Have a Question for Me?

[emeralda]

Just to clarify:'
1."transfer of weight" can be linear or ANGULAR ( CIRCULAR)"
2.Open stance is promoted heavy by clay coaches/player.
One of reasons is that recovery is more important there than speed of a ball
3.In the case of faster surfaces players do use BOTH stances
depending how quick an incoming ball is
4.Robert Lansdorp teaches a square stance FIRST-
I will give u a link later

Thanks for 1,2 and 3. I'm not so sure about square stance first. I think that is a relic of the past. But I wont say too much more on that, it may be a whole new can of worms!

[uspta146749877]

A blit of clarification

You have been helpful. In fact, I have now looked further around the WEB and I don't think anyone can clearly show why forward linear momentum is so important. It is just that young players hear "transfer your weight into the ball" from TV and elswhere and this motivates me to dig deeper. And as I do I find it is more complex than I first suspected.

Just to clarify:'
1."transfer of weight" can be linear or ANGULAR ( CIRCULAR)"
2.Open stance is promoted heavy by clay coaches/player.
One of reasons is that recovery is more important there than speed of a ball
3.In the case of faster surfaces players do use BOTH stances
depending how quick an incoming ball is
4.Robert Lansdorp teaches a square stance FIRST-
I will give u a link later

[emeralda]

Linear Momentum

Sorry that you are disappointed by my answers

You have been helpful. In fact, I have now looked further around the WEB and I don't think anyone can clearly show why forward linear momentum is so important. It is just that young players hear "transfer your weight into the ball" from TV and elswhere and this motivates me to dig deeper. And as I do I find it is more complex than I first suspected.

[uspta146749877]

Sorry

OK, fair enough. Thanks also for all the references. I've been curious about this subject since my junior days where I survived with a less than average FH.

Sorry that you are disappointed by my answers

[emeralda]

Don,
Open stance is PREFERABLE for me because a QUICKER RECOVERY time
regards,
julian

OK, fair enough. Thanks also for all the references. I've been curious about this subject since my junior days where I survived with a less than average FH.

[uspta146749877]

Open stance is preferable

Julian,
Quotes from

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...d_Stances.html

"For the professional players, the actual racquet head velocity for the open stance was about 47mph. For the closed stance it was about 50mph"

"These are relatively small differences, about 5%. They were less than the error factor in the measurements..."

My enquiry may be unrealistic as I was considering a 'standard' topspin FH with time not a factor and then comparing stances from a purely technical perspective. Is there a preferred stance?
You have shown forward linear momentum is defined and described but if the racquet head speeds are as stated then the benefits of forward linear momentum may be over-stated.
Regards,
Don

Don,
Open stance is PREFERABLE for me because a QUICKER RECOVERY time
regards,
julian

[emeralda]

Don,
please see
a very simple quotation from Page 66 of the same book-
"Open stance forehands have been shown to have court coverage and other
tactical advantages"
I believe that recovery time for open stance is smaller.
See

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/footwork/michael_friedman/michael_friedman_hitting_stance_images/michael_friedman_hitting_stance.html

See as well

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/biomechanics/John_Yandell/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances.html

Speed numbers quoted above are twice higher than in the ITF book-
hard to understand why.Maybe JY knows why
See as well the middle part of Page 68 for comments related to your post
regards,
julian usptapro 27873

Julian,
Quotes from

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...d_Stances.html

"For the professional players, the actual racquet head velocity for the open stance was about 47mph. For the closed stance it was about 50mph"

"These are relatively small differences, about 5%. They were less than the error factor in the measurements..."

My enquiry may be unrealistic as I was considering a 'standard' topspin FH with time not a factor and then comparing stances from a purely technical perspective. Is there a preferred stance?
You have shown forward linear momentum is defined and described but if the racquet head speeds are as stated then the benefits of forward linear momentum may be over-stated.
Regards,
Don

[uspta146749877]

From the ITF book.
"...forward linear momentum is crucial in the development of racquet head speed"
"forward movement of the trunk increases the linear velocity of the shoulder and also helps in pre-stretching the shoulder musculature."
"...it appears square stance stokes can create slightly higher racquet head speeds" (about 1 m/s for professionals, 21.2m/s to 22.3m/s)

So forward linear momentum is crucial yet the increase in the racquet head speed is minimal and the authors do not make a definitive commitment to open or square stance.

Don,
please see
a very simple quotation from Page 66 of the same book-
"Open stance forehands have been shown to have court coverage and other
tactical advantages"
I believe that recovery time for open stance is smaller.
See

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/footwork/michael_friedman/michael_friedman_hitting_stance_images/michael_friedman_hitting_stance.html

See as well

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/biomechanics/John_Yandell/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances/Comparing_Open_Closed_Stances.html

See as well the middle part of Page 68 for comments related to your post
regards,
julian usptapro 27873

[emeralda]

From the ITF book.
"...forward linear momentum is crucial in the development of racquet head speed"
"forward movement of the trunk increases the linear velocity of the shoulder and also helps in pre-stretching the shoulder musculature."
"...it appears square stance stokes can create slightly higher racquet head speeds" (about 1 m/s for professionals, 21.2m/s to 22.3m/s)

So forward linear momentum is crucial yet the increase in the racquet head speed is minimal and the authors do not make a definitive commitment to open or square stance.

[uspta146749877]

Please stay in touch

Thanks for the additional comments. 'Biomechanical Principles of Tennis Technique' and the ITF book are accessible but I don't have yet.

Please stay in touch

[emeralda]

References

Thanks for the additional comments. 'Biomechanical Principles of Tennis Technique' and the ITF book are accessible but I don't have yet.

[uspta146749877]

A reference text

Thanks. First I need to check those references from the ITF book. Regards, Don

Any luck with a getting a reference text?

[johnyandell]

Like I said I wouldn't necessarily agree. The mind can easily have that type of effect. If he comes across a court where we're filming we can check.

[kvh2000]

coria

yeah John, I agree that it is probably a mental more than a technical thing, but in his latest match (on clay vs. schwank in stuttgart) he double faulted 19 times! (scores were 0-6,6-1,6-2).....there must be something technically wrong there as well....

kurt

[johnyandell]

Haven't seen him play much less filmed him since before that French Open final. I suspect though that you wouldn't see technical problems. I think the issues are probably mainly emotional for him. If he makes it in front of the camera somewhere where we are filming I'll take a look.