Technical Training II - Video doesn't lie: How to use video to improve your game

You know what they say about good intentions…

I remember starting off this year - 2009 - saying that I would post more frequently, and well, you all know how that has gone in reality .I really do want to post more often—rather, more consistently—here, but as life goes, things happen and time flies by.

So, let’s consider this (another) a fresh start…

Oh yes, I also wanted to tell you that I do read every one of the precious few comments to these posts, and this post is based on a comment left by Wildvolley regarding an earliest post (Technical Training I — Looks define the result).

Wildvolley's comment was this:

“A key to doing this is to take video of yourself hitting. It is usually enlightening to see the difference between what you feel your body doing and what it is actually doing. Video can allow you to develop the form you want to have.

If you look at some of the tennis boards, there are a lot of young players who mimic the mannerisms and dress of the top players but not their actual strokes when hitting. It is easy for players to be delusional about their game unless they "see" what they are actually doing.”

Amen, Wildvolley, I could not agree more…

It’s one thing to study video taken of other players...

It’s far more valuable to study video of your own game.

I remind all my players that “video doesn’t lie” and watching themselves perform on video is a very important and powerful tool for improving virtually any aspect of their game: technical, tactical, even mental.

Video reveals the cold, objective truths about your game—and when you see yourself and your game the first time out, that truth may be shocking, perhaps even embarrassing in terms of how different your own internal perceptions and sensations (“feelings”) of your tennis movements and tactical choices may be from the reality depicted on the playback screen.

Some common examples of the truths of your game that video reveals are:

1) your complete lack of knee flex in all aspects of your technique from your ready position to your serve motion;

2) the fact that you look like you’re ducking under a too-low door frame instead of exploding at full extension to impact on your serve;

3) how slowly you really move around the court, especially when changing directions;

4) your wide open racket face at all phases of your forehand and backhand, especially at contact that launches the ball straight into the windscreen behind your opponent on the fly;

ETC., ETC.

Video will also not only reveal the truths of your game, but also the truth about how much or how little your teaching pro or coach really knows about tennis…

The potential of such a revelation explains why so many in the teaching and coaching establishment marginalize the value of video in training/helping their players…

They’re afraid that video will also reveal their fundamental tennis knowledge deficiencies and shortcomings along with those of their players!

Then again, there are those in the tennis teaching establishment who base their instruction on video footage (e.g. FYB, Hi-Tech Tennis, etc.) and end up describing concepts that aren’t even demonstrated on the video... Concepts that likely exist only in the mind of the “instructor”. The bottom line is the same—they end up unmasking their own knowledge gaps - chasms, really — whether they know it or not.

So, let me include this addendum to Wildvolley’s comment about “(I)t is easy for players to be delusional about their game unless they "see" what they are actually doing.”

IMHO, we should give credit where credit is due...

A large proportion of these “delusions” that the great majority of players have about their games is fundamentally “enabled”—if not entirely driven—by the dreadful instruction they get from just about everywhere—from their own pro/coach, the vast majority of “free web instructors”, their friends and league teammates, etc.

They did not arrive where they’re at without “help and support” from the available “experts” and resources that they trust blindly.

The question of why these players trust so blindly and implicitly in such flawed ideas is the subject of a separate post - in a different blog.

Now that my editorializing is concluded for the time being, let’s cover some simple fundamentals about how to reveal the truths of your game using video.

1. Shoot your video with a high-speed video camera

If you (or your coach/teaching pro) are serious about using video to improve your game, you need to make your video using a video camera that is capable of shooting high-speed video so you can see your game in ultra-slow motion.

Personally speaking, I don’t even bother using normal speed video anymore. For instructional and learning purposes, it is nowhere as informative and useful as high-speed video.

The amount of useful information that’s available when you can see movement in a high-speed video is simply astonishing and reveals an entirely new, previously hidden world compared to normal video. Once you see yourself (and others) in ultra-slow motion, normal-speed video (even HD video, however pretty it looks) will leave you unsatisfied and disappointed.

There are 3 such high-speed video cameras available on the consumer market today, and they’re all made by Casio: the Casio EF-X1 ($1000 MSRP); the Casio EF-X20 ($500 MSRP); and the Casio EF-X100/X10 series ($350 MSRP).

Each one of these Casio cameras can take high-speed video starting at 210 frames per second (7 times slower than normal video—which in the US is 30 frames per second), and can shoot up to 1200 frames per second (40 times slower than normal video) with amazing clarity and resolution.

If you are a teaching pro or coach, you should definitely invest in the higher end EF-X1 or EF-X20 models so you have maximum control of the image quality, but if you are a casual player, the newly introduced “take-down” version (EF-X100/X10) will do just fine—especially given the price.

One limitation of high-speed video I need to mention upfront is that in order to maximize the brightness/clarity/sharpness (the “resolution”) of the footage, you will need to shoot the video in high-light conditions.

This means that the best quality high-speed videos will be shot outdoors in full sunlight, and the image quality will not the same when, say, you try to shoot high-speed video indoors under the typically overly dim lighting of your local indoor courts (unless you are willing to go through the trouble of lighting your indoor video session in a professional manner using high-intensity lamps, reflector screens, etc.).

As far as which setting to use for your videos, 210 or 300 frames per second is plenty fast (slow?) enough to reveal the smallest details of your strokes, movement, etc. Shooting at higher speeds is even more revealing (i.e. 420, 600, 1000, even 1200 frames per second), but for the basis of fundamental analysis of your movements, 210 or 300 frames per second is more than satisfactory.

2. Use a tripod when shooting your video

Even with image stabilization built in as a standard feature on the Casio cameras, you need the stability of the tripod to guarantee a clear, focused image—especially when you’re shooting high-speed video.

Set the tripod such that the camera pointing somewhere between your waist and shoulder level. When the camera is set at this height, you will appear at a, natural-looking, “eye level” perspective when you’re on-screen.

3. Place the camera in the right positions

You need to know where to place the camera to get the most useful perspective(s) of your game.

For all practical intents and purposes, there are only two camera angles you need to shoot from to learn the most from your strokes:

a) Side view: place the camera perpendicular to where you’re standing at the baseline or net, so you can see your entire stroke movement from the side.




b) Back view: place the camera directly behind you, parallel to the baseline so you can see your entire stroke movement from the back. (FYI, playing on a sunken court really makes this perspective informative as well as convenient to shoot from!)



4. Frame yourself properly

You need to know how to “frame” yourself in the video so you can maximize the amount of information you can get from the footage.

In general, I suggest framing yourself in a way where you—the player—take up roughly 1/3 of the total on-screen area. There should be only a little space over your head (except when shooting video of your serve, where you want to be able to see ball contact overhead, so there will be more space visible overhead), but wherever possible, zoom in/adjust your tripod so there is very little “extra” court area visible at foot level.



In addition, I am very interested in seeing the initial 4 to 6 feet of ball flight after impact, so I suggest factoring in this increment when setting up your shot (this will be the subject of a future post—the highly valuable information that’s available by studying the first few feet of the ball flight of a groundstroke).

Finally, I strongly recommend that you take the 3 to 5 minutes total to make sure that you “frame your shot” properly so you can get the most usable information from your video.

5. No panning!

Last piece of advice when shooting your tennis video: avoid (as much as possible) panning the camera (i.e. move the camera to “follow” the player as they move around) when shooting your video.

Yes, there may be some upfront investment (both time and money) involved in putting yourself on video, but the payoff will be well worth it!

TTFN!

P.S.: The player images (US junior Shane Vinsant; ATP players Tobias Clemens and Thiago Alves, and WTA player Dominika Cibulkova) you see here were clipped from our extensive high-speed video library of ATP, WTA and junior players taken over the past 2 years, mostly shot from live tournament practice and match courts.

Typically, we shoot a player’s serves and groundstrokes from player practice sessions during live tournaments to observe their “base” techniques, as well as a few (practice) points if possible.

Sports Conditioning Secrets They Don't Want You to Know (Part 1): Hey Brother/Sister, Can You Spare $12,270?

Let’s start this post with a question:

Which scenario would you choose to increase your serve speed around 20 MPH?

Scenario 1) Conventional strength training (Kraemer et al., 2003)

• 120 workouts
• 200+ hours total workout time over 40 weeks total (9 months)
• $12,270 minimum cost
• ~$757.00 per 1 MPH improvement

OR

Scenario 2) SpeedChain training

• 8 workouts
• 4 hours total workout time over 4 weeks total (1 month)
• $175 minimum cost
• ~$9.00 per 1 MPH improvement

I think that most reasonable people would probably choose Scenario 2 over Scenario 1 the majority of the time.

And with times as tough as they are, I think that Scenario 2 is the only practical choice.

After all, who has $12,000 lying around? And, who could justify spending $12,000 to accomplish the same outcome as spending about $200?

On top of that, who really has the time to spend 9 months grinding 5 hours per week when there's an option to achieve the same results by training for only 1 hour per week for 1 month?

Well, I thought that in these times when people are really more conscious about their time and their money—especially about their money—I wanted to point out to you the hard, cold, time-consuming and very expensive facts about how much time and money you need to invest to increase your serve or groundstroke speed by training using conventional training methods.

(As well as demonstrate the real value that's delivered by SpeedChain training--value that can be measured in both time and money!)

How did I arrive at these numbers?

These numbers are based on a published scientific study regarding the “Physiological Effects of Periodized Resistance Training in Women Tennis Players” conducted by the American exercise physiologist, William J. Kraemer and his colleagues.

In their study, Kraemer and his friends were able to help a group of female, college tennis players increase their serve and groundstroke speeds up to 30 percent—after 9 months of rigorous, highly supervised and controlled weight lifting.

After reviewing all the gory details of their study, I tried to estimate how much real training time was spent by the players to achieve the published results.

By my conservative estimates, these players spent at least 5 hours a week in the gym in 3 personally supervised weekly training sessions over a 40 week or 9 month period.

In all, these players spent about 200 hours to achieve the observed increase in serve and groundstroke speeds.

So, the “good news” is that there is a documented way to increase your serve and groundstroke speeds if you are willing to invest at least the time and energy—5 hours a week for 40 weeks—to do so.

Well, the “bad news” is that the actual financial costs of such a training program are not mentioned—and these unmentioned costs are frankly huge.

Your willingness to invest the necessary time and energy is only the beginning, because you’ll need to expend a lot of cash to achieve their results as you’ll soon see… And maybe this amount of cash ($12,000+) is something you don’t have around right now…

This is because the only way to maximize your chances of duplicating the Kraemer study results is to reproduce that exact published program—including not skipping a single workout and having a personal trainer personally supervise every one of your 120 workouts.

Kraemer and his team point out that the “success” of their program is in large part due to the fact that the players worked out under the supervision of an experienced trainer at all times, which has been shown to the most effective way to produce the most (strength) training improvement in athletes of all levels.

Therefore, if you really want to achieve the same results described in this program, you’ll need to hire a qualified personal trainer to supervise all 200 hours of your workout program. From what I’ve seen recently, the hourly rate of personal trainers nationwide runs at about $60 per hour.

So, the total financial cost of performing this proven program is 200 hours X $6 per hour or $12,000. Add to that the fact that you’ll need a gym to work out in, and gym memberships typically run about $30 per month, you’ll need to add another $270 (9 months at $30 per month) to that total. At least you don’t have to pay your trainer to design the workout program for you (which typically runs about $80 to $100) as you can follow the published program.

Now, to sum it all up, you’ll need to spend at least 200 hours over 40 weeks, as well as $12,270 to cover the personal training and gym membership costs to achieve an average increase in serve speed of about 25.2 KPH or 16.2 MPH (according to the Kraemer study) by going to the gym and lifting weights.

What does this improvement amount to in terms of time (A) and money (B)?

A) How much time does it take to improve even 1 MPH?

When you do the math, to improve your serve speed 1 MPH using conventional methods, like the ones in the Kraemer study (and methods universally endorsed by almost everyone in the tennis world including Tennis magazine and the USTA, USPTA and PTR) you need to spend:

2.5 weeks or 18 days real time (16.2 MPH / 40 weeks = 0.405 MPH improvement per week OR 16.2 MPH / 280 days = 0.057 MPH per day)


B) How much money will you have to spend to increase your serve speed 1 MPH?

You’ll spend:

$757.40 per 1 MPH improvement ($12,270 total cost / 16.2 MPH = 757.40)

Oh, yes there’s one more important detail you’ll need to know before you embark on this 40 week journey…

Yes, my friends, there’s a catch!

The catch is: you’ll achieve the reported serve speed improvement only if you’ve never engaged in any form of resistance training.

Which means:

You’ll achieve those results only if you haven’t been training for a while, or if you haven’t ever trained before.

If you have any previous experience lifting weights or are continuously performing any form of serious off-court training (as is required if you want to be a successful tournament competitor!!!), your improvement will be far less than the reported 16.2 MPH.

In fact, you’ll be lucky to improve your serve speed 5 to 6 MPH total after 40 weeks of intense training if you have lifted weights previously.

So, if you’re a serious competitive player who thinks that all they need to do is to start this Kraemer program to see their serve and groundstroke speeds jump 15+ MPH, you need to think again. Real hard…

For these serious competitive players (highly-ranked junior, college and pro competitors), the time (A) and money (B) costs look like this:

A) Time Costs:

To increase your serve 1 MPH, it will take:

8 weeks of training (5 MPH / 40 weeks = 1 MPH / x weeks)

That’s a 1/8 of a MPH increase per week, after 5 hours of supervised training with a personal trainer.

B) Money costs:

You’ll spend a grand total of:

$2,454 per 1 MPH improvement (= $12,270 / 5 MPH).

Yes, that’s right!

The real cost of serve or groundstroke speed improvement for the serious competitive player is $2,454 per 1 MPH.

Let me repeat that figure again:

If you want to increase your serve speed by 1 MPH by lifting weights, you need to spend roughly $2,454 !!!

Does this make sense in these tough times?

Does this make any sense at any time?

Is there a better, cheaper way to increase your serve and groundstroke speed?

Yes, there is…

Recall “Scenario 2” at the beginning of this post? The solution is called training with the Tennis SpeedChain!

Players who train with the Tennis SpeedChain typically increase their serve and groundstroke speeds about 20 MPH in 4 weeks of training twice a week.

This means, that on the high side, the real financial cost of improving your serve or groundstroke speed costs as little as $9 per 1 MPH ($175 / 20 MPH improvement)!

$9 versus $2,454?

$9 versus $757?

$205 total versus $12,270 total?

4 weeks versus 40 weeks?

Oh yes, and I will also mention that in those four weeks, you’ll spend only about 40 to 60 minutes working out per week.

So, let’s add…

60 minutes per week versus 5 hours / 300 minutes per week?

Which training program sounds better to you? Which training program makes more sense?

I think that when you look at the real numbers, the answer becomes crystal clear.

The only sensible solution to increasing your serve and groundstroke speed is training with the Tennis SpeedChain.

TTFN!

Technical Training I: Looks define the result

Everyone loves talking about strokes. What’s textbook? What’s not? What's classic? What's modern? What's a modern classic? Is there even such a thing as a textbook stroke? And so on…

This debate is at the very least entertaining, as well as a complete waste of time as far as helping players to achieve what the want to the level that they’re capable of achieving. (Another frequent debate topic in tennis circles…)

One fundamental view of stroke technique we have at TennisSpeed can be described in 4 simple words:

Looks define the result.

What is so puzzling is that this simple concept simply eludes so many players, parents and coaches today.

What this means is that if you want to hit your forehand with some reasonable hope of achieving the same result as Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal, the simplest way to do this is to copy the exact movements they make when they hit their forehands.

I pick this specific example of the Federer and Nadal forehands because the technique(s) used by their respective owners is the current state-of-the-art as far as how to maximize the power, spin, and consistency of the forehand stroke goes right now (and for the immediate future).

And despite what the vast majority of instructional articles that exist all of today’s media in either print or on the mighty Web may say, the only way that you’re going to reproduce their stroke is to reproduce their exact body and racket movements, as completely as you’re capable of reproducing them.

Yes, as far as I am concerned, you CAN reproduce the fundamental movement patterns involved in reproducing either hall-of-fame forehand either fully or partially.

What you need to understand is that the quality of your reproduction, the quality of the resulting stroke will be determined by how much innate, or, as many call it—“natural”—athletic ability you have.

If you have the same raw, athletic ability of the actual owners (i.e. Roger or Rafael), then you can reasonable expect to generate the same stroke they have (more or less).

If you have a different—most likely lower—level of athletic ability, then your reproduction will be slightly different (i.e. less powerful, consistent, accurate, etc.) from the original.

What’s impossible is to think that you can reproduce their results by just modifying your existing technique using all available, published instructions in print or on the Internet, or by copying the techniques of other players who aren’t them.

For example, I guarantee you that you will not reproduce the Federer or Nadal forehand by trying to copying the Gonzalez or Blake forehand. And, consulting the resident Web tennis “experts” at places such as F-B.com; T-----P----r.net, W—T-----.com, or T-----O--.com, etc is as futile as the previous option as well.

(Let me just say that as far as I am concerned, there are enough free videos of Federer and Nadal hitting forehands on YouTube, that it doesn’t make sense to pay the subscription rates that these sites ask for. Anyway, the rest of the so-called “content” on those sites only serve to dilute, if not contaminate the real value of those sites, which lies in the videos themselves.)

The next illogical stage in this almost absurd situation is the common claim made by the tennis coaching and instructional establishment that their movements are specific and idiosyncratic to them (i.e. Roger and Rafael) alone, and the best that you can achieve is to reproduce the immutable and unchanging tennis technical “fundamentals” they promote that may be present in their technique.

What if the truth is the exact opposite: that you CAN learn their exact movements, and what’s preventing you from doing so is the inability of your chosen teaching pro, coach, parent-coach, or website to figure out what they’re actually doing. There are probably tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of words and images out there that have vainly tried to uncover the principles of the Federer and Nadal forehand.

What you and they fail to realize is that no amount of mainstream tennis technical knowledge or experience will be able to decode the not-so-secret principles (for a select few coaches on Earth, that is) used by Roger and Rafael.

The truth of the matter is that conventional tennis technical knowledge is really unimportant (and perhaps irrelevant) to reproducing their supreme movements compared with understanding the fundamentals of general athletic movement in humans.

Bottom line is this, for all practical intents and purposes, if you want to stroke it like Player X, get some video (high-speed video would be very helpful in this regards: i.e. 200+ frames per second video) of Player X executing the stroke of interest and copy what you see to the best of your ability.

If you want to take it to the next level and understand why you’re making exactly those moves, well… Your options are limited and very expensive, or you can just stay tuned!

TTFN!

P.S. I’ll be in Indian Wells for the BNP Paribas Open from 3/8 to 3/11/09, so anyone who wants to talk about anything relating to speed in tennis should give me a ring (303.242.5441) and maybe we’ll get together and “talk TennisSpeed” somewhere in the limited shade at the Tennis Garden.

TennisSpeed's Top 5 Pro First Serves (1985-2009)

Remember how I said I would be posting more frequently and trying to promote more feedback and discussion?

Well, here's words put into action...

I've noticed that people like to respond to "best of/worst of" lists.

So in the hope of getting folks who read this blog into "response mode" around here, I present the first of my lists: the Top 5 first serves of the last 25 years.

I'll do a few lists over the coming weeks and months for all of the strokes of general interest (serve, forehand, backhand, etc.), for completeness.

One thing I wanted to know is: should I separate these list by gender (i.e. men and women) or just make a master list?

Maybe I won't separate them the first time around...

But, if you think I should provide a second series of Top 5 lists focusing only on the women, you need to let me know (hint, hint...)!

So, without much further ado...

Top 5 First Serves (1985-2009)

--in alphabetical order---

Boris Becker
Goran Ivanisevic
Andy Roddick
Pete Sampras
Michael Stich

All 5 serves blended unbelievable power, accuracy, spin, variety and disguise under pressure.

Honorable mention:

Roger Federer
Ivo Karlovic
Richard Krajicek
Greg Rusedski

These 4 guys are close, but fall short in one of the five categories above...

So, what do you think?

TTFN!

P.S. Let me know which online tennis instructional websites you would like to see reviewed here. Just leave a comment or email me!

Change and the Power of Being "Different"

Happy New Year, Everyone!

It’s been a while since I’ve posted and let me begin by thanking all of you out there who have been following the blog and I hope that you have found the ideas and perspectives presented here interesting and useful sometimes. :)

Yes, the title of this post is a hint of what’s in store from TennisSpeed and this blog in the coming year.

There are going to be some major changes at TennisSpeed including a new website and the launch of a brand new service (tentatively called BVM, we’ll talk more about this future posts) that taps into the massive amount of new information we’ve obtained in the past 6 months about how to develop maximal power and control from your stroke technique on serves and groundstrokes.

This blog will change a bit too, as I plan to post more frequently with shorter entries with more photos and videos. I will also include some commentary and analysis of select ATP and WTA players and matches from a speed training and development perspective.

I also plan to introduce some of the really intriguing new findings about stroke techniques that we’ve uncovered using super high-speed video analysis and a novel video-based biomechanical analysis technique we’ve developed with the help of a retired, physics and engineering “superman”.

Essentially, what these new discoveries have been telling us is that if you want to perform at a world-class level, you need to focus solely on how to reproduce the stroke techniques used by the top players and essentially be willing ignore (or block out) virtually all conventional tennis instruction—especially when it comes to serves and groundstrokes.

If you look carefully, the top performers, the great champions have always performed in ways that went against the grain of virtually all of the dominant instructional ideas of their playing careers. They did things in ways that were considered by the tennis experts of their respective days to be either outright “wrong” or completely idiosyncratic in that only that player could execute that stroke (during their active playing careers).

What’s also true is that there is an optimal technique—an optimal movement—to execute every stroke, yet, there is still room for the “evolution” of these “optimal” techniques by an exceptional athlete.

From Lacoste and Tilden, to Budge, Hoad, Kramer and Laver, to Borg, Lendl, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, and now Federer and Nadal, the greats of this sport have almost always done things differently than those before them. The greats of any endeavor, of any “field”, separate themselves by doing things differently, not by “following the masses” and doing what even the most respected or famous experts say they “should be doing”.

For example, if you wanted to “follow” the path that Nadal took to the top, what you will find is that Nadal developed in a way that the great majority of so-called experts in US tennis believe is flat-out wrong. Our “experts” mainly dismiss his success as being unique to his specific circumstances and impossible to reproduce in general.

Truth is, having seen, met and worked with some of Nadal’s inner circle team, I will tell you that what he did to develop into a top player is completely logical and totally reproducible, just not in America. And, if you’re wondering, it has everything to do with character and family values (Yes, they matter! Big time!) as it does with superior training knowledge and methods.

At this point in history, as far as I can tell, US tennis is really incapable of developing a player of Nadal’s (or Federer’s) caliber given the type of people involved in tennis in general, as well as given who’s “in charge” of tennis right now. And when you look at the few recent exceptions who have broken through (esp. Sam Querrey), you will find out that these players did not conform to the commonly accepted “standards and practices” of US high-performance tennis, and found their own way, often going (far) "against the grain".

So, yes, if you haven’t figured it out already (or if you’re reading this blog for the first time), I have zero confidence in US tennis, especially when it comes to its ability to develop top players. Without a complete "re-start" of the tennis establishment here, I only expect more of the same: a random trickling of successful American tour pros.

Now, to show you that I will do more than complain, I want to offer you a few potential solutions. Here’s the most practical advice I can offer you today:

1) Hire a really expert tennis coach (there are only a few around on Earth; you can email me for a list of these individuals--fair warning, only a very few individuals on this list live in the US!)
2) Spend time training and playing tournaments in either Spain or France
3) Be completely skeptical, if not outright suspicious about all “free” tennis instruction that appears in the mass media—especially on the internet.

IMHO, most, if not all “free” tennis instruction on the web is worth exactly the price you’ve paid for it—i.e. absolutely nothing.

At least the videos they post are pretty good, but often they're no better than some of the vids you can find on Y**T**e (I really like the tennis vids posted by the user named "worldted"). Many of these websites have what I would call "entertainment value" (this is why I look at them), but frankly I just don't expect them to have any valuable instructional insights.

These sites are well-intentioned by and large, but simply lack the competence and insight that you could actually use to reproduce what you see in their images of ATP and WTA tour pros.

Better yet, ignore all free tennis instruction unless you are satisfied with information that will get you to maybe NTRP 4.5 max. Then realize that the NTRP of even a decent NCAA D3 player is between 5.0 to 6.0 (yes, really). So, if you choose to rely on the info that’s presented on sites like T*****P*****r.net, H*T*** T****s, W*bT*****s.net, F**.com, T*****O*e, etc. to mold your game, you absolutely won't improve beyond NTRP 4.5. What this means is authentic "high-performance" in tennis (i.e. NTRP > 5.5) will be impossible for you to EVER achieve, even if you did have the will, interest and talent to do so.

Finally, I wanted to just tell you upfront that your feedback is always welcome here. Please feel free to comment or even email me directly with your feedback anytime.

I have been wondering lately about why I’ve received relatively little feedback about what the contents of my posts since it's been around. Then it dawns on me that many of the ideas I’ve presented so far are either completely novel or fundamentally contrary to the vast majority of tennis instructional and training concepts that are familiar to American players, coaches, parents and fans.

So to a great extent, I conclude that many of you need to take some time to consider these ideas and opinions yourself before you might consider responding.

Or, maybe, I need to tap more often into my "inner provocateur" and see where this takes us…

TTFN!

The more things change...

The posts have been lagging, I know.

I've been at work on a number of projects behind the scenes that may all prove to be "game-changers" in the sense that the results of this work will, more than likely, fundamentally change the way we understand how to achieve ultimate performance in throwing and swinging sports.

As a bonus, this work may also finally provide a "bridge" that makes biomechanical analysis understandable and therefore, easily usable for all swinging and throwing athletes who want to increase their performance level.

In the coming weeks and months, I'll begin to reveal some of the incredible revelations and discoveries we have made through all of this ongoing "R & D" effort by the "Chain Gang" from the tennis world and beyond, so stay tuned!

In the meantime, I decided that I would post a column I wrote just about a year ago for my partner-in-chains' regular online column on www.aroundhawaii.com. After another season measuring the stroke speeds of collegiate and junior tennis competitiors, the article unfortunately, hasn't lost one bit of relevance.

Without further ado, here's that article:

133, 119, 97.

What do these three numbers have to do with the question posed in the title of this article?

The title of the article asks one of the fundamental questions that's constantly looming in the minds of American tennis fans and followers: who's coming up the US tennis ranks to become the next Pete, Andre, Jimmy, John, or Andy? In the glory days of American Tennis, I think that question was phrased more like "How many are coming up?" rather than "Do we have anyone coming?" as it appears today.

So what do the numbers 133, 119, and 97 have to do with developing prospective American tennis champions?

Well, these are the average serve speeds generated by the 4 men who reached the 2007 Wimbledon semifinals (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Gasquet) plus the last Amercian man standing, quarterfinalist Andy Roddick.

The average fastest serve speed of this "Final 5" was 133 MPH (Roddick's fastest serve on average was the highest among the 5 highest at 142 MPH). Their average first serve speed was 119 MPH, and their average second serve speed was clocked at 97 MPH.

What's the point I'm trying to make here? Before I get to that, let me introduce three more numbers...

107, 91, 74.

What do you think these numbers represent?

Well, these are same serve speed measurements (average fastest serve, average first serve, and average second serve speeds) for a sample of 20 NCAA Division I tennis players taken from teams ranked between #5 and #25 in the final national rankings for 2007.

These 20 players include a former NCAA D1 Singles Champion, 4 players who were selected as 2007 NCAA All-Americans, and 8 players who participated in the 2007 NCAA D1 Individual Championships.

The point is that there is a HUGE difference in the performance capability (as represented by serve speed) between today's top college tennis players and the top ATP pros.

The difference between the two levels is measurable, and in the case of serve speed, the difference is about 20 to 25 MPH for both first and second serves. Does having a powerful serve alone explain the difference between today's NCAA All-Americans and the top ATP players?

No, it goes way beyond the difference in serve speeds in that the top touring pros today are fundamentally physically (athletically) superior in virtually all physical aspects of tennis: serve speed, movement speed, groundstroke speed, speed endurance, etc. when you compare them to even the best college players. The difference between the best collegiate players and ATP pros basically extends to every physical attribute required to compete at the professional level today.

In the past, the difference between the performance level of an NCAA All-American was not very different from ATP players. Many of the past NCAA D1 Singles Champions, say up until the early to mid-1980s, could come straight off of campus and perform (and win) at the ATP level, say, as if they were already ranked among the world's best 80 to 100 pro players. Today, the typical NCAA All-American plays at a much lower level compared to his ATP brethren. From what I've observed in recent years, the top D1 players are playing at a level comparable to a pro player ranked somewhere between 400 and 700 in the ATP rankings.

For all of the casual tennis fans out there, what I mean is that in the past (before 1990), it was entirely possible that a top college player could walk off campus in summer and become immediately successful at the main tour level or even at the Grand Slam level. In contrast, today's top college players would be hard pressed to perform successfully in pro tennis' minor leagues known as the Challenger and Futures Circuits. Again, tennis has evolved to a much higher, much more athletic level in the past 20 years, and the difference between college tennis and pro tennis is clearly diverging very rapidly.


OK, now I have three more numbers to throw your way...

100, 91, 71.

These are the same serve speed averages (measured during live tournament matches) for a sample of 34 nationally-ranked (ranked anywhere from #11 to 1500 nationally), 18 and under junior boys.

The serve speed difference between the ATP pros and the "typical" US junior player is 30 mph, which is even greater than the difference between college players and the top ATP pros.

The serve speed difference between the top ATP pros and highly-ranked college players is around 20 MPH.

That is a huge difference in terms of performance.

However, if you compare the juniors to the college players, there is very little difference in serve speeds between the juniors and the college players.

This makes perfect sense because the top college teams recruit is primarily, if not exclusively from the available pool of junior players who have high national junior rankings. Therefore, you wouldn't expect a big performance difference between the nationally-ranked junior player and a college player.

What's interesting to me is that with all of the physical conditioning work that's typically done in the great majority of college tennis programs, and especially at the top college programs, why isn't there a greater difference in the serve speed performance between the juniors and the college players?

After being an insider to two top college tennis programs over the 2006-2007 season, the reason is pretty obvious. It's because, in terms of increasing racket speed (the physical basis of serve speed), conventional (football-centric) conditioning ideas and methods that are typically used to train even top college tennis players simply have no impact on racket speed, and therefore have no impact on serve speed.

For all of the hundreds of hours that most college tennis teams devote to lifting weights, pulling resistance bands, throwing medicine balls, and stretching over the course of every season, none of these exercises has ever been shown to increase their ability to serve or hit groundstrokes faster.

The majority of college players, coaches, and strength coaches THINK or PERCEIVE that they're hitting faster serves and groundstrokes as a result of all the off-court training they do, but when you actually MEASURE the actual stroke speeds (as I have done over the past season for 2 different teams), a very different picture emerges. And we'll explain and explore those differences next month.

Finally, let's end this article by showing you these three numbers:

133, 118, 98.

These numbers represent the serve speed profile of 3 of the 4 Junior Boys Semifinalists (Donald Young, Vlad Ignatic, and Greg Jones) at Wimbledon this year. Compare them to the pros in the main event...They're virtually the same as the Wimbledon Men's "Final 5" listed at the beginning of this article.

What's the take-home here? On one hand, who really knows if those 3 boys are actually going to become successful on the ATP Tour, much less champions at that level?

On the other hand, at least from a quantitative performance perspective, those 3 boys are at least capable of hitting serves at speeds comparable to that of the top pros, whereas the college guys and the average nationally-ranked junior player fall 20 to 30 MPH short of meeting that measurable, quantitative performance standard.

It's very much like saying that in order to have a reasonable chance of becoming a Major League Baseball pitcher, it helps to be able throw your fastball over 90+ MPH. Or, if you would like to become an Olympic Gold Medalist in the 100 meter dash, you have to be able to sprint 100 meters in under 9.9 seconds.

So, for those of you Donald Young ("DY") doubters and nay-sayers out there (by the way, DY won the boys' singles at Wimbledon), at least DY can bring the serve at the same level as the sports' current greats, so his potential for success at the pro level is not such a far-fetched idea after all.


See you next time...

TTFN!

The secret to mind speed

Well, it’s been a while since my last post because it's been a VERY busy summer where I have spent considerable time exploring some business opportunities (such as laying the groundwork for a future high-performance tennis academy) as well as coaching some very promising female players.

Anyway, the adventures I’ve had on the tennis side of things has prompted me to consider starting a new blog—as there were so many interesting events and happening both on and off of the court that lie outside the scope of the “mind speed, leg speed and racket speed” focus of this blog that are worth recounting for the learning value that they possess.

So, look out for a blog called “10S Radical” on WordPress in the coming weeks (sorry, Blogger, but I thought it was time to try another blogging platform mainly to find out if the “grass is really greener” on the other side of the blogging fence!). Expect more commentary (and controversy) about the sport at large (especially regarding the non-speed issues surrounding our problems with developing top tennis players) as well as the occasional rant from the “10S Radical”.

On to the subject of today’s post…

It’s been a while since we touched on the mental aspect of the sport, and as a result of the coaching experiences I’ve had so far this summer, it seemed to me like a good time to return to the subject of “mind speed”.

I first broached the subject of “mind speed” in the very first post of this blog…

“Whoa! Mind speed? What does that have to do with being a successful tennis player, you say?

Having a quick, agile, and focused mind is the starting point of being a high-performance competitor...

Your brain is the "master and commander" of your fantastic body machine. Your body does not move on its own! The body moves only under the direction of the mind, so if your mind is too slow to process what's happening when you're playing a competitive tennis point, you're already behind the proverbial "8-ball".

A fast mind is a mind that is clear of any and all distractions and is only focused what's going on right now, in the present. A fast mind pays attention only to what's going to help the player play the(ir) best possible right then and there. A "fast mind" in tennis is the product of mental discipline or "mental toughness" as it is commonly called.

A fast mind pays little or no attention to anything that distracts it from the task at hand (that's the definition of "being focused", right?), because these distractions (winning and losing, girl/boyfriend issues, parent issues, wondering about where to eat later, which bar to visit later, etc.) are what turns a fast mind into a slow one.

A slow, distracted, and undisciplined mind slows down the legs and racket, so it's really a triple whammy! With a slow mind, you can't produce the physical skills and consistency of execution to string together enough points to win a tennis match... It is no wonder players who lack mental discipline perform poorly and don't achieve the results they're really capable of.”

What then is the secret to “mind speed”?

The “secret” is the ability to focus on the task at hand, rather than say, the final outcome of the point or match.

You need to develop the ability to pay as much attention as possible to what you’re trying to do at the moment you do it, and leave everything else behind. Whether you're executing a drill or playing a point in a match, every ounce of concentration you can muster needs to be placed only on what you're doing at that very moment and nowhere else.

When the point or drill is over, that is the moment to “time travel” and allow yourself go back to the (immediate) past to mentally review the point or exercise that just concluded. Then, you need the ability to switch gears and “time travel” into the future where you can plan what to do (remember to keep things simple) on the next point (or drill).

Once the next point starts, you need to develop the discipline to re-focus all your attention only to what’s happening right then and there. Let your thoughts wander anywhere beyond what you need to do right then and there, and you won’t play anywhere near what you’re capable of.

Bottom line is, in order to perform your best, to play to your highest level, you will need to learn how to repeat this “focusing cycle” for each and every point, as well as consciously “dial down” the intensity of your focus at appropriate moments (i.e. during changeovers) by employing one of several relaxation techniques (we’ll get into this subject in more details in future posts).

How do you develop this ability to control your focus?

Well, there are a fantastic number of books and articles devoted to the subject, but for all practical intents and purposes, the first step is to understand and acknowledge that the ability to control your focus—your ability to control your mind—is a crucial step to becoming a successful tennis competitor.

The great majority of tournament players acknowledge that they need to have technically sound, consistent and powerful strokes, but only a few truly accept and understand that they must also train and develop their mental skills to a similar, if not higher level, in order to fulfill their true competitive potential (and isn't it funny how these players who are willing to train their mental skills tend to be the ones with a need for a “trophy room” at home).

Always remember that the mind controls the body, otherwise, you will receive frequent, object lessons about who’s really in charge when it comes to determining your performance level especially once the match starts.

TTFN!