Very interesting! This made me think of second language acquisition which is way more difficult than first language acquisition because you already have a functioning first language pattern. Which can and does interfere with your second language learning. (In the analogy, a second language wouldn’t be something completely new, which I agree in sports is easier, because the function of t he „pattern“ is the same as your first language.)
The bit about MAE is interesting. I think that's why those merry go round forehands don't get trained out, because in training under no pressure they can crunch forehands with huge topspin. And the players train a lot more than they play matches
Dec 18, 2023·edited Dec 18, 2023Liked by Hugh Clarke
Another example of interference. As a tennis player I cannot throw a frisbee. I chuck it like a one-handed backhand and it always curves right. However, I found I could hit a baseball left-handed, because I developed coordination from my two-handed backhand.
It would be interesting to formally see whether Federer's forehand changed gradually or did so in a quantum jump. I suspect the change was gradual and largely unconscious. This could be studied with computer vision/AI with sufficient video footage spanning his career. The "deliberate change" idea would indicate an abrupt change in stroke mechanics, whereas an unconscious learning would suggest a gradual change with no abrupt jumps.
It looks like Gasquet used an entirely different grip in that picture from his early days, looks semi western. A lot different from his current eastern(maybe even a bit continental) grip. As a junior, his forehand seemed better. Mannarino made a big change to his forehand because of an arm problem he could not overcome. I am not familiar with the details of his change, but I think it was significant.
Another mind bending post! I have so many thoughts about all these things. I spent 10 years working on my serve. In fact, I am still working on it. I keep tweaking and messing with it not just to improve but also to bring out different aspects. The most interesting effect is that I find that this very old hitch comes back on pressure points in a match. I now can recognize it and catch the toss. I have setup all kinds of cues to change it. For example, I start with my arms separate at the bottom in the windup. Interference is probably the hardest thing to overcome. It is a whole world of physical change that requires quieting the mind, finding very simple cues, and then realizing that no matter how much we try, we will never be perfect.
When I am practicing my serve, I often wonder how Federer would describe the day-to-day fluctuations on his serve? The stats are very consistent but I am sure his serve feels different on different days.
extremely thoughtful study of how difficult it is to course correct for athletes who spend the majority of their lives building habits. great writing as always!
Firstly I can't believe how much Nadal's golf swing looks like his backhand, it's ridiculous!
Also I wonder if any changes to technique sometimes might not be intentional and their technique may have naturally evolved over time. For example if Federer made an intentional change or not.
Nadal seems to have changed his forehand a few times over his career.
I would also love to see how Coco could go with a similar forehand forehand to Swiatek, that's very much the difference between the Big 3 forehand style versus the newer limp wrist forehand.
Great piece Hugh - good to digest during this offseason period!
Re the point around learning through retention and transfer, personally I've found that trying something new in competition that I've been working on helps to accelerate the change and establish conceptual understanding. Have you come across anything that substantiates this learning dynamic?
I think the examples of tweaking the serve/toss or tactics is a completely different animal from retooling someone’s FH or BH at the pro level. With the serve you can be very deliberate with the form as the server has control over everything (but wind). It would allow more mechanical changes to be drilled into or over an existing muscle memory. It’s also hit hundreds of thousands (or millions) of times less then ground strokes, so it’s probably also “less imprinted”
The only two players I can think of with radically different strokes deliberately changed while on tour are Paul McNamee learning a 2HBH in the late 70’s and the weird arm out method that Ernst Gulbis ending up doing to tame his forehand which was so notoriously inconsistent
On transference, my two-handed backhand has always been my best shot because I hit lefty in baseball, which is a more similar stroke to tennis than the cricket swing. Could be an interesting topic, though American players have traditionally had poor backhands (a trend that seems to be changing with players like Fritz and Korda).
Hello again, I haven't commented in a while but still have been reading your threads. The past few months with my tennis a lot has happened since I last commented.
1. I took your advice from the death of the forehand part II I think it was and adopted a desirable difficulty. I currently am borrowing my coaches old Yonex which is 90sq in. and stripped of all the technology (my coach couldn't find his Jack Kramer wooden). The Yonex is a pro stock from Joachim Johansson (former world no.9 in 2005 also known as Pim-Pim) who was a 6'6" behemoth of a player and his racquet on top of being small headed for today is challenging to swing since the balance is toward the handle and I am used to a head heavy setup (370g, 350-ish swingweight and around 8-10pts HL).
2. I have also thrown away my RPM blasts/polyester strings and use a Prince tournament nylon (syn gut). Also did experiment with a Babolat Xcel (multifilament) and will decide between the two.
3. I compete in matches every Wednesday BUCS league (Which for you was NCAA D1 matches but in the UK instead).
4. Will change to a one-handed backhand after the BUCS season is finished in (We spoke about this earlier in March after I suggested you do a piece on the one-handed backhand but was still on the fence after coaches persuaded me not to).
I think with the holidays serving as a refresher this piece you wrote serves as a checkpoint since when we started talking in the comments. This piece immediately threw me back to how difficult it was when I was starting to use Pim-Pim and how I lost matches I knew I could have got a set/games off but the element of honesty needed to admit it is completely me struggling to step up and not so much a 90 sq. in. with old school strings, everything you say in this piece from the start to end is an echo chamber of what using Pim-Pim has reflected to me.
Almost as if Pim-Pim bought me to the realisation emotionally of what this thread is about and you objectively presented it. "How I feel" has also been a big thing I noticed using Pim-Pim. Opposed to having an tracked measure of development and although you correctly mentioned relying on unaided human sense is unreliable I don't think using data/analysis will bring me the emotional satisfaction until I'm on court and the effects of the improvement are "felt" clear for me. Pim-Pim has made me less reliant on filming and video taping my tennis and now intrinsically "feeling" improvement on court/off court physical exertion and getting that validation physically/visually on court seems to just be "working" ever since I used Pim-Pim but I really don't know how. Why this is even though it is very unreliable I am not sure but I have this gut feeling it could be very beneficial to my development getting through a "desirable difficulty" and If I can use Pim-Pim in the same manner Johansson did everything in this thread is attained as a pre-requisite to sticking to the long term process instead of "get rich quick and flash success" kind of results which is too prevalent I feel in sport today, I get meaningful worthy experience that sticks with me. Funnily my strings on Pim-Pim broke a week before season finished and I had to use my 2015 technology pure drives again that had RPM blast in it and everyone was taken aback by the immediate increase in playing level but I never played like that before taking up Pim-Pim.
Using a 90 sq. in. in a competitive scene where the culture is all about winning is honestly really hard, I am losing quite a lot of matches and further handicapping myself with very thick syn gut/multi is even harder job however I will continue to use Pim-Pim until I can become competent enough to dictate and win matches consistently (on my 85% level) with it and I believe I will be a worthy player if I can thrive in the "development for the long term" by using Pim-Pim. Thanks again, this thread was needed.
Very interesting! This made me think of second language acquisition which is way more difficult than first language acquisition because you already have a functioning first language pattern. Which can and does interfere with your second language learning. (In the analogy, a second language wouldn’t be something completely new, which I agree in sports is easier, because the function of t he „pattern“ is the same as your first language.)
The bit about MAE is interesting. I think that's why those merry go round forehands don't get trained out, because in training under no pressure they can crunch forehands with huge topspin. And the players train a lot more than they play matches
Another example of interference. As a tennis player I cannot throw a frisbee. I chuck it like a one-handed backhand and it always curves right. However, I found I could hit a baseball left-handed, because I developed coordination from my two-handed backhand.
It would be interesting to formally see whether Federer's forehand changed gradually or did so in a quantum jump. I suspect the change was gradual and largely unconscious. This could be studied with computer vision/AI with sufficient video footage spanning his career. The "deliberate change" idea would indicate an abrupt change in stroke mechanics, whereas an unconscious learning would suggest a gradual change with no abrupt jumps.
It looks like Gasquet used an entirely different grip in that picture from his early days, looks semi western. A lot different from his current eastern(maybe even a bit continental) grip. As a junior, his forehand seemed better. Mannarino made a big change to his forehand because of an arm problem he could not overcome. I am not familiar with the details of his change, but I think it was significant.
Another mind bending post! I have so many thoughts about all these things. I spent 10 years working on my serve. In fact, I am still working on it. I keep tweaking and messing with it not just to improve but also to bring out different aspects. The most interesting effect is that I find that this very old hitch comes back on pressure points in a match. I now can recognize it and catch the toss. I have setup all kinds of cues to change it. For example, I start with my arms separate at the bottom in the windup. Interference is probably the hardest thing to overcome. It is a whole world of physical change that requires quieting the mind, finding very simple cues, and then realizing that no matter how much we try, we will never be perfect.
When I am practicing my serve, I often wonder how Federer would describe the day-to-day fluctuations on his serve? The stats are very consistent but I am sure his serve feels different on different days.
extremely thoughtful study of how difficult it is to course correct for athletes who spend the majority of their lives building habits. great writing as always!
Firstly I can't believe how much Nadal's golf swing looks like his backhand, it's ridiculous!
Also I wonder if any changes to technique sometimes might not be intentional and their technique may have naturally evolved over time. For example if Federer made an intentional change or not.
Nadal seems to have changed his forehand a few times over his career.
I would also love to see how Coco could go with a similar forehand forehand to Swiatek, that's very much the difference between the Big 3 forehand style versus the newer limp wrist forehand.
fabulous article!
Great piece Hugh - good to digest during this offseason period!
Re the point around learning through retention and transfer, personally I've found that trying something new in competition that I've been working on helps to accelerate the change and establish conceptual understanding. Have you come across anything that substantiates this learning dynamic?
Great article
I think the examples of tweaking the serve/toss or tactics is a completely different animal from retooling someone’s FH or BH at the pro level. With the serve you can be very deliberate with the form as the server has control over everything (but wind). It would allow more mechanical changes to be drilled into or over an existing muscle memory. It’s also hit hundreds of thousands (or millions) of times less then ground strokes, so it’s probably also “less imprinted”
The only two players I can think of with radically different strokes deliberately changed while on tour are Paul McNamee learning a 2HBH in the late 70’s and the weird arm out method that Ernst Gulbis ending up doing to tame his forehand which was so notoriously inconsistent
On transference, my two-handed backhand has always been my best shot because I hit lefty in baseball, which is a more similar stroke to tennis than the cricket swing. Could be an interesting topic, though American players have traditionally had poor backhands (a trend that seems to be changing with players like Fritz and Korda).
So where does Bruce Lee’s 10.000 kick thing fit into this
Hello again, I haven't commented in a while but still have been reading your threads. The past few months with my tennis a lot has happened since I last commented.
1. I took your advice from the death of the forehand part II I think it was and adopted a desirable difficulty. I currently am borrowing my coaches old Yonex which is 90sq in. and stripped of all the technology (my coach couldn't find his Jack Kramer wooden). The Yonex is a pro stock from Joachim Johansson (former world no.9 in 2005 also known as Pim-Pim) who was a 6'6" behemoth of a player and his racquet on top of being small headed for today is challenging to swing since the balance is toward the handle and I am used to a head heavy setup (370g, 350-ish swingweight and around 8-10pts HL).
2. I have also thrown away my RPM blasts/polyester strings and use a Prince tournament nylon (syn gut). Also did experiment with a Babolat Xcel (multifilament) and will decide between the two.
3. I compete in matches every Wednesday BUCS league (Which for you was NCAA D1 matches but in the UK instead).
4. Will change to a one-handed backhand after the BUCS season is finished in (We spoke about this earlier in March after I suggested you do a piece on the one-handed backhand but was still on the fence after coaches persuaded me not to).
I think with the holidays serving as a refresher this piece you wrote serves as a checkpoint since when we started talking in the comments. This piece immediately threw me back to how difficult it was when I was starting to use Pim-Pim and how I lost matches I knew I could have got a set/games off but the element of honesty needed to admit it is completely me struggling to step up and not so much a 90 sq. in. with old school strings, everything you say in this piece from the start to end is an echo chamber of what using Pim-Pim has reflected to me.
Almost as if Pim-Pim bought me to the realisation emotionally of what this thread is about and you objectively presented it. "How I feel" has also been a big thing I noticed using Pim-Pim. Opposed to having an tracked measure of development and although you correctly mentioned relying on unaided human sense is unreliable I don't think using data/analysis will bring me the emotional satisfaction until I'm on court and the effects of the improvement are "felt" clear for me. Pim-Pim has made me less reliant on filming and video taping my tennis and now intrinsically "feeling" improvement on court/off court physical exertion and getting that validation physically/visually on court seems to just be "working" ever since I used Pim-Pim but I really don't know how. Why this is even though it is very unreliable I am not sure but I have this gut feeling it could be very beneficial to my development getting through a "desirable difficulty" and If I can use Pim-Pim in the same manner Johansson did everything in this thread is attained as a pre-requisite to sticking to the long term process instead of "get rich quick and flash success" kind of results which is too prevalent I feel in sport today, I get meaningful worthy experience that sticks with me. Funnily my strings on Pim-Pim broke a week before season finished and I had to use my 2015 technology pure drives again that had RPM blast in it and everyone was taken aback by the immediate increase in playing level but I never played like that before taking up Pim-Pim.
Using a 90 sq. in. in a competitive scene where the culture is all about winning is honestly really hard, I am losing quite a lot of matches and further handicapping myself with very thick syn gut/multi is even harder job however I will continue to use Pim-Pim until I can become competent enough to dictate and win matches consistently (on my 85% level) with it and I believe I will be a worthy player if I can thrive in the "development for the long term" by using Pim-Pim. Thanks again, this thread was needed.