HI Hugh, I keep coming back to this post. I have been playing with lighter rackets as a I get older. But there is something off about it that I seem to not like. I am going to experiment with a heavier one to see if I can use gravity to generate more controlled power.
Basically,the ball flies on me and I think it is due to small changes in my racket face that happen because I cannot swing all the way through. It helps when the ball is coming fast but still sometimes I feel a lack of control.
I can't comment on your swing without seeing it, but I think for development a heavier racquet might promote a more circular (as opposed to outside) swing path that tends to align with great forehands.
I also think heavier is easier to manage on low bouncing courts; anything above the shoulders consistently can get more taxing if you aren't training/playing everyday
I really like your thoughts at the end when you said something about DelPo maybe having the blueprint on the forehand. He certainly uses a ferris wheel gravity drop on his forehand, with a completely neutral wrist in his set up. Then he simply supinates his shoulder/forearm with a relaxed wrist, crating his racquet lag just before contact. Tsitsipas has to me a very similar technique to Delpo on his forehand.
Could you assess Igor Andreev's forehand in terms of preparation and contact? And I'd love to know where would you put it in relation to top guys here.
I only ask because I remember his patient, unruffled composure on it during his slam matches with Federer. He seemed to be a righty Nadal, if not in technique, then in effect at least.
Mopped up those slices, broke down the Federer forehand with both depth and height, generated tremendous angles inside-out and cross, and was decent in counter-rushing defence off it as well, finding that short Deuce angle, perhaps even better at Nadal there—from what I've seen, he didn't offcentre/shank off that CCFH when pressured with pace as much as Nadal (though my viewing sample size is rather small: just his Fedal matches).
Andreev dropped his racquet under the ball a lot, which helped with generating all that spin (also really tucked in his left arm to promote that reactive brake). But I feel like he muscled the ball more than he created easy lag. Strong guy with a super heavy forehand. And yeah, set up very much like Nadal with the tip up and a full takeback.
Great article Hugh! I l just found your site and have loved going through all the content. I was wondering if you have any thoughts on Murray's forehand? It seems much more similar to a NextGen forehand than one of the greats (face inverted, etc.). He seems to be the one guy who has won majors in the last 20 years that doesn't fall into the great forehand list you provide above? Was he just great at everything else and thus able to protect it? Also, any thoughts on how he's developed the reputation of being such a clutch player late in his career despite the technical weaknesses?
Thanks Jacob. Murray's forehand was probably the main reason he didn't win more against the Big-3 (that, and his second serve was attackable). His returns, anticipation, speed, backhand, and variety were all unbelievable, and he was a real fighter as well. I think he still had a pretty sound forehand but just seemed to lack any dynamism on that shot--and yeah I think it can look flexed in the wrist and he didn't get the racquet tip that high (early in his career he really did though, back in 2008 etc.).
Hugh, is Ivan Lendl too remote in the past to consider in this analysis? Obviously his forehand was a great weapon. To me he hits with a flexed wrist and the racquet head is closer to being parallel to ground that pointing to the sky - very much in line with the Next Gen features you suggest. I know smaller racquets, before poly strings…
Yeah that's an interesting question. I think there are several things to consider. Firstly, the game was different then; he used a more eastern grip and a heavier racquet, so if you watch his forehand in slow motion there isn't nearly the same racquet head speed or swing length of the player's today. Check this out:
That second video is good also because you see a real contrast in swing speed; the role of the wrist in accelerating the racquet and the much faster swing speeds in the modern game (due to poly I think) is really evident. The overlay at ~3:45 helps you see that they have opposite take backs (elbow pull with tip-down versus tip-up from roger) but as they are about to accelerate they are fundamentally quite similar. Lendl's lag is much less and his follow through is non-existent by comparison. He was swinging a very heavy stick (I would imagine) and that means less speed, wrist confined to extension/hyper-extension (a very stable wrist config) and overall would have had a really controlled swing; the parts are moving through less degrees and with less speed compared to someone like Jannik Sinner or Jack Sock.
Thanks for the detailed response. My video analysis is not quite as good as yours :-). You did however inspire me to find another clip, this from the famous USO final against Wilander. Someone has gone to the trouble of slowing it down and camera position behind Lendl provides a great vantage point. As you say during the take back you can really see him extending the wrist as he prepares to strike. https://youtu.be/hmh6MggmLsk
Such a fantastic analysis! What are your thoughts on the "straight arm" vs "bent arm" forehand? It's brought up somewhat often during TV commentary, usually something along the lines of "Alcaraz/Player X has that same straight arm forehand as Federer and Nadal... he's following in the footsteps of the great" and in general extolling the virtues of the straight arm forehand. However this piece argues that the bent arm mechanic is superior (https://www.patcash.co.uk/2019/04/tennis-forehand-technique-straight-arm-vs-bent-arm/), because it gives you more margin for error and reduces risk of injury. I'd be curious to hear your take on this.
My understanding is you get more racquet head speed by virtue of a longer lever with the straight arm, but yes, more margin for error in timing with the bent. I think if we look at most of the best they tend to be from the straight arm camp (Nadal, Federer, del Potro, Verdasco, Alcaraz, Rublev, Tsitsipas etc) but plenty of bent armers (Lendl, Borg, Agassi, Sampras, Djokovic) have had great forehands. As with most things, I think that there is a tradeoff, and depending on what you are prioritizing (speed/spin v control/margin of error) you will lean one way or the other in terms of your preference.
I remember it was an almighty shock when I first saw that video. The great Fed, the paragon of tennis technique, the definition of proper, hits with a bent elbow and a grip that made him look like some yesteryear Jack Sock! I wonder who/what/how pushed him to iron out all that and become the Technique God
I'am loving this article series! Super interesting thoughts. You should team up with impactingtennis more :-) beacuse I think you can deepen the analysis by going into the racket specs aswell. If we take Rublev and Beretteni who struggles with the backhand they both play with a quite depolarized racket, a mgri-value close to 21. That could just be a fact that to have a world-class backhand you have to have a more polarized setup? You could have the best forehand in the world but if the backhand is lagging you will never get to the absolute top.
Very possible, but my hunch is their backhands struggle because they technically set up on the outside. I've detailed Auger-Aliassime's struggles with that before:
Yes, but with a racket setup like that you have to whip it (outside/svort setup) just as they whip it on their forehand. Watch Kyrgios and Norrie who has an even more depolarized setup they have almost didged the topspin altogether to get the ball moving.
Just having a quick look, and Norrie and Kyrgios do indeed have a high MGRI (above 21), but so do Hewitt and Nishioka who have great backhands (and full turns). Then on the other end, low MGRI also includes the mediocre backhand of Roddick (20.07). The kicker for me: Gulbis and FAA have almost the exact same MGRI (20.56 v 20.55) but Gulbis' backhand is world class and FAA's is a weakness. The only difference? The setup position. Inside v outside
Hmm, You would have to get all the racquets and see if that was an actual trend. My hunch is that it won’t be; you could give ND or Medvedev any racquet and I think they would be able to hit their backhands the same way. The two-hander is fundamentally very different from the forehand because the second hand on the racquet reduces the ability to actually whip it, and I think the outside set up is usually a choice in court position more than anything (aggressive baseliners like shorter swings to take the ball early). Norrie and Kyrgios also have very open grips which makes that shorter swing more feasible in terms of bunting/blocking.
Incredible stuff. Usually I read tennis commentary on the internet and shake my head because there's so much bad info. Reading you, I feel like I'm actually learning a lot. Thank you.
Hi Hugh, really loved your three part series on forehands. Being someone who has watched many videos on forehand technique, I found the arguments you made very interesting. I do think it's a sign of the times that kids are taught using balls that are easier to learn with. Looking forward to more posts from you!
Thanks Orton! I'm aiming to do around 2 posts a week. Wednesday or Thursday I'll post a more technical piece regarding technique, motor learning, psychology etc. Saturday I like to pick a player and analyse their game in some way. Glad you liked it.
Alcaraz is great! But not quite as sound as the Big 3 guys I think. I've written about some of his areas he could improve. Check out "Rublev and the Mental Mirage' for a breakdown of his backhand, and 'Djokovic x Alcaraz Madrid Analysis' for his forehand.
In short, Alcaraz doesn't get a full racquet turn or drop on his backhand. Means he doesn't get much topspin or the outside of the ball. And his elbow gets high with an inverted racquet head on the forehand, so when he is rushed it's a little inconsistent. But I love Alcaraz, think he has a big future.
Hugh, Have you been watching Shanghai? I saw Dimitrov play baby Fed vs. goliath. Baby Fed won! Dimitrov has much less of a problem with the wide forehand than most modern players. Many times he could just keep Alcaraz at bay. Alcaraz cannot hit through a low sliced shot that makes him run to the forehand side. It is almost as if people have figured out that if you make Alcaraz run to the corner and keep it low, he invariably will not be able to defend very well. Seeing Dimitrov's very Federesque forehand holding up quite nicely in all departments, made me think about your death of a forehand post. BTW, my forehand improved as soon as I switched out of gut and back to poly in my mains. I kept gut in my crosses. I still get some softness from the gut but a lot more reliability from the poly. The gut is just so lively in the mains that it tends to fly on me. As Cahill might say, Poly makes me from a below average player to an average player. The backhand is better too. Poly is just too reliable to give up!
Yes I saw his match against Dimitrov--fantastic match from both: really high level. Dimitrov is such a sweet player when he is on like that. Alcaraz still has that running forehand weakness i think at times. Will be interesting to see how he evolves in the next few years.
Poly very good for groundstrokes. Low powered string so you can swing hard without fear of the ball flying. String looser though or you might get some joint pain.
Poly was around 52 lbs and gut around 56 lbs. I kept the same tension but just flipped the mains and crosses. Yes, poly really lets you hit out. The gut crosses helps to soften it a bit too.
is there a particular racket setup do you think yields best results/demands the optimal techique?
im thinking weight, balance, swingweight, maybe even twistweight
my hunch is that if it gets too light, that's possibly where it can get messier.
Beyond that, I don't want to say "have these specs" exactly. Too complicated and every player is unique
Hello Hugh ....I just came on here, impressed with your perceptions and observations . N
HI Hugh, I keep coming back to this post. I have been playing with lighter rackets as a I get older. But there is something off about it that I seem to not like. I am going to experiment with a heavier one to see if I can use gravity to generate more controlled power.
Basically,the ball flies on me and I think it is due to small changes in my racket face that happen because I cannot swing all the way through. It helps when the ball is coming fast but still sometimes I feel a lack of control.
Maybe I am just getting older and slower...
I can't comment on your swing without seeing it, but I think for development a heavier racquet might promote a more circular (as opposed to outside) swing path that tends to align with great forehands.
I also think heavier is easier to manage on low bouncing courts; anything above the shoulders consistently can get more taxing if you aren't training/playing everyday
I really like your thoughts at the end when you said something about DelPo maybe having the blueprint on the forehand. He certainly uses a ferris wheel gravity drop on his forehand, with a completely neutral wrist in his set up. Then he simply supinates his shoulder/forearm with a relaxed wrist, crating his racquet lag just before contact. Tsitsipas has to me a very similar technique to Delpo on his forehand.
Delpo's is just such a sweet simple hammer of a forehand. Technically he makes it look stupidly simple. All the very best do, in my opinion.
Great piece!
Could you assess Igor Andreev's forehand in terms of preparation and contact? And I'd love to know where would you put it in relation to top guys here.
I only ask because I remember his patient, unruffled composure on it during his slam matches with Federer. He seemed to be a righty Nadal, if not in technique, then in effect at least.
Mopped up those slices, broke down the Federer forehand with both depth and height, generated tremendous angles inside-out and cross, and was decent in counter-rushing defence off it as well, finding that short Deuce angle, perhaps even better at Nadal there—from what I've seen, he didn't offcentre/shank off that CCFH when pressured with pace as much as Nadal (though my viewing sample size is rather small: just his Fedal matches).
Andreev dropped his racquet under the ball a lot, which helped with generating all that spin (also really tucked in his left arm to promote that reactive brake). But I feel like he muscled the ball more than he created easy lag. Strong guy with a super heavy forehand. And yeah, set up very much like Nadal with the tip up and a full takeback.
Thanks, so he used a gravity-assisted swing path like the modern guys before NextGen, I'm guessing?
(Lol, I meant "Federer backhand" earlier; not many could do that with the inside-out forehand, Andreev found some wicked angles)
Yeah he had some extreme windshield wiper action on that thing. Exaggerated the drop and just whipped it up and down.
https://youtu.be/_EHsnSVzviM?t=135
Watched Rublev in the Hamburg Open 2023. I think he has changed his forehand more towards the Modern Forehand. Do you think so?
Not sure I'd have to have a closer look!
Great article Hugh! I l just found your site and have loved going through all the content. I was wondering if you have any thoughts on Murray's forehand? It seems much more similar to a NextGen forehand than one of the greats (face inverted, etc.). He seems to be the one guy who has won majors in the last 20 years that doesn't fall into the great forehand list you provide above? Was he just great at everything else and thus able to protect it? Also, any thoughts on how he's developed the reputation of being such a clutch player late in his career despite the technical weaknesses?
Thanks Jacob. Murray's forehand was probably the main reason he didn't win more against the Big-3 (that, and his second serve was attackable). His returns, anticipation, speed, backhand, and variety were all unbelievable, and he was a real fighter as well. I think he still had a pretty sound forehand but just seemed to lack any dynamism on that shot--and yeah I think it can look flexed in the wrist and he didn't get the racquet tip that high (early in his career he really did though, back in 2008 etc.).
compare 2008 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hYWhoDDE2Q
with more recent years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uPetW4Uuig
Hugh, is Ivan Lendl too remote in the past to consider in this analysis? Obviously his forehand was a great weapon. To me he hits with a flexed wrist and the racquet head is closer to being parallel to ground that pointing to the sky - very much in line with the Next Gen features you suggest. I know smaller racquets, before poly strings…
Yeah that's an interesting question. I think there are several things to consider. Firstly, the game was different then; he used a more eastern grip and a heavier racquet, so if you watch his forehand in slow motion there isn't nearly the same racquet head speed or swing length of the player's today. Check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsEKwaO5pzA
In that video I see an extended wrist, and the racquet head slightly above the hands before acceleration. Also pause this one at 25 seconds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiCCS627zOU&t=172s
That second video is good also because you see a real contrast in swing speed; the role of the wrist in accelerating the racquet and the much faster swing speeds in the modern game (due to poly I think) is really evident. The overlay at ~3:45 helps you see that they have opposite take backs (elbow pull with tip-down versus tip-up from roger) but as they are about to accelerate they are fundamentally quite similar. Lendl's lag is much less and his follow through is non-existent by comparison. He was swinging a very heavy stick (I would imagine) and that means less speed, wrist confined to extension/hyper-extension (a very stable wrist config) and overall would have had a really controlled swing; the parts are moving through less degrees and with less speed compared to someone like Jannik Sinner or Jack Sock.
Thanks for the detailed response. My video analysis is not quite as good as yours :-). You did however inspire me to find another clip, this from the famous USO final against Wilander. Someone has gone to the trouble of slowing it down and camera position behind Lendl provides a great vantage point. As you say during the take back you can really see him extending the wrist as he prepares to strike. https://youtu.be/hmh6MggmLsk
Thanks again.
Such a fantastic analysis! What are your thoughts on the "straight arm" vs "bent arm" forehand? It's brought up somewhat often during TV commentary, usually something along the lines of "Alcaraz/Player X has that same straight arm forehand as Federer and Nadal... he's following in the footsteps of the great" and in general extolling the virtues of the straight arm forehand. However this piece argues that the bent arm mechanic is superior (https://www.patcash.co.uk/2019/04/tennis-forehand-technique-straight-arm-vs-bent-arm/), because it gives you more margin for error and reduces risk of injury. I'd be curious to hear your take on this.
My understanding is you get more racquet head speed by virtue of a longer lever with the straight arm, but yes, more margin for error in timing with the bent. I think if we look at most of the best they tend to be from the straight arm camp (Nadal, Federer, del Potro, Verdasco, Alcaraz, Rublev, Tsitsipas etc) but plenty of bent armers (Lendl, Borg, Agassi, Sampras, Djokovic) have had great forehands. As with most things, I think that there is a tradeoff, and depending on what you are prioritizing (speed/spin v control/margin of error) you will lean one way or the other in terms of your preference.
Note Fed had bent arm FH as a teenager
Yep and a more extreme grip
I remember it was an almighty shock when I first saw that video. The great Fed, the paragon of tennis technique, the definition of proper, hits with a bent elbow and a grip that made him look like some yesteryear Jack Sock! I wonder who/what/how pushed him to iron out all that and become the Technique God
For me too, because such an extreme grip change is very unusual
Anyone have a link to a video of this?
I'am loving this article series! Super interesting thoughts. You should team up with impactingtennis more :-) beacuse I think you can deepen the analysis by going into the racket specs aswell. If we take Rublev and Beretteni who struggles with the backhand they both play with a quite depolarized racket, a mgri-value close to 21. That could just be a fact that to have a world-class backhand you have to have a more polarized setup? You could have the best forehand in the world but if the backhand is lagging you will never get to the absolute top.
Very possible, but my hunch is their backhands struggle because they technically set up on the outside. I've detailed Auger-Aliassime's struggles with that before:
https://hughclarke.substack.com/p/auger-aliassime-v-wolf-firenze-final
Yes, but with a racket setup like that you have to whip it (outside/svort setup) just as they whip it on their forehand. Watch Kyrgios and Norrie who has an even more depolarized setup they have almost didged the topspin altogether to get the ball moving.
Just having a quick look, and Norrie and Kyrgios do indeed have a high MGRI (above 21), but so do Hewitt and Nishioka who have great backhands (and full turns). Then on the other end, low MGRI also includes the mediocre backhand of Roddick (20.07). The kicker for me: Gulbis and FAA have almost the exact same MGRI (20.56 v 20.55) but Gulbis' backhand is world class and FAA's is a weakness. The only difference? The setup position. Inside v outside
Hmm, You would have to get all the racquets and see if that was an actual trend. My hunch is that it won’t be; you could give ND or Medvedev any racquet and I think they would be able to hit their backhands the same way. The two-hander is fundamentally very different from the forehand because the second hand on the racquet reduces the ability to actually whip it, and I think the outside set up is usually a choice in court position more than anything (aggressive baseliners like shorter swings to take the ball early). Norrie and Kyrgios also have very open grips which makes that shorter swing more feasible in terms of bunting/blocking.
Very very good article on the forehand.
Thanks Jon
Incredible stuff. Usually I read tennis commentary on the internet and shake my head because there's so much bad info. Reading you, I feel like I'm actually learning a lot. Thank you.
Thanks Niko!
Hi Hugh, really loved your three part series on forehands. Being someone who has watched many videos on forehand technique, I found the arguments you made very interesting. I do think it's a sign of the times that kids are taught using balls that are easier to learn with. Looking forward to more posts from you!
Thanks Orton! I'm aiming to do around 2 posts a week. Wednesday or Thursday I'll post a more technical piece regarding technique, motor learning, psychology etc. Saturday I like to pick a player and analyse their game in some way. Glad you liked it.
Alcaraz has the modern forehand plus he is technically as sound as anyone on both wings
What do u say?
Alcaraz is great! But not quite as sound as the Big 3 guys I think. I've written about some of his areas he could improve. Check out "Rublev and the Mental Mirage' for a breakdown of his backhand, and 'Djokovic x Alcaraz Madrid Analysis' for his forehand.
In short, Alcaraz doesn't get a full racquet turn or drop on his backhand. Means he doesn't get much topspin or the outside of the ball. And his elbow gets high with an inverted racquet head on the forehand, so when he is rushed it's a little inconsistent. But I love Alcaraz, think he has a big future.
Hugh, Have you been watching Shanghai? I saw Dimitrov play baby Fed vs. goliath. Baby Fed won! Dimitrov has much less of a problem with the wide forehand than most modern players. Many times he could just keep Alcaraz at bay. Alcaraz cannot hit through a low sliced shot that makes him run to the forehand side. It is almost as if people have figured out that if you make Alcaraz run to the corner and keep it low, he invariably will not be able to defend very well. Seeing Dimitrov's very Federesque forehand holding up quite nicely in all departments, made me think about your death of a forehand post. BTW, my forehand improved as soon as I switched out of gut and back to poly in my mains. I kept gut in my crosses. I still get some softness from the gut but a lot more reliability from the poly. The gut is just so lively in the mains that it tends to fly on me. As Cahill might say, Poly makes me from a below average player to an average player. The backhand is better too. Poly is just too reliable to give up!
Yes I saw his match against Dimitrov--fantastic match from both: really high level. Dimitrov is such a sweet player when he is on like that. Alcaraz still has that running forehand weakness i think at times. Will be interesting to see how he evolves in the next few years.
Dimitrov is trying to refocus on his tennis. Hopefully, he will be like Stan and peak a bit later and win one or two majors.
Poly very good for groundstrokes. Low powered string so you can swing hard without fear of the ball flying. String looser though or you might get some joint pain.
Poly was around 52 lbs and gut around 56 lbs. I kept the same tension but just flipped the mains and crosses. Yes, poly really lets you hit out. The gut crosses helps to soften it a bit too.