the foot needs to be mobile and flexible to absorb impacts and transmit forces efficiently. this also allows for joints further up the change to function better.
in tennis the wrist is a useful tool as it has the ability to control the balls characteristics. A mobile and functioning wrist could make all the difference to stroke output???
the tennis engineer,
This post aims to give a simple overview of the considerations in a tennis related physical model. This is not S&C or “fitness” based but links in with the previous parts of the tennis system. S&C is a field in its own right that is out of the scope of this series but works on the premise that whatever is achieved in the gym MUST translate to the court otherwise it is all in vain.
so with that said lets consider our previous models of Tactics and Technique. these areas are linked, of course, and one cannot happen effectively without the other. Where I come in, is a step further, to ask the question of the functionality of the body in chasing success in the Tech/Tact model.
The logic, thus far, states that the Tactical outcome and it’s effectiveness relies on technical competency but what does technique rely on? Good racket skills? Footwork? ball tracking, decision making, anticipation? yes all of these but also we are asking the body, the complete musculo-skeletal system, to perform the action that is required.
Many coaches consider the term “bio-mechanics” and also consider developing strokes from the ground up but how many consider the actual “bio-mechanics” in terms of how forces are transmitted through the body and how the joints interact? It is this that is missing from many sporting arenas and make life difficult for both player, coach and support staff (S&C).
The first question really is to consider whose responsibility it is for working with this area and in my opinion it is the responsibility of the coach to understand the bodies functionality, how it likes to work (optimally) and what is being asked of the body in the differing tech/tact relationship.
Now, in order to define the model one must consider each of the major joints in the body and how they interact through stroke production whilst being aware of what situation (tactically) you are dealing with. A defensive forehand has a different bio-mechanical requirement than the “controlling” forehand and is further differing depending on the opponent and ball characteristics. This could get very detailed (unnecessarily) and un-practical.
Therefore, in considering the bodies functionality it makes sense to understand the general capabilities of the key joints (feet, hips/pelvis, spine) and how they link into your key tactical/technical situations.
I will be posting some analysis articles considering the complete system in the next few days (maybe today for the first one) so be sure to check those out if this has sparked interest. Previous posts in this series can be accessed from the links below.
Please contact me with any questions and I am in the process of creating workshops for any level of coach who is interested in the bio-mechanics of tennis. Continue to develop yours and your players tennis story!
Regards,
The Tennis Engineer,
Previous parts of the “Creating a System” series
Creating a System 1 – Tactical Intentions.
If you follow this or indeed read this blog then I apologize for not being that active recently. I have been working on an motion tracking app which is now into a testing phase.
Anyhow, today’s thought extends that of the bodies freedom and how it interacts with the mental, emotional side of tennis. For example, if the player is nervous or apprehensive what affect does this have on the body? Players get “tight” when the pressure or nerves are heightened and this causes the player to play cautiously and with out freedom. This then points to the emotional state being the main factor as to the execution of the game of tennis. It dosn’t matter how free you are, or how good your technique is if you cannot control the emotions.
The Tennis Engineer,
I was coaching a young female player of mine and we were working on moving up the court, getting after the ball and exploiting space by playing down the line. The drill was simple, defend cross and attack line, repeating this on both forehand and backhand side for approximately 20 balls per set.
Another coach and friend of mine observed that when the girl went for the down the line ball her front foot was parallel to the net effectively blocking movement at the hip/pelvis and subsequently making balance after the upper body had rotated through very difficult.
the problem here is that the reason for this is to do with posture and foot function. She has over pronated feet that are turn into to absorb the force of landing or stepping and hence when putting her front foot down it moves to be a parallel in order to absorb the knee flexion and of course transmit force up through the body from the ground.
The thing for me is that no amount of “coaching” will allow this change to stick but there is a way of bypassing the conscious and fix it with out her even knowing. This is to give the foot the freedom of movement that it requires and also to educate the body to use it. Exercises such as the balancing on the offending foot and reaching out with the other leg around a “clock” face gives the foot a 3D experience, in addition some “lunge” type movements encouraging the hip to rotate in a similar manner to the intended stroke forces the foot to take up a new position.
Naturally, the intervention needs repetition and work as with any skill acquisition but there was a instant alteration. In addition we altered the movement to the ball from a “side step” to more of a “gallop” where the front foot is pointing at the ball and we created a situation where mechanically the position was more desirable.
Homework exercises prescribed and we shall see the effects this coming week!
well, this is in regards to our two wonderful feet and the server lack of attention to them!
how many coaches referred to “loading up from the legs” or something similar and wondered why it is difficult for some? Now, of course there are many reasons but consider the foot for a second. When, you flex the knee what happens to the foot? when you hop on one foot and flex the knee what happens to the foot?
The foot flattens (or pronates) which is a way of allowing the knee to flex and subsequently load the rest of the body. Also it loads (or stretches) the muscles required to move the foot out of this position through to full extension at the hip (the foot here has fully supinated). Isn’t this what we as coaches want for our players when hitting ground-strokes? (or in fact any shot that requires some knee flexing).
For the thought of the day bit consider what would be the output of a players shots if they had difficulty in flattening the foot in the first place or if they had “flat” feet and therefore could not use the supination muscles effectively?
Here in lies the real key to maximum output on stokes!
Enjoy,
Questions just pop me and email!
Recently I read a post that mentioned bio-mechanics as the “unit turn,” “grips” and “ball tracking.” This is NOT bio-mechanics. The definition (Wikipedia) is;
Bio-mechanics is the study of the structure and function of biological systems such as humans, animals, plants, organs and cells by means of the methods of mechanics.
The word bio-mechanics developed during the early 1970s, describing the application of engineering mechanics to biological and medical systems.
I consider it the methods in which we, as tennis players, maximize the functions of the bodies joints in a fluid and seamless sequence in order to produce efficient force. It relies on functional joint actions, in effective range of motion that are sequential in what we consider the tennis strokes. Each joint has its role to play and should be capable within the integrated system.
The movements required are a function of the tactical intention and the required technical model. Therefore the “bio-mechanics” of tennis have a tactical, technical, physical and mental component.
The Tennis Engineer.
Today’s thought is one of what the Tennis Engineer specialises in (along with the team of movement therapists/specialists) and that is diagnosing force leaks and re distributing tensions within the body during the execution of tennis tactics.
If there are imbalances within the body there will be compensations. This puts the body into a state of coping rather than free flowing. The results are that the body may become over stressed and injuries caused or that in the linkage of joint actions within the complete movement cycle, (in a given tactic including movement to the ball, the hit and the recover) forces are leaked and the output sub optimum.
Should we allow this?
This post is the third in the series following on from;
Creating a System 1 – Tactical Intentions.
Creating a System 1 – Technical Model.
Having decided the tactical intention and the techniques required in order to achieve the tactic it is time to train, practice, drill whatever you call it. There are plenty of ways to train for example, match play, conditioned match play, cooperative control drills, fed drills, hand fed drills and there are probably more. All of these have their merits and reasons and the list is progressive if you move from hand drills through to open match play.
However, the thesis of this post is more to do with how many balls a player hits in practice and there are few issues to deal with before any numbers are put on it.
Firstly, how many balls should a player hit per day, session, drill? this has been debated before but some figures that I can remember are 150 per session (LTA), 3000+ to acquire skills? I’ll leave this open but one thing is for sure LOTS of balls need to be hit!
Secondly, the quality practice thing is always bought up, quality of quantity etc. Well, my view is that there will be a balance within a session/training block. Can we expect a player to be 100% all the time? I don’t think so, I think we can expect maximum effort but there will be good times and bad times. So, in order to compensate (a word used in Europe a lot), one must provide LOTS of balls to practice.
Thirdly, consider a 100 ball practice that is hand fed. Should we expect the player to be able to compete effectively now? Better probably, but not as if they had hit those 100 balls in match play situation? Therefore, if the goal is to simply acquire a fine skill then hand feeding could be appropriate, but if the skill needs to transfer into match play (because they are competing at the weekend) live control drills maybe better. I try and go with an approach of “I am adaptable” since the player may seem to have succeeded in hand fed but struggle in control and as the coach I notice something else that might help and subsequently return to hand fed drills and then go control again.
So, to summarize this section, the number of balls need is LOTS and there needs to be various degrees of progressions and regressions in order to move the player to the ultimate playground of the competition court playing fantastic tennis!
It wouldn’t be me if I didn’t bring Spain into the equation and so here is a picture of the training load for the well know drill “X factor” or as they call it Deep = Short X. Ok notice, the 60 repetitions and the frequency of this drill being DAILY!
Sanchez Casal X drill
When I trained there during the week and the on my previous visit I found the loads tough, however, on the course the coach said that the loads are adapted to the individual along with the “area of control” to individualize the training. In addition to this they also stated that with a weeks training at this load and intensity the adaptions are great within the anaerobic/aerobic systems.
There are some “pre competition” warm up drills with also reach 60 balls by 3 x 20 and a the final drill in the system “defense/attack balance” which is a 6 ball sequence repeated twice for symmetry (12 balls) that is totally repeated for as long as needed. I managed 3 sets of the 12 balls (36) which was tough but again after a week of it I am sure I would be clearer to focus on outputs. Not surprising the Spanish players are battlers!
To conclude this post, the volume needs to be pretty high in order to maximize the skill acquisition, muscle memory and required conditioning. It HAS to be tailored to your players and can be varied by # of balls, rhythm of delivery (pace, height, flight etc) and the area of control.
Now, with the 3 posts so far we lead on to the “NEW” area of the system that is of great interest to me and that is the movement of the body (some term it bio mechanics) but I still want to call it movement just considering the joint actions and the linkage as a fluid system. This is IMPORTANT because with training becoming more focused and more intense the chance to get hurt increases and the body takes more of a battering not to mention the stresses and strains of the today’s modern game!
With this it is imperative to consider the movement fluidity for these reasons
Thanks again for reading and check back soon for Creating a System 4 – Physical Model
The Tennis Engineer.
This post is a continuation of Creating a System 1 – Tactical Intentions.
Having considered the tactical intentions or areas of play or both we must now consider what technical model to use. The technical model describes the “how” in the “what/why” that is the tactical intention. It is not enough just to consider the general factors in stroke production as this carries no purpose. So for every tactical situation there is a technical model to consider.
For example, in considering a defensive situation on the forehand side, with the player positioned mid way over and a few meters behind the baseline what are the requirements of the player? Are these requirements the same in an offensive situation? I believe that answer is no, and if you agree then there are technical differences.
A friend of mine bought up the scenario of a coach observing a player in a game and making the statement “the player needs more topspin on his forehand”. Another coach also watching the same game commented “which forehand?”
If we consider this there are times when a player will require and want more topspin and in other situations less topspin and therefore the mechanics of the stroke production differs. Admittedly, one can argue that there are commonalities in shots but there are also a lot of differences.
Referring back to the defensive situation above the technical model required could be one that involves loading onto the rear leg (80:20 %) and a greater low to high swing path. Other factors to consider are contact position, rotation of upper body, transfer of weight etc.
Even at this point there are things missing!!!
Possibly most importantly how does a player receive the ball? what movement and footwork is required? what is the ball doing (speed, spin, flight), what should the sent ball look like and what effect should it have on the opponent?
From my recent education in Spain, the training is setup to improve the ideal and the technical model is also centered around what would be ideal. It consists of side steps in a diagonal path to get behind the ball and a recovery into a optimal position expecting the next ball to be an offensive opportunity along with stroke production teaching points. Personally I like this mentality as why train for anything less than great?
Considering the technical model as a direct result of the tactical intention and taking into account opponent, ball characteristics (received and sent), the complete movement cycle as well as the racket paths and body functions you are now in a position to create drills and exercises to effectively train technique in a tactical context.
Now the foundations of understanding allow for a few other things to happen;
The next post will consider some of the Spanish drills in terms of tactical intentions, technical model and training loads + “break out” exercises (progressions/regressions).
thanks for reading,
The Tennis Engineer
When performing analysis one must always consider the context. That is the tactical intention, position of the opponent, position of the player and the type of ball. Applying a technical model to this will reveal the areas of success and areas of improvement.
The Tennis Engineer 