Interactive Forum November 2016: Angie Kerber Forehand

[klacr]

Could someone please comment on this:
It seems that 2 of the best immerging forehands in the game could possibly be Kerber and Jack sock. Both these players have unorthodox tecniques , that most academies would change in a heartbeat. As a corollary , the USTA or PTR would not have this in their Bible either. So does teaching mainstream tecnique hinder and handicap an emerging player or does tennis need mavericks who take a new approach but understand the laws of physics. It's awful boring to watch without the top 5. Who can turn the Circus into the cirque do soleil?

You bring up some good points. Speaking on behalf on USTA and USPTA, they do not have a teaching system and do not promote any particular style. USPTR does however insist on a specific style of teaching and mechanics as it is part of their training and certification.

What Kerber and Sock show are there are a multitude of styles and technical combinations that can be used, assuming many, if not all the key technical checkpoints are met and that the player stays within their natural style and personality. I think the key here is not to teach a player a style or technique that is labeled as a time period like traditional or modern, but instead show them timeless technique, swing fundamentals that have stood the test of time and let the player develop their own way. Long after Federer retires, players will still study and emulate his forehand and serve. It will no longer be modern, but it stands the test of time, as will the Sampras serve, the Murray and Djokovic backhands, etc etc. A world class player will make the technique with the caveat it falls within the key technical elements, but within those keys, there is still so much to work with and differences between each and every stroke on tour.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[johnyandell]

Let's just note that there are few players with "pure" atp backswings even at the top of the game. Rafa, Novak, Andy and Serena certainly aren't among them. There are many factors in a good or great forehand. Brian Gordon and Rick have what I think is an ideal backswing model but I think they have also helped to create an obsession.

[seano]

What I love about the work of Dr. Gordon and Rick Macci is 1) It's based in science 2) From a teaching perspective, it gives an "ideal" framework to work with. It cuts through all the BS being taught and hopefully will expedite the students learning curve and gives a clearer path for technique correction. As long as your able to follow the B.I.O.M.E.C. principles of bio-mechanics, it's a good thing.

[sjhara]

As “guest” mentioned some would have wanted to or might want to change Sock’s and Kerber’s forehand to conform closer to a model. But Sock’s incredibly flexible forehand would not work on a Kerber body type, playing style, or personality, just as her forehand would not work on Sock’s body type, style, or personality.
I do agree that strokes are not pure, but hybrids that athletes adapt to their bodies, playing styles, personalities, and goals. Andy Roddick’s serve is a function of the incredible flexibility of his shoulder joint, his personality, and his experimentation with moving a tennis ball built around core concepts and body moves, and the physics of the game.
So if and when we change things, at what point in development or season or career do we change, how much change are we looking for, is the player looking for, and how do we go about the change. And how much interference internally as well as externally will we coaches create in the process.

[johnyandell]

SJ,
Those are wise and considered comments!

[doctorhl]

SJ's comments justify the need for the U.S. to include tennis anthropometric data in a national data base to use to compare playing styles.

[stotty]

Let's just note that there are few players with "pure" atp backswings even at the top of the game. Rafa, Novak, Andy and Serena certainly aren't among them. There are many factors in a good or great forehand. Brian Gordon and Rick have what I think is an ideal backswing model but I think they have also helped to create an obsession.

Interesting point John raises about the "pure" ATP forehand. I am not sure quite what John means by "pure" but if it's hitting all the positions in exactly the same way Federer does, then the shot's unattainable for most of us. I wouldn't say teaching the shot is an obsession over here. Coaches here tend to teach an ATP only if the player is two thirds there already.

I was talking to a group of coaches last week who tend to think the shot area was mis-sold in one area, when Rick said the shot could be taught to 5-year-olds, or at least get things in the neighbourhood. It can't...and not even to 8 or 9-year-olds. It's a concept youngsters cannot possibly grasp and the positions are nye on impossible to set up with the very young. The best way forward with the diddy folk is to teach a compact-ish backswing and leave it at that, then see what happens further down the line. It's a great model, though, and the players who pull it off are rewarded.

Roger makes it easy to sell the stroke to kids when/if they are ready. Who wouldn't want to model their forehand on Roger?

Stotty

[stotty]

Here are couple of good ones up the line. It's my favourite shot of hers. You get a good view of how compact her forehand is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4If-wsXnL6w

Stotty

[stroke]

First of all, I totally enjoy watching Kerber play and am so impressed by her athletic court coverage and shot-making ability.
So for me the “issues” start with the hands-in a way, an imbalance in the hands that affects the way the stroke unfolds and that does not allow her to fully tap into her athletic movement.
I think the left hand is too active in the beginning move, and the right hand is too inactive, or not engaged enough, in this beginning move.
While I think Kerber’s forehand is certainly compact and possibly more “reliable”, this imbalance makes the entry into the slot smaller and somewhat cramped, and the extension through and release after the slot reduced. It also limits the extension of the right hand and arm across the body and interferes with the natural coiling and uncoiling that is more evident in the forehand of Justin Henin-Hardenne.
I also think there is what I would call a premature gripping and possible hardening of the hands which gives the sense of muscling. In Henin-Hardenne’s forehand there is a “searching” for her grip (see her finger activity in video of her forehand) which I think lends itself to a more flowing and less muscled movement.

Among women players, I also think Justine has been the closest to the Brian Gordon ATP forehand model. I do agree with John that this model can become too emcompassing in our thoughts. Roger's what appears to be gold standard efficient forehand is unmatched, most of us agree, but I do think Dimitrov is very, very close to Roger technique wise and he has not really made a run for top 5, so there is that. Tomic's forehand is high end efficient also, he hardly seems to expend any effort and seeing him play in person, he does way more with it than it appears on TV. John once called it an extreme version of the Brian Gordon Type 3 forehand.

[johnyandell]

Stroke,
Yep. And yep on Dimitrov.