In my opinion the type of forehand also depends on who you are playing and the court you are playing on. High bounce courts or players hitting a lot of topspin you would do well with a more modern out in front style. For low bounce a traditional swing would be better.
Thanks Julian for your comments and contribution to the video. Yes, these variable do factor in, but I don't think most players can change grips depending on opponent's style or court conditions...that is quite advanced. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis do you think traditional grip is better for seniors? I’m torn between traditional and modern. Lots of seniors I play in tournaments 65+ age use traditional and single backhand. I’d like to move to double backhand and modern forehand. Am I trying too hard!
Without seeing your game, I can't give you a meaningful answer. I appreciate your desire to continue improving. Keep in mind that modern forehands and two-handed backhands will be more difficult to execute as you age. Are you competitive now in the 65's? Perhaps we can schedule a zoom lesson, or you can send in a video for me to review...let me know your thoughts. Thanks, John @@Ormsby504
Yes, probably the best plan unless there is some compelling reason to change. Keep up the great practice and reach out if you have questions. Best, John @@Ormsby504
Classic forehand you need early preparation for that loopy take back, while modern forehand you are afforded more time with the compact take back, but have to be precise with the timing. I feel like I can get more pop with the modern forehand compared to classic, but the classic is more simple with a more consistent swing compared to modern which can be prone to more unforced errors if the timing is off. With classic I can control the depth of the ball easier and more predictable compared to using modern where sometimes I’ll hit the ball shorter than what I was aiming for.
Agree John. On some really bad days, I have to turn my mind off on all those 'fancy' wrist work and just focus on my elbow to guide the raquet on that classic swing path.
I think what you mentioned as modern forehand is actually called ( Next-gen ) , and classic is actually ( Modern ) , and the last one is ( Classic ). Next-gen: Jack Sock, Siner, Theam, ... Modern: Feeder, Nadal, Djokovic, ... Classic: McEnroe, ... The main differences: Next-gen: Elbow up and racket horizontal, ... Modern: Racket lag and perpendicular, ... Classic: No racket lag ...
Thanks for your feedback and contribution to the video. Jack Sock's forehand is in a space all his own. Thiem's forehand is the next-gen. Modern is certainly Fed, Nadal, etc. The tour today is a blend of styles: Tsitsipas is modern for example. I think we will see this prevail over the high elbow, racquet tip pointing forward in preparation. Roddick was actually using this style 20 years ago...Thanks, John
Wow! Thank u sir been struggling between these forehand options. I thought I couldn’t have consistency because i dont do the lagging. So now i will go back to my classic and master it. Thank u sir
Very well said John, I agree wholeheartedly. If you can't put in the time, a modern forehand timing is too difficult for consistency. I found myself mis hitting much more. Keep up the great content coach. 👏👍🎾🎾
Funny I think of one of my first tennis coaches Brian Hill he taught me to take the racquet straight back and not closed. I couldn’t hit a forehand for decades. I was ahead of my time and the pro didn’t realize it.
Hi Andre, Thanks for your comment and contribution to the video. Yes funny in a way but also sad. Thankfully the tennis coaching overall has improved significantly over the decades. Take care and stay tuned...we have a lot of new content planned for the channel! Best, John
I think the modern forehand (with abbreviated take back and more of a drop than a full loop) is in part the answer to a much faster pace of the sport. Tennis is played much faster now than before. The player just doesn't have tons of time to coil and uncoil with a bigger loop. For recreational tennis, the traditional forehand is just fine. With more time, players would still hit it with plenty of take back.
Very Nice video and presentation John. Actually I think it is far more the opposite and what you are calling the "Modern Fh" is really more about the ATP take-back style using the Congruent Tennis ``Swivel". True Modern strokes incorporate both ATP and Wrap style tackebacks. Interestingly enough, it is most likely that the ATP Take-back style emerged from the high demands placed on timing that are often created at the ATP level. These players evolved towards simplicity and timing enhancements under the stress of the best players on the planet and likely not into a more challenging stroke with regards to timing. To be more precise, they developed this more direct path to contact to deal with the very fast and often Rising incoming shots. Using the old "Wrap Take Back" that you refer to as classic is just too challenging to "time" effectively against fast, rising balls. This is largely due to the pronounced arcing path towards contact. This Wrap leads to more arc with further to drag a G-loaded Racket head, and as you mentioned, often with less "lag into drag" employed on the stroke. Less dragging of the racket head on a more curved path means a longer radius & more resistance for the player to overcome in a short period of time due to the G-forces created. By using the "CTM Swivel" into "Slot Entry" in order to Drag the racket head up the "Slot Path", a player can avoid most all of this Resistance until the very moment that it actually flips the script to become an Asset to the Swing, providing more Force thru the contact via Acceleration G-forces created as Racket Speed continues to ramp up smoothly into the desired impact orientation.
John, I noticed pros contact point racket face are tilt down. Some seemly tilt to a 45 degree. How come their balls didn’t just hit the net? Can you help us understand it? 🙏👍
HI Bourne, the racquet could be closed slightly in some cases, such as a high contact inside the service line, but rarely will the face ever approach 45 degrees closed on the ball. A radical low to high swing will influence the trajectory, as the strings grab the ball. I would stick with getting as close to vertical as possible for most topspin groundstrokes. Thanks, John
John, I've wondered the same thing until I saw another video where it mentioned if the ball contacts the lower part of the racket face, that will naturally cause the racket face to close after contact. Of course what happens to the ball after contact does not affect its trajectory. I could be wrong.
Hi and good day to you as well. As a genteel guideline, yes, but with exceptions such as Roger Federer, who plays with an eastern grip but has a modern forehand technique. Best, John
Glad to see you’re back. I’m interested in the topic of contact point vs forehand grip. How far in front is ideal and does it change with the type of grip? How far in front is too far? Same question for the side. Thanks in advance
Most rec players, just like picklballers, play just doubles, which is a serve and volley game. Their two models are McEnroe and Navratilova. Sampras is excluded because he used a high maintenance eastern forehand and a Lansdorp backhand. Too tricky for Ricky the Rec Player.
Thanks for your comments and contribution to the video. I don’t know what you mean by a high maintenance eastern forehand. Sampras had one of the best forehand in recent memory. His back hand was consistent, but not as potent as say, Federer. Sampras didn’t get the same degree of shoulder rotation into his shot. Best, John
Just a nitpick, but calling it classic makes it seem lame. I'd rather sell it as learning the Agassi FH or early Fed FH. Of course, this is going to appeal to "classic" players whereas the modern players may have not seen them play :) I find the timing is too hard w/ the WTA takeback, but the woman's FH I really liked was Graff.
I always think WTA forehand is easier to imitate compared to atp forehand, But most people on YT are pretty critical about it, saying it breaks the plane…
Hi Bourne, Yes, the ATP / modern forehand is tough to master for most club players. Certainly some of the WTA FH backswings are longer than ideal, but I don't see it as a limitation to their success. There are other factors such as poor serving and a lack of shot variety that could be improved...best, John
Great analysis John. With tennis and society it seems the latest is the greatest. Not so. I ask myself and others why AA would play a grand slam match and have like 28 winners and 4 unforced errors match after match and I see Federer and Nadal and other making buckets of unforced errors mishitting balls off the frame yet AA never saw him frame a ball into the crowd in 21 years.
@@PerformancePlusTennis Thanks so much John I appreciate. I guess with the media, ESPN etc something has to be said for previous generations. Another comparison I love to make is Pete vs Roger, Rafa and Novak at Wimbledon. IMO none of them would have a Wimbledon title if they had to play Pete there.
@@williamsannuto8239 Well, we know that Roger defeated Peter at Wimbledon, so I think he would have split titles with Pete if they indeed played in the same era. You are probably correct about the others...thanks!
Let's say you have a passionate 40 year old 3.5 player that is willing to practice 15+ hours a week with goals of one day reaching 4.0 or low 4.5. I suspect that for the vast majority of such players, classical would be the best fit. A minority of them might quickly adapt to modern and I think that after a few hitting sessions a coach would be able to tell them if modern style is suitable for them... And I assume that Agassi and Sampras are "classical". If so, there is plenty of potential with classical for a middle aged club player.
Hi Raul, Thanks for your comments and contribution to the video. The classical forehand is ideal for most players, including most pros. I wouldn't get too caught up in the modern technique we see from some of the pros. If your goal is be a 4.5, keep your strokes clean and simple, and let your natural style reveal over time. Best, John
Federer and Nadal are modern. Then we have next gen with a high elbow and racquet tip pointing at the ball in preparation. Classic is more like the early Federer forehand.
Why you bring Jack Sock up when there are ton of strong young guns who by definition are "modern": Tsitsipas, Zverev, Sinner, even Thiem? Medvedev is a bit on his own... Sock/Kyrgios style seems to be a dead end, no one uses nothing similar on the top of the game.
Hi Anton, Thanks for your comment and contribution to the video. I agree with you, but I wanted to present an extreme version of what I think most club / rec level players should avoid. Best, John
Great question! I consider a classic forehand like Federer's early forehand, or Nalbandian's, or even Del Potro. Any of these forehands would succeed on the tour today in my opinion. Forehands like McEnroe, Connors, Evert, etc would never make it on on the tour today. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis and if you can see there are young players that play with those classic forehands at today's game like Rune JJ Wolf Rublev and others either
In my opinion the type of forehand also depends on who you are playing and the court you are playing on. High bounce courts or players hitting a lot of topspin you would do well with a more modern out in front style. For low bounce a traditional swing would be better.
Thanks Julian for your comments and contribution to the video. Yes, these variable do factor in, but I don't think most players can change grips depending on opponent's style or court conditions...that is quite advanced. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis do you think traditional grip is better for seniors? I’m torn between traditional and modern. Lots of seniors I play in tournaments 65+ age use traditional and single backhand. I’d like to move to double backhand and modern forehand. Am I trying too hard!
Without seeing your game, I can't give you a meaningful answer. I appreciate your desire to continue improving. Keep in mind that modern forehands and two-handed backhands will be more difficult to execute as you age. Are you competitive now in the 65's? Perhaps we can schedule a zoom lesson, or you can send in a video for me to review...let me know your thoughts. Thanks, John @@Ormsby504
Yep think you have answered my question. Stick with and improve single backhand and continental on forehand likely to be best long term
Yes, probably the best plan unless there is some compelling reason to change. Keep up the great practice and reach out if you have questions. Best, John @@Ormsby504
Classic forehand you need early preparation for that loopy take back, while modern forehand you are afforded more time with the compact take back, but have to be precise with the timing.
I feel like I can get more pop with the modern forehand compared to classic, but the classic is more simple with a more consistent swing compared to modern which can be prone to more unforced errors if the timing is off.
With classic I can control the depth of the ball easier and more predictable compared to using modern where sometimes I’ll hit the ball shorter than what I was aiming for.
Yes, sir! Thanks, John
Agree John. On some really bad days, I have to turn my mind off on all those 'fancy' wrist work and just focus on my elbow to guide the raquet on that classic swing path.
I think what you mentioned as modern forehand is actually called ( Next-gen ) , and classic is actually ( Modern ) , and the last one is ( Classic ).
Next-gen: Jack Sock, Siner, Theam, ...
Modern: Feeder, Nadal, Djokovic, ...
Classic: McEnroe, ...
The main differences:
Next-gen: Elbow up and racket horizontal, ...
Modern: Racket lag and perpendicular, ...
Classic: No racket lag ...
Thanks for your feedback and contribution to the video. Jack Sock's forehand is in a space all his own. Thiem's forehand is the next-gen. Modern is certainly Fed, Nadal, etc. The tour today is a blend of styles: Tsitsipas is modern for example. I think we will see this prevail over the high elbow, racquet tip pointing forward in preparation. Roddick was actually using this style 20 years ago...Thanks, John
Wow! Thank u sir been struggling between these forehand options. I thought I couldn’t have consistency because i dont do the lagging. So now i will go back to my classic and master it. Thank u sir
Thank you for your feedback and contribution to the video! So glad it was helpful to you! Kindly, John
Very well said John, I agree wholeheartedly. If you can't put in the time, a modern forehand timing is too difficult for consistency. I found myself mis hitting much more. Keep up the great content coach. 👏👍🎾🎾
Thanks Jose!
Funny I think of one of my first tennis coaches Brian Hill he taught me to take the racquet straight back and not closed. I couldn’t hit a forehand for decades. I was ahead of my time and the pro didn’t realize it.
Hi Andre, Thanks for your comment and contribution to the video. Yes funny in a way but also sad. Thankfully the tennis coaching overall has improved significantly over the decades. Take care and stay tuned...we have a lot of new content planned for the channel! Best, John
I think the modern forehand (with abbreviated take back and more of a drop than a full loop) is in part the answer to a much faster pace of the sport. Tennis is played much faster now than before. The player just doesn't have tons of time to coil and uncoil with a bigger loop. For recreational tennis, the traditional forehand is just fine. With more time, players would still hit it with plenty of take back.
Very Nice video and presentation John. Actually I think it is far more the opposite and what you are calling the "Modern Fh" is really more about the ATP take-back style using the Congruent Tennis ``Swivel". True Modern strokes incorporate both ATP and Wrap style tackebacks. Interestingly enough, it is most likely that the ATP Take-back style emerged from the high demands placed on timing that are often created at the ATP level. These players evolved towards simplicity and timing enhancements under the stress of the best players on the planet and likely not into a more challenging stroke with regards to timing.
To be more precise, they developed this more direct path to contact to deal with the very fast and often Rising incoming shots. Using the old "Wrap Take Back" that you refer to as classic is just too challenging to "time" effectively against fast, rising balls. This is largely due to the pronounced arcing path towards contact. This Wrap leads to more arc with further to drag a G-loaded Racket head, and as you mentioned, often with less "lag into drag" employed on the stroke. Less dragging of the racket head on a more curved path means a longer radius & more resistance for the player to overcome in a short period of time due to the G-forces created.
By using the "CTM Swivel" into "Slot Entry" in order to Drag the racket head up the "Slot Path", a player can avoid most all of this Resistance until the very moment that it actually flips the script to become an Asset to the Swing, providing more Force thru the contact via Acceleration G-forces created as Racket Speed continues to ramp up smoothly into the desired impact orientation.
Thanks for your highly detailed contribution to the video! Much appreciated! Kindly, John
John, I noticed pros contact point racket face are tilt down. Some seemly tilt to a 45 degree. How come their balls didn’t just hit the net? Can you help us understand it? 🙏👍
HI Bourne, the racquet could be closed slightly in some cases, such as a high contact inside the service line, but rarely will the face ever approach 45 degrees closed on the ball. A radical low to high swing will influence the trajectory, as the strings grab the ball. I would stick with getting as close to vertical as possible for most topspin groundstrokes. Thanks, John
John, I've wondered the same thing until I saw another video where it mentioned if the ball contacts the lower part of the racket face, that will naturally cause the racket face to close after contact. Of course what happens to the ball after contact does not affect its trajectory. I could be wrong.
Hi,
Good day!
When it comes to the grip, am I right to say that classic forehand is using eastern & semi-western for modern forehand? Thanks
Hi and good day to you as well. As a genteel guideline, yes, but with exceptions such as Roger Federer, who plays with an eastern grip but has a modern forehand technique. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis Thanks
Glad to see you’re back. I’m interested in the topic of contact point vs forehand grip. How far in front is ideal and does it change with the type of grip? How far in front is too far? Same question for the side. Thanks in advance
Hi Bourne, This video should answer your question: ruclips.net/video/TYQM8ShQ3n0/видео.html. Best, John
Performance Plus Tennis thanks. 🙏
Most rec players, just like picklballers, play just doubles, which is a serve and volley game. Their two models are McEnroe and Navratilova. Sampras is excluded because he used a high maintenance eastern forehand and a Lansdorp backhand. Too tricky for Ricky the Rec Player.
Thanks for your comments and contribution to the video. I don’t know what you mean by a high maintenance eastern forehand. Sampras had one of the best forehand in recent memory. His back hand was consistent, but not as potent as say, Federer. Sampras didn’t get the same degree of shoulder rotation into his shot. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennisI only meant that continental groundstroke grips transition to volley more easily.
Just a nitpick, but calling it classic makes it seem lame. I'd rather sell it as learning the Agassi FH or early Fed FH. Of course, this is going to appeal to "classic" players whereas the modern players may have not seen them play :) I find the timing is too hard w/ the WTA takeback, but the woman's FH I really liked was Graff.
Thanks fro your perspective! Best, John
I always think WTA forehand is easier to imitate compared to atp forehand, But most people on YT are pretty critical about it, saying it breaks the plane…
Hi Bourne, Yes, the ATP / modern forehand is tough to master for most club players. Certainly some of the WTA FH backswings are longer than ideal, but I don't see it as a limitation to their success. There are other factors such as poor serving and a lack of shot variety that could be improved...best, John
Great analysis John. With tennis and society it seems the latest is the greatest. Not so. I ask myself and others why AA would play a grand slam match and have like 28 winners and 4 unforced errors match after match and I see Federer and Nadal and other making buckets of unforced errors mishitting balls off the frame yet AA never saw him frame a ball into the crowd in 21 years.
who is AA
You are spot on, William! Great comparison! Thanks, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis Thanks so much John I appreciate. I guess with the media, ESPN etc something has to be said for previous generations. Another comparison I love to make is Pete vs Roger, Rafa and Novak at Wimbledon. IMO none of them would have a Wimbledon title if they had to play Pete there.
@@williamsannuto8239 Well, we know that Roger defeated Peter at Wimbledon, so I think he would have split titles with Pete if they indeed played in the same era. You are probably correct about the others...thanks!
Let's say you have a passionate 40 year old 3.5 player that is willing to practice 15+ hours a week with goals of one day reaching 4.0 or low 4.5. I suspect that for the vast majority of such players, classical would be the best fit. A minority of them might quickly adapt to modern and I think that after a few hitting sessions a coach would be able to tell them if modern style is suitable for them... And I assume that Agassi and Sampras are "classical". If so, there is plenty of potential with classical for a middle aged club player.
Hi Raul, Thanks for your comments and contribution to the video. The classical forehand is ideal for most players, including most pros. I wouldn't get too caught up in the modern technique we see from some of the pros. If your goal is be a 4.5, keep your strokes clean and simple, and let your natural style reveal over time. Best, John
I'm confused - did you describe Federer and Nadal as both classic and modern? Also, r u confusing/conflating modern with next gen?
Federer and Nadal are modern. Then we have next gen with a high elbow and racquet tip pointing at the ball in preparation. Classic is more like the early Federer forehand.
Why you bring Jack Sock up when there are ton of strong young guns who by definition are "modern": Tsitsipas, Zverev, Sinner, even Thiem? Medvedev is a bit on his own...
Sock/Kyrgios style seems to be a dead end, no one uses nothing similar on the top of the game.
Hi Anton, Thanks for your comment and contribution to the video. I agree with you, but I wanted to present an extreme version of what I think most club / rec level players should avoid. Best, John
at today's game you can still become pro with the classic forehand yes or no and why??
Great question! I consider a classic forehand like Federer's early forehand, or Nalbandian's, or even Del Potro. Any of these forehands would succeed on the tour today in my opinion. Forehands like McEnroe, Connors, Evert, etc would never make it on on the tour today. Best, John
@@PerformancePlusTennis and if you can see there are young players that play with those classic forehands at today's game like Rune JJ Wolf Rublev and others either
Many coaches say to club players: you should learn modern forehand. But for what?