Bỏ qua

🎾 Revolutionary - Tennis

Giới Thiệu

Revolutionary - Tennis — tài liệu 265 trang từ thư viện sách tennis.

Tóm tắt nội dung (trích từ tài liệu gốc): Revolutionary Tennis Tennis That Makes Sense Step 1 The Geometric Reality of Tennis � Mark Papas mark@revolutionarytennis.com Movement. The first step in establishing a strong foundation with the body is by facing the undeniable truth about this game. A tennis player faces an angle of possibilities, which means the ball angles, or moves, away from you either to your right or to your left (1A). The ball is not hit at you. (The court is drawn to scale.) The ball is moving away from you, and while there are different directions to intercept it, you want to hit the ball with some power and send it

Lưu ý: Nội dung dưới đây được trích xuất tự động từ PDF gốc tiếng Anh, giữ nguyên ngôn ngữ để bảo toàn độ chính xác kỹ thuật.


Nội Dung Gốc (Tiếng Anh)

                          Revolutionary Tennis



                                           Tennis That Makes Sense



                         Step 1



                         The Geometric Reality

                         of Tennis



� Mark Papas

mark@revolutionarytennis.com



Movement. The first step in establishing a

strong foundation with the body is by facing the

undeniable truth about this game. A tennis

player faces an angle of possibilities, which

means the ball angles, or moves, away from you

either to your right or to your left (1A). The

ball is not hit at you. (The court is drawn to

scale.)



The ball is moving away from you, and while

there are different directions to intercept it, you

want to hit the ball with some power and send

it back where it came from, you simply don't

want to run over and touch it or just stop it.



You've heard often enough that moving into the ball gives you power, that is getting your body's

momentum behind the stroke and into the ball equals power. Why doesn't that happen often

enough for you? Because if you either move parallel to the baseline, turn sideways, or pivot one

foot to the side, you're moving away from the ball and not into it. It's simple geometry.



To see this, imagine you're ready to throw a tennis ball at a friend's car going past you parallel to

the sidewalk on which you're standing (1B). If you throw the ball before the car is at a right angle

to your position, you're throwing the ball INTO the car and it hits with force. If you throw after

the car passes the right angle mark, the ball's moving AWAY with the car and catches up with it

later, hitting with less impact.



                                INTO THE BALL



Let's apply this to tennis. You're in the ready position behind the baseline

and a ball is hit to your left side (1C). Draw a line from your position to

form a right angle to the ball's flight line. If your movement pattern takes

you to the inside of that right angle mark, that is in the direction of the

net, you're moving forward and INTO the ball. And your ever so

important momentum is going into the ball, which means power.

Diagram 1C shows that by moving parallel to the baseline you're moving away with the ball,

catching up to it later. As a result your momentum is going off toward the side fence and not into

the ball, it takes more time to reach it, and there's little chance your body can structure itself to

support your contact spot because the ball has passed you by.

I know you feel you don't have enough time in which to hit the ball, but you can't give yourself

more time to hit it by taking more time to reach it because the ball is angling away from you and

getting lower.



                                                 DIRECTIONS

In what direction lies forward? To one side? Into the ball? Diagram 1D explains. You want to

move into the ball, you want your momentum into the ball.



The angle of your movement relative to the ball's flight line helps you reach the ball on time, Step

2, structure the body for a strong hit, Step 3, and helps you develop power in a simple manner and

not in one you're used to that is counterproductive to success, Step 4.

With your ready position three to five feet behind the baseline, moving into the ball means just

that, moving forward. Not at full speed, simply not away from the ball, not parallel to the baseline

or backwards. But this idea of moving forward won't happen if you first pivot one foot against the

ground, turn sideways, or step backwards as diagram 1E shows because, undeniably, the ball's

moving away from you. Less is more.

It's clear you need to move forward, into the ball, and not waste time or opportunity by pivoting

against the ground or turning sideways. How should the feet move to achieve this? Which one

first? Step 2 explains.



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 1 p.2 /3

OLD THINK                        NEW THINK



� pivot                          � move forward INTO the ball

� turn sideways

� step backwards

� move parallel to the



   baseline or over to the side



                                                               � Mark Papas Step 1 p.3 /3

                          Revolutionary Tennis



                                           Tennis That Makes Sense



                         Step 2



                         How The Feet Work



� Mark Papas

mark@revolutionarytennis.com



Footwork. Step 1 shows that moving into a ball

angling away from you means moving forward on an

angle less than 90 degrees to the ball's flight line (2A).

You don't move literally on a straight line as indicated

in diagram 2A, but the idea is not to move beyond the

90 degree mark. Basically, the movement pattern is an

arc (2B).



How should the feet move, which one first? There are

different ways and directions in which to move the feet, but two

things come to mind. First, you start by standing still at point A, the

ready position, and will move forward to the contact spot at point B

without compulsory steps, restrictions, or avoiding obstacles on the

court.



Second, human beings are bipedal. That means human locomotion,

our gait, works in two's, in pairs.



Child development literature explains the progression of motor skills involved when learning how

to kick a soccer ball. First, a child stands still and swings 1 foot to kick the ball. Some time later,

the child takes 1 step and kicks. This skill is considered fully developed when the child takes 2

steps and kicks the ball. This 2-step method prior to execution forms the basis of natural human

rhythm.



                                               RHYTHM



If you're familiar with other sports that involve movement, such as basketball, soccer, or when

fielding a baseball, you know you take a minimum of 2 steps before shooting, kicking, or

throwing the ball. No matter how many steps are taken in the approach, the feet do a final 1-2

before executing the act: 1-2 throw, 1-2 shoot, 1-2 kick. An exception is shooting foul shots in

basketball, where you stand still.



Your 2 feet complement each other in everything you do, whether you're standing still and one

foot moves to shift your weight (the other follows), or walking. When running the feet work in

pairs: 1-2, 1-2, 1-2. That is steps 1 and 2 are taken, then 3-4, 5-6, and so on.



Tennis is a game of movement. Bipedal rhythm indicates there should be 2 steps prior to

execution, which means you take STEP number 1, STEP 2, and then hit the ball, not pivot, step

and hit.



                      2 STEPS PRIOR TO CONTACT, 1-2 AND HIT



When one foot pivots, and the other one steps before the hit, that's only 1 step prior to contact

and not 2. The same if one foot drags, or slides while the other steps. This is like taking 1 step

before kicking a soccer ball, it's both arrhythmic and underdeveloped.



                      TO STEP OR NOT TO STEP INTO THE BALL

                                    THAT IS THE QUESTION



The debate is whether there's more power when you hit with an open stance, or when you step

into the ball with the front foot. As a teacher and player I feel there is more power when stepping

into the ball with the front foot, that is with the left foot on the right side, and the right foot on the

left side, than by choosing an open stance. Into the ball is key here. This is detailed further in

Steps 3 and 4, and is not the "standard method," a flawed representation of footwork structure.



All right. What do we know? We need to move forward, both feet step before contact, 1-2, and

we want to step into the ball with the front foot. What we don't know is which foot will move

first on which side. Luckily, our 2-step pattern of human locomotion can answer this.



When hitting a ball on your right side, your left foot will be the front foot that steps into the ball

prior to contact. As such, your left foot is the 2, or the second step, of a 1-2 pattern that occurs

prior to contact. This means your right foot is the 1, or the first step. Together they complement

each other and form a 1-2 (and hit). On this right side, your right foot is called the back foot, the

left your front foot.



It is the mirror image when hitting a ball on your left side. Here the right foot will be the front

foot that steps into the ball prior to contact, making the left foot the 1, or the first step, on that

side.



In everyday life you move your right foot first when moving to the right, your left first when

moving to the left, and your feet work in pairs. It's natural. Why not do this in your tennis?



          MOVEMENT SHOULD BE SYMMETRICALLY EQUIVALENT

                            FROM FOREHAND TO BACKHAND



                         BACK FOOT FIRST / FRONT FOOT LAST

                       AND ALWAYS, ALWAYS, INTO THE BALL



Beginning from the ready position, then, the right foot moves first when moving to the right, the

left when moving to the left. And in what direction? Forward (2A, 2B), not to the side or

backward, not in-place by pivoting (1D). If you want to go backwards and hit the ball, then by all

means step back with your first step. But if you want to move into the ball, then your first step

must be in the same direction.



All right. This is what we know. Move forward, back foot first, a 1-2 before hitting. However,



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.2 /9

you can't hit groundstrokes well by taking only 2 steps. Either you'll stretch to reach the ball, or

your rhythm will be off because while you're ready to hit, the ball won't be there yet. Rhythm is

1-2 and hit, not 1-2 and wait, and wait, and hit.



                             4 STEPS 4 STEPS 4 STEPS 4 STEPS



I've found that 4 steps reaches most groundstroke situations. More steps and you're hitting

on-the-run.



When moving to the right, it's right foot first, followed

by the left, then right, then left, and contact. When

moving to the left, it's left foot first, then right, left,

right, and contact. In other words you take 2 sets of a

1-2 movement pattern, 1-2, 3-4. 4 steps (2C).

Contact follows the even numbered step, the front

foot.



You start with large steps, not small ones, because you need to get moving. Step #1 out of the

ready position is the most important because it gets you headed INTO the ball from the get-go.

Without it chances are good you won't reach the ball on time.



Tennis literature talks about footwork as small, adjusting steps, but you can't build a footwork

model based on adjustment steps. Perhaps the confusion lies in the fact that it is the last 2 steps

(of this 4 step model) that adjust their stride as needed, and the last one is completely on its own

depending on the efficiency of your movement angle into the ball. You need to MOVE, and

INTO the ball, and it has to be done efficiently. More follows.



Bear with me, I know you're thinking, "4 steps, way too many." Let me explain.



You don't take 4 steps like you're casually walking across the room, just 4 steps within the

amount of distance you have between your ready position and the contact spot. Sometimes they'll

be 4 small, quick steps; sometimes the last step will be a stutter step, sometimes it will be a long

step. Furthermore, one foot moves past the other and you don't sidestep, as if you were limping.



                                        OLD FOOTWORK



For your amusement, I'm juxtaposing modern

day footwork as prescribed by the United States

Professional Tennis Association in their book,

USPTA Professional Guide, Official Handbook,

which teachers have to study to earn

certification, and a convoluted footwork pattern

from 1926, The Mechanics of the Game, by J.

Parmly Paret, as part of the Lawn Tennis Library

of instructional books. Though the placement of

the feet in the ready position has changed in 60

years, the idea of moving backwards first lives

on.



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.3 /9

                                          SIDESTEPPING



Sidestepping, whether forward or off to the side,

is an inefficient movement pattern because one

foot fails to cover distance by dragging behind

and into the other (2D). Instead, both feet

should remain pointing forward and/or toward

the eventual contact spot as in 2C above, and

you shouldn't rush the ball. Sidestepping behind

the baseline on groundstrokes to then take one

step into the ball is both arrhythmic and finds

your momentum moving parallel to the baseline

and over to the side fence instead of forward

into the ball.



Your steps must continue forward and into the

ball (2A,1C). It's common to start forward but

veer off to the side and lose the advantage of

moving into the ball; it's common that step

number #3 becomes a short stutter step instead of

a full one, leaving step number #4 to make up

distance it shouldn't have to, and you reach,

losing balance and structure.



Adding a recovery step to your footwork during

your contact makes it harder to get ready, costs

you time, reduces your body's support, and

inconsistent results follow. Diagram 2E shows

the extra distance involved to get ready after the

hit when taking a recovery step during contact instead of holding the anchor foot down as best as

possible. It doesn't matter if you backpedal or turn and run back to get ready. This extra



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.4 /9

distance costs you time, of which there's never enough, and the ensuing lack of support from

body rotation that naturally accompanies the recovery step is responsible for mishits, as outlined

in Step 3 and 4.



A recovery step helps change directions and recovers balance, it is not a part of a footwork model

designed to end in contact. Your feet need to maintain their position when you swing to increase

the swing's speed, to support your contact spot, to produce more power, and to eliminate

upper/lower body movement during contact, the culprit behind stroke inconsistency.



What happens when you do move correctly into the ball but place

your anchor foot sideways prior to contact? Not only are you short-

changing your court coverage when your penultimate step works

inefficiently (2D above), but your momentum gets re-directed away

from the ball, 2F.



For returns and volleys you only take the minimum of 2 steps

because there's both less distance between you and your opponent's

contact, and the ball's never as wide away from you as it could be in

the backcourt (1A).



                                WHAT ABOUT THE GRAVITY STEP?



The gravity step, or drop step, finds the back foot moving first, followed by the front foot. In this

sense it adheres to the idea that the foot nearest the ball, the back foot, moves first.



But the gravity step finds the back foot moving in

the direction opposite the ball's. The back foot

moves backwards, beneath the body toward the

other foot, leaving the body imbalanced, almost

falling over. It is argued that you move faster by

imbalancing the body and having to catch up with

it, so to speak.



As I mentioned earlier, there are many ways we move our feet to get from point A to point B.

Our experiences have a lot to do with the way we move. I feel the gravity step has developed as a

result of turning sideways first, as a result of turning the shoulders, hips, or feet first instead of

simply moving (hopefully forward) to the ball.



When the body turns in place your body weight is placed on the foot closest to the ball, that is the

back foot. At this point it is impossible to move that foot toward the ball. The result is either the

other foot crosses over for the first step, or the back foot drops back under the body, creating

imbalance to jump start the body.



Pros have been taught to turn first, then move. The gravity step developed as a compensatory

technique to both turn and move, much like the open stance compensates for the fact that

stepping sideways doesn't allow the body to empower the stroke (Step 3). But you'll avoid

having to compensate if you first move forward to the ball because you turn automatically by

moving (Step 4). Less is more.



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.5 /9

                BUT BEFORE YOU TAKE THAT 1ST STEP..... SPLIT-STEP



Before you take that first step you have to hop in-place, sometimes called a split step. You lift

both feet off the ground, you unweight the body, and when you touch down you move more

quickly to the ball because your body is in motion to begin with. Your response is much slower if

you stand dead still, notice where the ball's going, and then begin to move.



When you split step at the baseline or up close to the net try not to land with your feet too far

apart or you won't be able to push off well to get going into the ball. A wide stance means you're

holding ground, a narrow one means you're moving. Try to keep the feet closer rather than

farther away, a difficult task but one well worth trying.



With a split step you're likely to land and start leaning over to move into the ball, your torso

wants to get going before your feet. Moving too aggressively promotes imbalance, which lessens

the body's ability to act as a strong foundation for your stroke, Step 5. Your first step won't get

you to the ball, it simply gets you going. More importantly, your first step establishes whatever

vertical balance you will have throughout the routine, Step 5. Be balanced first, and then make up

the distance to the ball with the next step(s).



                PLAYING AGAINST BALLS HIT DEEP INTO THE CORNERS



Stand back 5 feet from the baseline in order to keep the ball in front of you/defend against the

hard shots into the corner or deep to the baseline. If you take 4 steps on balls really deep and

hard into the corners, your body will be too turned to the side to effectively deliver its momentum

into the ball (instead, it goes into the side fence).



There is a limit on taking 4 steps into the ball while keeping the body structured well to support

the contact, but this limit can be overcome fairly easily.



That limit is roughly halfway to your singles sideline corner, and it can be overcome by translating

the ready position farther over to the corner before breaking into the 4 step pattern into the ball.

You do this by side-stepping, or shuffling to the side for one two-step pattern, then taking 4 steps.

This is the only time a shuffle is needed, it's an exception. Conventional tennis wants you to

shuffle all the time and then take but one step, which is arrhythmic, causes you to lose your

balance, promotes an open stance, and sends you and your momentum off to the side instead of

into the ball.



                                              REPOSITIONING



Repositioning, the bane of all tennis players. It's easy to go and hit the ball, but you can't stay

where you are on the court because you'll be strategically out of position. You need to

reposition. That means for groundstrokes you need to get back behind the baseline in order to

face the center of your opponent's angle of shot-making possibilities.



Mathematically, you can always draw a straight line between you and your opponent's contact

spot. This line forms a zero degree baseline, away from which the ball angles either to your right

or left, no matter how slight or your position on the court. It's as if your ready position is at the 6

o'clock spot on a clock face, the opponent's contact spot is at 12, and the ball goes either to 5 or 7

o'clock. It's rare the ball comes directly at you, more often you move incorrectly and the ball goes



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.6 /9

right into your body.



In singles you reposition three to five feet behind the baseline

AND slightly to the right or left of the center hashmark, not

dead-center (2G). Your opponent's contact spot isn't literally in

the middle of his/her court as in diagram 1A, it's always off to

one side. If you remain dead-center behind your baseline you

won't be facing the center of the angle of possibilities against

you, you'll be off too much to one side.



Diagram 2G shows this repositioning effect. You are on the

side opposite your opponent's contact spot. In doubles you

simply reposition behind the singles sideline corner behind the

baseline.



When you're up at the net for singles you're on the same side as

your opponent's contact spot. I know it's a bit confusing, but it's

part of the same family. For diagram 2H I have simply drawn a

line from the ready position in the back court to the opponent's

contact spot (the zero degree baseline). If you walk from the

back court along this line up to the net, you cross over the

middle of the court and wind up on the same side as your

opponent's contact spot. For doubles you remain in the middle

of your service box and reposition laterally either toward your

alley if the ball is hit into your opponent's alley on your same

side, or toward the middle if it's hit into the alley on the side

opposite you.



              THE FIRST STEP TO EMPOWERING YOUR BACKHAND

           IS TO IMPROVE THE USE OF YOUR NON-DOMINANT LEG



One reason why your forehand is stronger than your backhand is because the foot that moves

first, the back foot, happens to be your dominant foot/leg. You easily move this foot first, and if

not, at least it manages to keep the contact spot ahead of you, in the direction of the net, and not

off in the direction of the side fence. On backhands, though, your non-dominant foot/leg fails on

both accounts, and it drags behind as the dominant foot tries to take over.



In everyday life there is no problem moving to your right or to your left, your feet move easily

and unencumbered. You don't make the distinction, "this is my backhand side, it's weaker, I

should go around and approach it from my forehand side." The first step to empowering your

backhand is to move your back foot first and forward and train it to keep you moving into the

ball. It's awkward at first, but you will get to the ball faster, your momentum will be directed into

the ball, and when combined with other elements to come, you will be establishing a strong

foundation with the body from which to empower your stroke. I used a ball machine. I held my

left foot in the air and moved it forward when the ball appeared. And I took 4 steps, making sure

my left foot moved forward on that third step.



Why is hitting open stance popular with the pros? Conventional tennis teaches the front foot to



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.7 /9

step first by doing a crossover step. Here the back foot pivots against the ground (1D) and the

front foot takes a step as step #1. The back foot becomes step #2 and contact is made in an open

stance.



An open stance is rhythmically sound when the first step is a crossover step (step #2 leaves you

on the back foot). Furthermore, pros starting with a crossover step avoid stepping into the ball

with the front foot because one more step throws the 1-2 and hit rhythm off into 1-2, 3, and hit.

And they've experienced that stepping sideways with the front foot doesn't empower the stroke,

as explained in Step 3.



                                                  ADDENDUM



Anyone watching Roger Federer has undoubtedly noticed he sidesteps once, or twice, then steps

to the ball with the front foot (or remains in an open stance), yet he also moves in the more

conventional 1-2 manner as described in this Step. He is not alone in this. Is this sidestepping

footwork pattern something to emulate?



I wrote earlier in the "Sidestepping" portion above: "Conventional tennis wants you to shuffle all

the time and then take but one step, which is arrhythmic, causes you to lose your balance,

promotes an open stance, and sends you and your momentum off to the side instead of into the

ball." I still believe this, especially when teaching how to play. And evidence for me remains

clear in both student and pro of the extra challenges created by a sidestepping movement pattern.



So why does Federer do it? The sidestep pattern is used when, ironically, the ball is coming fast.

Why? Keeping the ball ahead or in front of you increases the chances of hitting on time because it

opens the hitting window (visually, physically). Using the 1-2 pattern to move fast to a fast ball

can turn the body away from the ball, which also turns your head and momentum to the side,

whereas using the 1-2 pattern to move fast to a ball that is not so fast doesn't turn the body so

dramatically.



The sidestepping pattern on a forehand keeps you, or Federer, in an open stance, from which you

choose either to remain that way and hit open with the weight on the back foot or step the front

foot in-place (open forward stance), or choose to take a more forward step with the front foot

forward into the ball (forward stance). A one-handed backhand leaves little choice but to step

with the front foot (open stance is done better using the 1-2 movement pattern), whereas a two

hander has the same choices as with a forehand.



Lots of pros use the sidestep pattern, but when we do it something's amiss because it doesn't work

like with Federer. Why? The first drawback of this sidestep pattern is you don't cover distance as

you would using in a normal, 1-2 pattern, and pros attempt to overcome by being top athletes.

And though the sidestep pattern seems simpler there are other prices to pay besides getting into

shape like a pro athlete to help make up for this inefficient movement pattern.



With the sidestep movement pattern you to have to prepare the swing not only sooner but the

adjustments at the end are made more demanding; you have to fight harder to keep your balance

before and during the swing since your momentum's sideward direction is at odds with the

stroke's more forward direction into the ball; and with only one step before the hit the whole thing

is arrhythmic. This is all very difficult to do, it is far too easy to lose the prep work, the balance,



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 2 p.8 /9

the momentum redirection, or the overall rhythm using one step, let alone getting close enough to

the ball to begin with so you don't have to adjust/make up for distance. This explains why, even

when the pros do it, they don't execute like Federer. He alone remains well balanced and

stabilized during his shot, two cornerstones to his success his peers try to emulate but can't.



Federer's overall composure on the court is the reason he's number one, that is his talent in many

areas (moves well, balances and counter balances, stabilizes, vision, etc.). You can certainly

sidestep and hit the ball like he does but remember how challenging it really is because it taxes so

many other areas. And if your game is a bit off stop the sidestepping and work in a 1-2

movement pattern instead to re-ground your rhythm and get the feet moving again a little better.



OLD THINK                                        NEW THINK



� move foot A first if ball is short             � right foot first to the right, short or deep ball

� move foot B first if ball is deep              � left foot first to the left, short or deep ball

� move opposite foot first if ball is far

� move closest foot first if ball is close       � get going with large steps

� small steps, then large ones                   � 4 steps groundies, 2 on volleys

� get going with large steps

� stutter steps, side steps, crab steps or drag



  one foot behind you



                                                            � Mark Papas Step 2 p.9 /9

                          Revolutionary Tennis



                                           Tennis That Makes Sense



                         Step 3



                         Your Body's Power Zone



� Mark Papas

mark@revolutionarytennis.com

Steps 1 and 2 begin to explain how to structure the foundation, your body, to empower your

stroke. Move into the ball using your natural locomotion for rhythm and efficiency..

Step 3 explains the relationship of your feet and body to the contact spot and the result is a new

stance for tennis players: the forward stance. First, let me illustrate the popular stances known

today as outlined by a self-described tennis guru. Diagram 3A shows the closed stance, open and

semi open, and the neutral stance (also known as the standard method, the square stance).



The stances in 3A are all but derivations of a main theme. The main theme is based both on the

body's structure and our desire to move into the ball as seen earlier. First, let me explain a simple

thing about the body's structure before arriving at the main theme.

It doesn't matter whether you kick or hit a ball, tackle someone, lift a bag of groceries or a heavy

box, all of these actions take place in a zone common to us all. This common zone lies between

the width of the feet where the feet are for the most part parallel to each other, and you can see

this zone if you look at the act from a bird's eye view and extend lines straight away from the toes.

For example you don't stand sideways to a box and try to lift it, you stand facing it

where the box is between your feet and your feet are parallel, or identical, to each

other (3B). And, you wouldn't think of turning your body center to the side

before lifting.

I call this common area your body's power zone. Not exactly in the middle

between identical feet, simply in between them and not to the outer side of either

one, and the center of your body, the groin area, faces straight ahead in the same direction as your

feet.

For example, a golf ball lies between the width of the golfer's feet, and the body's center faces the

ball at contact. A baseball batter, standing sideways, takes one step and swivels both feet to

make them identical and to place the contact between them and in front of his center. This is,

initially, how your body structures itself to empower whatever it is you're doing with your arms

and hands, and the height of the action is secondary to this.



The contact spot for a tennis player is our task, and

as such the contact spot must line up between the

width of identical feet in front of the body's center

for the body to empower your swing into the

contact spot. This is the same as your body

empowering your arms to lift the box. But

diagram 3C shows how this fundamental alignment

does not occur when the front foot steps sideways

(and contact is made out in front/ahead of the front

foot), or when both feet face the net, often

misunderstood as the open stance.



Your strokes are unsupported in 3C because the

contact does not lie between the width of the feet, even though the feet are parallel or pointing in

the same direction. Diagram 3C is the tennis player's equivalent of standing sideways to a box

and lifting it.



You may think some of the popular stances shown in diagram 3A above may meet the dual

requirement of hitting the ball between the width of identical, or parallel, feet. You are half right.

Either the contact spot will not lie between the width of the feet (closed stance), or the feet are

dissimilar (neutral, open stance). Only the semi open stance meets the dual requirement of

contact between the width of identical feet, but, as with the open stance, you're standing still on

the back foot prior to swinging instead of stepping forward into the ball.



Each stance in 3A requires you to compensate for the fact you've been moving off to the side

instead of into the ball (1D). As a consequence you'll rotate the body to deliver momentum into

the ball to support your stroke, but that's a compensatory and counter-productive technique that

adversely impacts your swing, Step 4.



                                         THE FORWARD STANCE



What is the forward stance? BOTH feet are identical,

BOTH feet have been moving into the ball, and you step

into the ball with the front foot prior to contact (that

occurs between the feet). The back foot is not sideways

because it's been moving into the ball per Step 2.

You've experienced this alignment structure when

hitting on-the-run moving forward into the court. The

feet here are never sideways or dissimilar during contact

(that occurs between the feet).



If you follow Steps 1 and 2 for groundstrokes and

volleys, the result is the forward stance, the result is

strength. With BOTH feet moving into the ball, or



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 3 p.2 /4

pointing into the ball, stepping into the ball with the front foot prior to contact finds both feet

identical and the contact between their width (3D).



Diagram 3D also includes what I consider a proper open stance, which is called a semi open

stance in 3A. Contact is made between identical feet, though very close to the back foot. You

won't be at full strength with an open stance because it's like placing the heavy box closer to one

of your feet instead of in-between them before lifting it, and you're not stepping forward into the

ball.



The forward stance, for a tennis player, is the main theme. You should plan to use it more often

than not. But, if you can't get to the ball in time, use the open stance. If the ball is just too close

and too fast, use the open stance. If you don't want to move into the ball to begin with or step

into it with the front foot before you swing, use the open stance, or the neutral stance of diagram

3A. If you need to compensate, go ahead, just don't make it the heart of your game. These

stances can work, but they make you work more for your shot. And with Revolutionary Tennis,

remember, less is more.



                                    THE OPEN FORWARD STANCE



There is an open forward stance that accommodates fast balls

and high balls for a western grip which I'm seeing on

occasion in the pros. Prior to contact, 3E left, the front foot

prepares to take the last step prior to contact, the 2 of a 1-2

and hit rhythm of Step 2. It steps into and toward the ball,

3E right, but it doesn't take as long a step as with the forward

stance. Instead of planting your back foot before swinging,

the open forward stance allows you to take a (small) step

forward into to the contact.



                                            HIT OUT IN FRONT?



What about hitting out in front, or ahead, of the front foot?

This is a old misconception brought by the closed stance (or

was it the other way around?). Today's tennis still urges you

to stand sideways and hit out in front/ahead of the front foot.

This means contact is made to the outside of the front foot,

which leaves you unsupported, and as a result the open stance

developed. Well, hitting out in front/ahead of the front foot

seems to be happening when you look at the contact spot from the side, 3F. But if you look at

the contact from the body's point of view, you would see it lies between the width of the feet and

in front of the body's center, not out in front/ahead of the front foot. This is the alignment

structure for a strong hit. "Out in front" really means don't hit late.



The contact zone has always been described as optimally located between the hips and the

shoulders, a location that suggests height is everything. I don't know about you, but the tennis

ball never sits at just the right height when I hit it. Instead, the contact zone should be seen as

lying between the width of the feet, allowing you to strike the ball at whatever height. After all,

there is only one moment in time when the ball can be hit on time, and height is secondary to the

contact's horizontal placement between the width of the feet. Contact too far ahead and you're



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step 3 p.3 /4

too soon, and once past your body's center you're late, no matter the height. Step 7 elaborates

more.



I'm sure you've seen a photo or two of a pro's front foot almost pointing straight to the net on a

backhand, looking a little awkward. Next time you do, look at the back foot's position. It will

invariably be sideways, parallel to the baseline, pointing to the side fence, or even the rear fence,

indicating the pro has not been moving forward into the ball. At this point the pro opens his/her

front foot awkwardly to valiantly place the ball somewhere between the width of the feet. The

instinct is natural to do this, but it's hard to accomplish when sideways first.



Yet another difference between backhands and forehands can be seen here. There is a fudge

factor regarding the contact on a forehand. The ball can be hit later, or closer to the back foot,

because the racket arm is on the same side as your back foot. On the backhand there is no margin

for hitting later. The racket arm is on the same side of what is now the front foot, and the contact

spot lies almost even with the front foot. This is why a backhand open stance is becoming more

popular, you can hit later.



If you're sideways, should you then swivel one or both feet, like a baseball batter, to place the

contact between them and in front of your body center? If you're in an open stance, should you

rotate the body to generate momentum? You could, but you'd be adding layers of difficulty

unnecessary for tennis, as explained in Step 4.



Turning sideways, moving parallel, taking small steps to move, dragging one foot behind you,

stepping across or sideways, using an open stance, each one works against developing a strong

foundation with the body. No wonder your strokes suffer.



An even greater misconception is how to achieve power, Step 4.



OLD THINK                      NEW THINK



� contact out in front         � contact between the width of the feet

� stand sideways               � face the ball

� step towards the net         � both feet point and step towards the ball

� step towards ball placement  � both feet are identical

� face the net                 � forward stance

� neutral stance

� open stance

� semi open stance



                                                                � Mark Papas Step 3 p.4 /4

                          Revolutionary Tennis



                                           Tennis That Makes Sense



                         Step 4



                         Your Body's Power



� Mark Papas

mark@revolutionarytennis.com



To step or not to step into the ball, that is the question.



Does your body empower you more when you move into and step into the ball, or when you

remain in an open stance? Or when you throw the back leg around from an open stance? Well,

try pushing someone away from you, or throwing a ball, without stepping into what you're doing.

The answer is clear: move, take that step. How about accuracy? Ever throw a ball while

aggressively swinging your back leg around? You have no accuracy.



Power means shifting body weight. The weight is shifted, creating momentum, into your body's

power zone to empower your arms or legs. There's acceleration with the striking mechanism

(hand. leg, bat) for more pop, but it's the weight shift that counts.



You can shift your weight in a variety of ways, and instinctively tennis players are always trying to

shift more weight into the ball. But what we want is a system that gets the most bang for the

buck and can be repeated easily. All athletes are trying to achieve power with the least amount of

energy expenditure possible because overdoing things leads to injuries and inconsistent results.



Two terms used for momentum: linear and angular. I know biomechanists would add minutiae to

my descriptions, but I want to keep it simple. It's angular momentum when the body rotates the

torso and/or hips, like a golfer or baseball batter during a swing, and it's linear momentum when

the body shifts straight without rotation, like moving straight into someone and pushing them

away from you.



Every tennis manual asks you to rotate your body for power like a baseball batter or golfer when

swinging, but consider this:



       WHY DO YOU HAVE SO MUCH POWER HITTING ON-THE-RUN

                         MOVING FORWARD INTO THE COURT



          WHEN YOU HAVE NOT ROTATED ANYTHING AT ALL?



You know the example I'm talking about. The ball's short, you're forced to run forward, you hit

while moving (on-the-run), and at times you have too much power. Absent rotation, what's

going on?



You're using linear momentum from the body for power when hitting on-the-run, not angular

momentum, AND it's being directed solely into the ball and not along the ball's flight line toward

the opponent.. (The swing is angular, yes, because it goes around, due to the arm.) By following

Steps 1 and 2, your momentum moves into the ball. Linear momentum shifts weight in a straight

line, and believe me, it's enough of a power supply for you or any other tennis player.



I know what you're thinking, this is crazy, but I'm not advocating hitting groundstrokes

on-the-run. I'm arguing what's right for tennis based on the game's point of view, and the body's

point of view. Let's compare tennis with golf and baseball to see if we're talking apples and

apples, or apples and oranges.



            TENNIS                       GOLF             BASEBALL



the ball    angles away                  lies still       thrown at you



the player  moves to the ball            stands still     stays in a box

            and back



1 point     is many hits                 is one hit       may hit once after

                                                            series of tries



playing area 39 feet long, 26 feet wide  hundreds of      hundreds of feet

                   and begins up to 39    yards away,       long and wide

                   feet away from you    10's yards wide



Tennis demands movement into a ball and stroke repetition, all within a small playing field.

Except for the hand-eye coordination, a golfer or baseball batter's body technique during the

swing is of no use for a tennis player because their realities are much different. Body rotation for

power is required when the player does not or can not move, moves very little, or the field is

large. It's clearly apples and oranges when comparing tennis with golf and baseball.



Steps 1 and 2 describe moving INTO the ball with 4 steps on groundstrokes. When you move

INTO the ball your linear momentum is also directed INTO the ball, they go hand in hand.

Movement equals power. Movement into the ball automatically places the contact between

identical feet, Step 3, and delivers power into the ball (4A, 4B) without the need for

compensatory technique.



       LINEAR MOMENTUM "INJECTS" POWER ON A STRAIGHT LINE



The back foot doesn't stay flat on the ground, it goes up on its toe when you shift into the ball.

You already know how to do this. Get up and walk s-l-o-w-l-y. Notice how your weight goes



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step4 p.2 /8

from one foot to the next, and how each foot moves heel to toe. The back heel lifts, leaving only

the toes touching the floor when shifting onto the front foot.



On the tennis court keep moving into the ball to shift the weight into the ball. Don't hesitate,

pause, or pull back. I know that sounds obvious, but imagine you want to kick a soccer ball back

down field and you're told to run toward the sidelines, get "in position," and then kick it. Or

you're told to run up to it, turn, shift your weight back away from the ball, and then kick. These

two examples represent the standard advice on weight shifting for tennis players. Less is more.



                                     WHY NOT BODY ROTATION?



Body rotation is designed to shift weight if you're not moving into the object to begin with, or if

you're standing still prior to contact. But a tennis player gets to move, and should take advantage

of this huge benefit by moving into the ball instead of to the side fence.



Body rotation by definition means the body rotates inward from the

contact spot, no matter the sport. From overhead, the trajectory of a

tennis ball is a tangent line, angling away from the player, and it continues

to angle away at contact. The direction of the body's rotation here is

inward from the tangent line, inward from the contact spot (4C).



Or look at it this way. Stand and face your computer monitor. Draw an

imaginary line perpendicular to it from your navel. This line has a fixed length to it. Rotate your

body to one side and notice how your imaginary line arcs inward from the monitor.



As a tennis player you face the reality of a ball angling away from you. If you rotate your body

during the swing, this means both your racket and your body are moving away from the ball at the

same time the ball is moving away from you. �Ay caramba!



Linear momentum is an easier and more reliable source of power than angular momentum. Its

mathematical equation is simpler as well. When a tennis player rotates, it's overkill,

counterproductive, and everything gets more complicated. What happens when a golfer or batter

tries to hit the ball harder? They rotate more, and their accuracy suffers.



                                    LINEAR BODY WEIGHT SHIFT



The length to the linear shifting of your body weight is small.

This is the main advantage, there is very little "shifting" to do

since you've been moving into the ball. The tennis balls placed

below the center of my body in photo 4D represent this length,

and the arrow shows the direction of the shift. Aggressive

players will add more length to this shift by taking a longer

stride.



Let me show the direction in which your weight shift should

proceed. 4E shows the difference between shifting your weight

forward into the ball, or shifting it "forward" toward the

opponent in the direction of your stroke, which isn't forward



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step4 p.3 /8

into the ball. You shift into the ball, and there is only one direction for that.



If you're like most players, often your momentum has

been going to the side fence. You're sideways, and to

compensate you'll rotate your body to redirect your

momentum more into the ball. Unavoidably, this

rotation adversely impacts your stroke.



Or, you'll rotate your body to generate momentum

from an open stance because you've stopped moving,

you won't step into the ball. Ironically, this momentum

from rotation will not go into the ball but away from it,

the largest single source of unforced forehand errors in the pros. On a replay after the pro has

netted an easy forehand, notice how severely he or she rotated the body inward from the contact

spot toward the opponent's side of the court, that is away from the ball.



I know the idea of no body rotation is different. It runs counter to the established method. Well,

if you move into the ball correctly with both feet, step into it with the front foot, shift your weight

linearly into the ball, and don't rotate the body during the swing, you'll be amazed at how strong

your contact is with linear momentum as a power source. Large muscle groups are still

responsible for transferring weight, only now their contribution is linear, not rotational. This is a

new idea. Revolutionary.



                             LESS IS MORE, SIMPLE IS BEST



Let's talk about turning the body, because I

know the popular idea is to "turn" the body

when you take the racket back. First,

when you move you automatically turn the

hips and shoulders, it doesn't work the

other way around, shown in diagram 4F.

Movement = turning, as illustrated when

hitting on-the-run forward into the court.

Very few students move across the court

with their shoulders parallel to the net.



Second, if you turn first, you've turned

the body and its momentum away from

the ball. With this over-turn, you'll have

to re-turn the body into the ball to

support the stroke at contact. All of

that adjustment, especially in such a

short amount of time, adversely impacts

any swing. Compensatory technique

should not be offered as a model.



Third, and last, what about the popular

idea of turning the upper body a lot



                                                                                                      � Mark Papas Step4 p.4 /8



---

[Cuối tài liệu]

linear and angular  http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



        Along with the fact that we are attracting some great athletes to the game of tennis, racket technology has improved

        significantly. Both of these factors allow players to hit ground strokes with open stances, providing for powerful

        strokes and rapid recovery. The photo series featured here shows the open stance forehands of Andy Murray and

        Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. The goal of this photo series is to show you the contribution of both linear and angular

        momentum in each of these forehands. There are two key things to remember related to these shots:



        1. Open stances are situation specific.



        2. All ground strokes require both linear and angular momentum.



        Linear and Angular Momentum



        The forehand ground strokes featured here are hit with an open stance. One of the main reasons the players are able

        to use an open stance is that, although they are just inside the baseline, they have plenty of time to set up. If the

        incoming ball was lower and shorter, each of these players would have "squared off" his forehand significantly. Both

        players are clearly looking to go on the offensive and are in the process of hitting a very aggressive shot. As you will

        see in the explanation of the stages of these strokes, there is a significant linear AND angular momentum

        contribution in each of the forehands. Linear momentum is a product of both mass and velocity and can be generated

        in both a vertical and a horizontal direction. Angular momentum refers to the rotational component of the stroke and

        takes into account both the moment of inertia about an axis (resistance to rotation about that axis) and the angular

        velocity about that axis. Without getting too technical, it is important to realize that both linear and angular

        momentum are fundamental for the successful generation of power in the forehand. The amount of linear momentum

        created affects the amount of rotation force that's generated about each of the body segments (angular momentum)

        and vice versa. Therefore, both play an integral role in the success of the ground strokes regardless of stance. As

        linear momentum is developed in a straight line and angular momentum about an axis of rotation, coaches often

        associate a square stance with the former and an open stance with the latter. Conceptually, this link makes sense and

        may assist with one's understanding of the terms; however, stroke production - regardless of stance - relies on both

        linear and angular momentum.



        Let's take a look at how these two players employ both linear and angular momentum to their open stance

        forehand strokes.



        Preparation phase



        In the first three pictures, we can clearly see

        that both Andy Murray and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga

        are looking to hit a very aggressive forehand.

        They are clearly inside the baseline and

        preparing to hit with an open stance. From

        Photo 1 to Photo 2, you can see the weight

        transfer from the left leg to the right leg. This

        weight transfer shows the horizontal linear

        momentum necessary to plant the right foot.

        [i.e. "Loading" on the outside or back leg is

        horizontal linear momentum.] Even though the

        linear momentum is in the opposite direction of

        the stroke, it is important to load the right leg.

        This helps to prepare the leg for its drive,

        predominantly upward (vertical linear

        momentum) but also forward (horizontal linear

        momentum). This leg drive (or triple joint

        extension: ankle, knee and hip), which utilizes

        ground reaction forces, is critical for linear to

        angular momentum transfer and the

        development of high racket speed. [The

        potential for "high racket speed" is present with

        this leg drive but does not guarantee said "high



2 of 7              5/13/13 8:19 AM

linear and angular                                                                http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



racket speed" will happen. Calling this leg

drive "critical" to "transfer... linear to angular momentum" inevitably leads one to think more leg drive will be better,

but it's not because you'll look like popcorn popping.] Photo 3 shows it beginning to unfold, with mostly vertical

linear momentum being produced. The subtle differences in the right (and left) foot plant of the two players (Photo

2) offers some explanation for the more pronounced leg drive used by Tsonga (as evidenced in Photos 4-6). Note the

amount of both hip and shoulder rotation. The shoulders are typically rotated more than the hips by about 20 degree,

which is observable in the strokes of both players (Photo 3). This is commonly refereed to as the separation angle.



Contact phase



The vertical linear momentum phase as been completed,

evidenced by the full knee and hip extension in Photo 4. [Only

vertical linear momentum, or upward? What about horizontal

linear momentum, the forward component, is it present here or

not?] Forces have been transferred and we can see the hips

opening up first, followed by the shoulders. [Therefore, in the

graph above, "leg drive... is critical for linear to angular

momentum transfer and the development of high racket speed,"

the word "transfer" means it's done through the "hips opening up

first, followed by the shoulders"] Both players show significant

rotation indicating a powerful stroke, further evidenced by the

right foot coming off the ground (Photo 5). This is where angular

momentum (of the trunk and then the rotating upper limb)

contributes significantly to the speed of the shot. At contact, the

resultant high swing speed (and linear momentum) of both

players' rackets allows the linear momentum of the incoming ball

to be easily overcome.



            Follow-through phase                                                  5/13/13 8:19 AM



            Photo 6 and 7 show the completion of the stroke. The amount of

            rotation (note how far the right leg comes around) points to the

            effectiveness with which both players coordinated the linear

            and/or angular contribution of each of the body parts involved.

            [Does this mean more "amount of rotation," and more "right leg

            comes around" = more effectiveness? No, the "effectiveness" of

            said coordination lies in the ball staying in, the work-to-result

            ratio not tilted too much toward work, and the player looks

            balanced and coordinated regardless of form used.] The fact that

            both players are farther in the court than at the beginning of the

            swing (see the position of the right shoulder) is a product of the

            shot's horizontal linear momentum. The follow-through is also

            dictated by the differences in objectives (Tsonga hitting inside out



3 of 7

linear and angular                                                        http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



            and Murray hitting cross-court). The interplay of linear and

            angular momentum is what makes the forehands so successful.

            End.



                                                               Breakdown



        How many times linear and angular are mentioned, including the headers:



        23 linear

        16 angular



        Problem 1



        Leg drive = vertical (upward), and horizontal (forward) linear momentum.

        Leg drive = "critical" for linear to angular transfer and the development of racket head speed.

        Transfer = hips and shoulders opening, or rotating.



        Note is says AND the development of high racket speed, not FOR the development of high racket speed. Therefore

        the opening of the hips and shoulders, the torso rotating, is not in and of itself "critical" for the development of

        racket head speed.



        But then: "Both players show significant rotation indicating a powerful stroke." We now return to rotation

        ("significant") as the nexus of the powerful stroke. In other words rotation, not leg drive. So which one is it?



        Problem 2



        If you say leg drive is "critical" then players do too much and look like popcorn popping.



        You say "significant rotation" = indicates "a powerful stroke" then players do too much and become spinning tops.



        Leg drive (linear) is "critical" for the development of high racket speed, but only as long as the transfer from linear

        to angular results. This transfer, as indicated in the USTA newsletter, is about the hips and shoulders opening, the

        torso rotating, but this USTA newsletter does not address how much the hips open, how much the shoulders open,

        whether or not they do so in tandem, what is their objective, how much opening is required to achieve maximum

        acceleration with maximum torque, and whether or not opening the body helps or hinders the linear momentum of

        the stroke itself.



        Just how does leg drive feed the angular momentum that follows? How can angular momentum be disciplined so it

        does not destroy the entire process and the player lose control over the contact moment?



        What happens when you drive your car as fast as it can go? You lose control, and the same thing happens when we

        boost angular momentum for the stroke. It's easily seen in golf where, even though the ball lies motionless, large

        twisting or body rotation to try to accelerate the club leads to lack of contact control. In tennis we move to the ball,

        linear momentum, load weight and shift weight, linear momentum, and it is then we engage "the" power source

        (angular momentum) for the stroke? I think not.



        So there you have it, a sport which on the one hand talks about the presence of linear momentum throughout the



4 of 7                                                                    5/13/13 8:19 AM

linear and angular  http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



        stroking process but highlights the "powerful stroke" coming from angular momentum of hip and shoulder rotation.

        Or if you want to prevaricate by saying it is the "transfer" from linear to angular that creates the powerful stroke,

        they why not explain how to mitigate, modulate, manage, or master this transfer other than saying "leg drive" is

        "critical" and "significatn rotation [indicates] a powerful stroke"?



        Revolutionary Tennis has stated body rotation will appear on its own without any teacher's input because it is a

        natural thing, and that if the teacher asks for hip/shoulder "turn" and "rotation" the student will certainly do this but

        unfortunately do too much of it to the point of hurting their stroke's efficacy. Why? Because this is the simplest

        instruction set to grab onto. Miss-hits, lousy hit, over-hits, and poor timing are all a result of too much body

        involvement (body rotation, or angular momentum) during the commission of the stroke.



        Linear before angular, angular feeds off linear. Because our sport is one where we move. Hence the forward

        component for every strike: shift body weight forward into the strike, don't shift weight upward, don't shift it away

        from the strike if you really want to get it. Without that you'll rotate yourself silly and only wind up hurting your

        body and your game.



        Photos below show a forehand groundstroke sequence. From the side we can tell the player did not move forward

        during the commission of the stroke. She plants her back foot farther ahead than her front, loads, and then instead of

        pushing forward she pushes up and to the side (to her left). She also winds up jumping left and forward a touch, the

        back foot ends closer to the baseline, yes, but her effort is primarily up and to her left, putting an awful lot of strain

        and effort onto her back leg and hip



        Here is Roddick from an earlier web page. His forehand return finds him pushing not forward and into the ball but

        off to his left, though he shows substantial body rotation.



5 of 7              5/13/13 8:19 AM

linear and angular  http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



        Federer below clearly pushes, or drives himself, forward on a forehand return, and his rotation is much less

        pronounced for it.



        Everyone knows we must "load" body weight to develop a powerful stroke, it's the expression of athleticism: shift-

        then-execute. Duh. As in shift and throw the jab, shift and throw or shoot. But the secret lies in unloading our body

        weight in such a particular way to not adversely effect our swing's efficacy (arm leverage and elasticity and timing

        notwithstanding).



        Therein lies the Holy Grail to our game, to any athletic expression. The Unloading Principle, and those who do it

        best are always described as elegant, has nothing to do with the kinetic chain as is commonly written, has nothing to

        do with overall physical strength though physical strength will improve one's ability to Unload best, has little to do

        with the traditional understanding of extending for a greater moment of inertia or engaging more muscle groups.

        Conventional wisdom talks about one muscle group feeding into another, and a subsequent one feeding off of a

        preceding group's contribution, but no one, absolutely no one, talks about how this is done best or what the

        contributions should be along the way.



        Revolutionary Tennis will be the first to try to explain how to do it. I will leave the why-ness to the work of scientists

        and analysts, a pro's work is the smacking of the ball and communicating same.



        Stay tuned. And it's easier than you'd think. I think I'll call it the 3-1-2 concept, or Chicago for short. Gotta love the

        American midwest.



6 of 7                                                                                                                5/13/13 8:19 AM

linear and angular  http://www.revolutionarytennis.com/linearandangular.html



7 of 7              5/13/13 8:19 AM