and was struck by how many of his principals I was taught by my childhood coach Chris Bovett in Houston. Van Horn mentions that "stroke" is the perfect word for tennis because it implies "feel" more than "hitting" the ball does. Bovett actually went a step further by calling his technique for developing feel, depth, and control, "placing and carrying". Anyone that took from Chris had to learn how to place and carry the ball. In summary, he wanted us to emphasize solid contact and a full follow through. So instead of hitting the ball, he wanted you to place the racquet on the ball, then carry it out with the follow through. It also struck me that Van Horn says people accused him of producing clones. Bovett actually heard that criticism all the time. I even had an opponent ask me mid match if I took lessons from Chris Bovett, and when I acknowledged it, be said "yeah I thought so". I have been teaching tennis for over 20 years now and have taught placing and carrying to thousands of people as well. I think it creates a very solid platform from which to build. I agree with Van Horn that players then develop their own unique style, but within the framework of correctness. I use a semi-western grip and a one handed backhand and had no problem integrating more modern stroke techniques into my game as the game changed over the years. Good on you to Welby for teaching sound fundamentals and not the flavor of the week technique, and thank you to Chris Bovett for also recognizing that solid technique is the foundation upon which good tennis games are built.
George Schuldberg,USPTA Austin, TX

To me this is one of the interesting ideas in tennis and I might add "no matter from whom it comes."

But I am also interested in forehands that don't seem to try to do this, that contain fast action on the wrong side of the contact according to this prescription, i.e., put too much fast action before the contact.

This has led me to a design in which the racket begins its forward motion with strings open as if to hit a lob.

The three-quarter length arm then rolls from the forearm as wrist lays back. Is this use of the wrist temporization? Half-mondo? Flip? All three?

Then and only then the elbow pushes out while rolling strings a bit more.

This method seems to both fill and not fill the prescription and is a sound while unusual stroke in my view.

[johnyandell]

George,
Sounds like Chris was a memorable influence. We are all lucky if we have those!

[tennis_chiro]

I haven't taught thousands, but I've taught a few... since 1968. I insist on certain elements being part of anyone's strokes. There's plenty of room for individual style, but certain principles have to be respected. To me, it is no surprise that Jack Sock could hit three double faults in a row in the second round of the US Open. I simply don't think a delivery with that kind of a backswing and toss can ever be consistent and reliable under pressure. Certainly, he is talented, but I don't think he will ever succeed, meaning make into the top 10 with that delivery. And then there is CC Bellis. I took an interest because I taped one of her matches against a player I worked with occasionally from my park; that was 3 1/2 years ago. At that point she needed serious work on her service motion, but she clearly had the ability to hit through the ball like few others. Well, after 3 1/2 years and a lot of work with USTA coaches, she has a motion which I believe will never deliver a world class delivery. I seriously am asking, can anyone point out for me a single top player who had a serve that includes the kind of drop of the dominant elbow in the backswing coming out of the trophy position that Bellis has. She should delay turning pro and devote at least 6 months to changing that habit. She'll be lucky to change it in 6 months, but as no one seems to even recognize it, I believe it is going to be baked into the constitution of her game if no one addresses it right now. It's like trying to serve like a shot-putter instead of a thrower and it will never be world class, especially for someone who is not a giant relative to her peers.

don

[hockeyscout]

I haven't taught thousands, but I've taught a few... since 1968. I insist on certain elements being part of anyone's strokes. There's plenty of room for individual style, but certain principles have to be respected. To me, it is no surprise that Jack Sock could hit three double faults in a row in the second round of the US Open. I simply don't think a delivery with that kind of a backswing and toss can ever be consistent and reliable under pressure. Certainly, he is talented, but I don't think he will ever succeed, meaning make into the top 10 with that delivery. And then there is CC Bellis. I took an interest because I taped one of her matches against a player I worked with occasionally from my park; that was 3 1/2 years ago. At that point she needed serious work on her service motion, but she clearly had the ability to hit through the ball like few others. Well, after 3 1/2 years and a lot of work with USTA coaches, she has a motion which I believe will never deliver a world class delivery. I seriously am asking, can anyone point out for me a single top player who had a serve that includes the kind of drop of the dominant elbow in the backswing coming out of the trophy position that Bellis has. She should delay turning pro and devote at least 6 months to changing that habit. She'll be lucky to change it in 6 months, but as no one seems to even recognize it, I believe it is going to be baked into the constitution of her game if no one addresses it right now. It's like trying to serve like a shot-putter instead of a thrower and it will never be world class, especially for someone who is not a giant relative to her peers.

don

None of us really know the issues Bellis or Sock physically.

They just may not be able to do what the better servers do.

Teaching someone that does not have a live arm or hand-eye is a tough road to climb.

Expecting someone to serve great, or get into certain positions isn't going to work if you don't have a double joint like Sampras, extreme wrist mobility and strength like Federer or quick twitch muscle fibers like Tanner.

In 99 percent of the case's a tennis coach would never be of much assistance to them, as they need someone to set up a neurological chain first and foremost to eliminate all the hitches.

I got a kid I work with now and his dad is a pro sports play announcer, and has had a lot of people work with his son. Every fitness and power skating coach has given him workout programs, and he's had access to a lot of them. He's learned the hands and shooting, but, feet are an issue. His speed has never increased, and nothing is working for him. The deal with his kid is nothing will help whatsoever until he learns to dorsiflex, increase ankle mobility, learn how to drop his hips to contact into the correct slot, stop living off his quads, get comfortable falling into the ground, widen his base, stop caving in, understand how to sequentially activate his chain below the waist, etc. The kid has bought right into this, and so have his trainers who are noticing a major difference in his movement. Coaches often times don't have the time to walk a kid through painstaking things like working on moving toes correctly, so, they kind of welcome guys like me who do what I do. In tennis, I am not sure coaches see the correlation, and many of them think they can pound ahead and fix technique issues through hitting a ball. If an athlete can't reach a checkpoint there is always a reason, and cause, and 99 percent of the time its athletic based. Basically, I am rehabilitating 10 plus years of wrong movement sequencing. It's a lot of set-up work that needs to be done, and when it is done he will have more continuity of momentum, his body will stop buckling and he will understand where his joints need to be in order to activate every small muscle group proficiently. The good news with the kid is he has a real feel for the game of hockey, and has a superlative set of hands and a heavy shot. When he is properly activated, and his body is working correctly as a unit I THINK he will be a professional.

I've also helped the kid clean up his diet, and I have him tea, minerals and digestive enzymes, as that is a big key in development (the better the food, the more easy it is to adapt, learn and think).

tennis_chiro, miss you posting here. You dropped out of site for a bit?

[hockeyscout]

[bottle]

Hopefully it's not rude of me to try to take this discussion back to a forehand "placing and carrying" of uspta4097294361's original post.

I'm very sure that if hockeyscout and I were sitting face to face-- over a beer of course-- we would disagree on the role of big body movement vs. racket work.

Because I am still in love with the title of an old tennis book: RACQUET WORK: THE KEY TO TENNIS by John M. Barnaby. Forget the contents although these are plenty good too. Go with the precious surface of things, I'm saying, and accept or don't accept the title.

hockeyscout, I've gathered from previous posts, thinks that if big body movement is correct, the racket work will adjust, and I think just the opposite, i.e., start from correct racket work and wait for big body to adjust.

So, from my new forehand, my Katoui, I want to take still one more step to a new streetcar, another stroke which I haven't even tried yet in self-feed or any other mode.

All I'm doing is putting different elements of forward racket work in slightly different places within the micro-sequence.

So, starting from the Katoui, a stroke that despite being new worked well in two matches over the weekend, I now keep the wrist straight as forearm brings racket around with elbow held back.

Mondo now happens during the elbow push-lift-- a BAM which embraces all contact with the ball.

The racket gives, in other words, an idea espoused and seen as good in one of the books by the stringers Lindsey and Cross even though they were describing and illustrating a supposed forehand of Roger Federer and I think most likely they were far from the truth.

Well, I'm nevertheless willing to give this mondo-as-give idea a try.

Have no idea whether I will like this pattern more or less than that of the Katoui.

[hockeyscout]

The racket, stick, bat - to me it's meaningless and of zero importance. Your central nervous system is guiding it. It (the racket, stick, bat, etc) can do spectacular things if the body is set up correctly and positioned to do it. Trainers all over the world are now just starting to figure this stuff out. Its an interesting time in athletic development.

[don_budge]

The racket, stick, bat - to me it's meaningless and of zero importance. Your central nervous system is guiding it. It (the racket, stick, bat, etc) can do spectacular things if the body is set up correctly and positioned to do it. Trainers all over the world are now just starting to figure this stuff out. Its an interesting time in athletic development.

...golf club.

[bottle]

But you must have some idea of what you want the bat to do. Go through the ball, go at right angles to body weight travel-- those are two very different choices. What decides? The body?

[hockeyscout]

But you must have some idea of what you want the bat to do. Go through the ball, go at right angles to body weight travel-- those are two very different choices. What decides? The body?

Why not try focusing on your hips, collarbone placement, engagement of your feet etc, and see what happens with your racket head?

Right now I am working with a hockey player on his shot. Coaches want him to extend. He can't. They are frustrated. I understand why. Right now they will try anything to fix the issue. Guys like me I guess. I am teaching him to properly drop his hip to contact, and kick his foot back while not letting his chest fly away from him. And, he will get more extension on his shot to the net as a result. His coaches are seeing it. They are dumbfounded an athlete can get better by NOT shooting the puck. So, he's doing pool work activations and we're working on opening up his hips. I can't even think about putting the kid on land cause he's not ready for it. His issues shooting have nothing to do with shooting (which is out in front) - it's what's happening on the opposite side which is his issue (the backend). This is just one case. All this kind of stuff applies to every sport - you just have to know how to apply it. You get there if you keep hammering away at it. This athlete in particular has many issues, and I am doing a lot more to solve these issues than I am stating, but, anyways, you get the idea.

[bottle]

I'll try anything with the bod and probably have. It's just when one is pretty sure that there are new things not commonly explored having to do with the hands, wrist, forearm, upper arm that one ought to put one's attention in that area.

Then, when one has assembled the new ideas into some kind of workable form, one will begin to play. And maybe the time when one steps out will be a little different, but one will be better off to let the bod decide that one. And whatever bod thing that comes immediately afterward.

I just think that one needs to use one's bean to design new racket work and then to modify it. But I certainly don't think experiments about hip height, etc., should be ignored. They are just different aspects of the same cycle of stroke.