Bent versus Straight Hitting Arms

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Pat Cash's newest article, "Bent versus Straight Hitting Arms"

[seano]

I guess the question is whether the body works better moving together (as a unit) or sequentially? Hopefully Brian will respond. Doesn't seem to be much data or science to back up his article. Just seems to be opinion supported by a simple example. I'll stick to Brian's comprehensive research. In teaching, you don't force a straight arm if they aren't capable but moving towards as straight as a student is comfortable, is the way to go.
Sean

[jeremy93]

I too would rather stick to the research (and my experience hitting and teaching) rather then one’s opinion.

[glacierguy]

I think the author may have confused that crane's elbow with its shoulder.

[stotty]

Well it's certainly great to get another point of view on the subject. We are endanger of becoming a bunch of disciples if we don't at least consider another knowledgeable person's viewpoint.

I cannot make my mind up whether bent is more stable than straight because my arm is straight (almost) and I can't suddenly become bent (to the point of being accomplished at least) to make an informed decision. When I try bent it does 'feel' more careful and secure...being closer to the body has a 'secure feeling' but maybe that is just illusional. Being straight does nothing for me as I use a continental grips and flip not one iota.

I used to think being bent was easier and better in terms of running round balls to hit forehands, but Rafa and Roger proved me wrong there...that's the danger of forming a non-scientific opinion I guess.

I teach what comes natural to the player and would never encourage straight if a player is naturally bent. I just get the impression that bent is easier for most players. It's easier to get all the ducks in a row with the shot.

But, yes, as always, it would be interesting to get BG's viewpoint...and JY's.

Nice article. Really enjoyed it.

[arturohernandez]

I agree but he states the following "Since I haven't seen any other top level coaches with an understanding of sports biomechanics explain this I'll do so in this two part article." I suppose this is technically accurate but BG and JY have been writing on this for a while. So, it is a bit surprising that Cash would write another article without referencing what has already been written. It is really an opinion piece. He doesn't offer much data to support his view.

Why does the double bend allow a more fluid stroke? It would have been nice for him to define this and quantify it a little bit.

The one thing I would agree about is that the double bend is not a "bad" forehand. Sampras had a great forehand and it was not straight arm.

It's another voice but BG has knowledge of biomechanics and has written about this too. I am also very curious about his take on this article.

[jeremy93]

It’s odd (to me) to have this article on this site as it seems to not support BG and JY research/articles. I would love to hear BG’s thoughts on this article (or JY)?

[stroke]

I agree but he states the following "Since I haven't seen any other top level coaches with an understanding of sports biomechanics explain this I'll do so in this two part article." I suppose this is technically accurate but BG and JY have been writing on this for a while. So, it is a bit surprising that Cash would write another article without referencing what has already been written. It is really an opinion piece. He doesn't offer much data to support his view.

Why does the double bend allow a more fluid stroke? It would have been nice for him to define this and quantify it a little bit.

The one thing I would agree about is that the double bend is not a "bad" forehand. Sampras had a great forehand and it was not straight arm.

It's another voice but BG has knowledge of biomechanics and has written about this too. I am also very curious about his take on this article.

Yes that statement about "haven't seen any coaches with biomechanic unperplexing explain this " was pexplexing.

[johnyandell]

I think it's important to have multiple viewpoints! Tennisplayer isn't an orthodoxy. Brian has said not everyone and in fact very few players can hit a straight arm forehand. It may be the ultimate and I don't for a second question Brian's research. But he himself has analyzed many bent arm pros in his articles here with great forehands.

I just think Pat has a good point. Remember he says that Rafa and Roger have some of the most powerful forehands ever. But the vast majority of top players have bent arms. And the mania among lower level players to try to hit straight arm just seems crazy. Go to some of the message boards. These guys will have terrible stroke flaws but if that arm is close to straight, that's world class!

When I first started high speed video filming there were literally no straight arm forehands at the top of the game with the exception of Mark Phillipoussis. When I work with players I am more concerned with coiling and extension and after working on these will examine the hitting arm. If players want to try for a straight arm I am up for the experiment but I never try to force it if the forehand looks good.

Anyway good to have discussion and stay tuned for part 2 from Pat.

[jeremy93]

I think it's important to have multiple viewpoints! Tennisplayer isn't an orthodoxy. Brian has said not everyone and in fact very few players can hit a straight arm forehand. It may be the ultimate and I don't for a second question Brian's research. But he himself has analyzed many bent arm pros in his articles here with great forehands.

I just think Pat has a good point. Remember he says that Rafa and Roger have some of the most powerful forehands ever. But the vast majority of top players have bent arms. And the mania among lower level players to try to hit straight arm just seems crazy. Go to some of the message boards. These guys will have terrible stroke flaws but if that arm is close to straight, that's world class!

When I first started high speed video filming there were literally no straight arm forehands at the top of the game with the exception of Mark Phillipoussis. When I work with players I am more concerned with coiling and extension and after working on these will examine the hitting arm. If players want to try for a straight arm I am up for the experiment but I never try to force it if the forehand looks good.

Anyway good to have discussion and stay tuned for part 2 from Pat.

Awesome, thanks John. IMO the fundamentals to the forehand are- Preparation, hip rotation and extension of the hitting arm out and up after contact. All of these things are poor in most rec players.

[glacierguy]

The article asserts that the reason a bent arm forehand is superior is:

"Because a bent arm forehand brings your contact point closer to your core which is a stronger, more balanced position. From here your body can twist, turn, tilt and adjust all at the same time without causing resistance in your kinetic chain. The result is a fluid, relaxed and stable forehand stroke that is less injury prone."

So why doesn't that work on the one-handed backhand?

[doctorhl]

Great article with a different viewpoint. I do wonder about injury rate being lower for the bent arm. I don’t think there is enough data to make an injury statement on either style. I also wonder about the differences the two styles have in the interaction of internal shoulder rotation with any unwanted forearm pronation.

[johnyandell]

Glacier,
Forehand is back shoulder driven. 1HBH is front shoulder driven.

[glacierguy]

You know what, I love Pat Cash - my idea of tennis is Cash v. Edberg AO 1987. That guy can volley. Whatever he says about forehands is OK with me, and I'm glad he's a contributor.

[johnyandell]

Yeah his volley articles are great.