Where are the little steps on the forehand, Roger

First topic message reminder :

The major thing that I see with federer is that his footwork on the forehand is the worst I have ever seen for him. In the past his balance and offensive footwork was flawless. When in full flow there was almost a musical quality to watch federer on attack; squeak, squeak, squeak, and then boom. The little steps aren't there on the forehand. His footwork is lazy, there is nothing that is wrong with the swing. His balance is off because he doesn't give a good split step anymore and when hurried even a little bit he has lost the little steps in an around the ball to adjust. I have not watched federer for months, and I was shocked at how poor his spacing was on both wings but especially on the forehand. He is either lunging at the ball last minute or he is short arming the balls because he is not doing the hardwork to adjust his feet to the ball. The jump stops and the baby steps are crucial for hitting to maintain proper spacing with the ball and the balance in your movement. They are also the most tedious and gruelling part of movement. The long strides to get to the ball in between don't really have that much of an impact on how you strike the ball. It is the little adjustment steps around the ball that are important in giving you proper spacing. I have never seen the man hit the inside out forehand so close to his body. Getting jammed by the inside out ball in the center of the court is a tell tale sign that you are not shortening your stride and doing the hardwork to give yourself the space to get full extension and rotation on the shot. That is why he is either hitting the inside out forehand into the net or spraying it wide. He is not getting the proper spacing, which is not allowing him to take the proper swing, and get full rotation. His arms simply do not have the room to hit that shot the right way. Look at Del Po to illustrate this do you see how hard he works to get his body out of the way of that cross court backhand to crush his inside out forehand. Often his body is in the doubles ally when he hits the inside out forehand. To me his spacing right before he hits the ball is off on way too many shots.

bogbrush wrote:What also isn't there, imo, is the incredible fluidity of movement that we see from the young Federer in those clips. Now that age for you.

Completely, completely agree.

When he used to hit that in to out forehand his whole body would coil through the stroke (as JMac said "the liquid whip"), now he shoves it much more of the time and consequentially gets less spin and pop. Obviously this is all relative though.

kemet wrote:Excellent post Socal and I concur. As a Federer fan, I have been noticing this for years now and, like Bogbrush and emancipator, have been trying to make this point, although not a well as you have. You obviously know your tennis.

Roger's decline has been very gradual, but gradual all the same. It first started when he started spray his forehands long and mishitting shots that were effortless in the past. This is down to a millisecond slower in movement. This is why his weakness would have escaped the casual observer at first. However, as a fan who knows that his footwork forms the basis of his beautiful game, I knew that he was going to struggle in the future. It is very impressive that he can still make it to the second week of slams and get to quarter and semifinals. His return game, which was excellent in the past, is now merely adequate, and he tends to get bullied by players with intimidating physiques and groundstrokes such as Tsonga at Wimbledon 2011. If one goes back to 2004, when Andy Roddick was putting on the serving display of his life, Roger's superior movement and returning was able to negate Andy's power.

With that said, I still believe that Wimbledon remains his best chance of adding to his slam tally, since his serve is very effective on grass and there are not as many grass court specialists out there.

Thank kemet very nice comment. I also agree Roger certainly has a shot at wimby with his serve, slice backhand, and flatter shots. Can't say that I agree with Roddick being a particularly impressive great or potential great though. As a djokovic fan I still don't want any part of Roger on grass. The man's movement has come off a bit, but his decline has been gradual as you say and he still is capable of the inspired performance and a hot run of form. I mean he isn't all that slower than he was 6 months ago when he won wimbeldon. I think it is more of a hunger and focus issue than physical breakdown. It is hard to stay focused and hungry when you have accomplished more than anyone else. To me the technically sloppy footwork is more from that then from a dramatic physical breakdown from wimbeldon of last year to now. Also of course the different surfaces play a huge role as well.

emancipator wrote:Do u think he produces those shots with the same regularity?

I don't know. He may have done better then, when you take into account the speed of the courts and the quality of the opponents. It's hard to get anything conclusive with that line of debate...

Henman Bill wrote:

emancipator wrote:Do u think he produces those shots with the same regularity?

I don't know. He may have done better then, when you take into account the speed of the courts and the quality of the opponents. It's hard to get anything conclusive with that line of debate...

Yet.. you're just as inclined to believe that the 31 year old Federer can move as well as his 25 year old self? I find that line of reasoning even more bizarre.

Good technical article Socal...always like these types of discussions.
A few observations my side:

1. Federer is amongst the best ever, quickest footworkers...along with Sampras and Borg (and oddly Kafelnikov had truly incredible footwork too)
2. He used to have an incredibly strong core - his fitness regime was 2nd to none
3. He doesn't rotate his body as fast as he used to do
4. His recovery from full ground strokes to recovery position is slower
5. His back isn't what it was...affects core rotation speed and flexibility
6. He doesn't do the forehand hop step on approaches like he used to do
7. His racquet head speed is lower than it used to be...less rpm, more shots long

Just look at this for his racquet head speed on FH...(only matched by Nadal): https://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=MdcRi-PUdsg
Look at the racquet head speed of the 2nd FH hit in that video, and a few others thereafter.

So what does this all point to? A weakened core.
Less core strength means less speed, less explosiveness, reduced foot speed due to slower trunk movement, less rpm on FH or BH.

Why less core strength? Less gruelling exercise on it. Why? Probably because of his back issues.
They have reduced his ability to maintain the strength of his core.

It's hard to spot it ordinarily but it's all there. His ball striking ability remains great...perhaps even better than ever as its having to compensate for other areas...but the reduced core strength and speed is undermining his ability against the newer players. The fact he's doing as well as he is us testament to his foot striking...plus 80% Federer Footwork is still enough to beat most players. In tennis, footwork is everything...it's what tennis players spend as much time training on as actually striking the ball.

BTW...exactly the same thing happened to Sampras albeit at a slightly younger age (he was dogged by back issues for years with similarly resulting core effects, which when you're an explosive forecourt player are the death knell).

Very informative Lydian. Funny thing is that it probably points to there being one massive myth about Federer; that he avoided injury throughout his career.

Then again, technically it's not an injury I suppose, I think he had back issues right from the off.

Yep BB...in those respects both his and Sampras's careers are likely similar.
Plagued by back issues...for 2 of the best servers in Open Era.
Serving like that comes at a price unfortunately...both have v. significant back arches compared to their peers (particularly Sampras).
Once the back goes, the core goes, the speed goes...you can't fit the same number of steps in as before so you have to modify your footwork...it all snowballs. We're talking % points in reality but at this level it's enough to make a big difference. Plus >30yo the core just doesn't have the same physiologic elastic snap back to recovery it once did.

Yes good points Lydian a very fair assessment. Lydian I also think that he does a very perfunctory split step now and that this is one of the reasons he doesn't return or have that first explosive step to the ball as much. Which is goes to your point 6 which is spot on. Of course age plays a role. I also agree that timing wise he is still an amazing ball striker. Outside the last couple of matches last year he served better than ever, because that is all down to his own timing not conditioned on reacting to his opponents. Have you also noticed that he seems to be short arming and hitting the inside out forehand too close to his body? I was stunned how often he was either lunging last second at the ball or short arming the forehand.

On the backhand it is less apparent , and that is why he hits it better because he stands in that backhnd corner and people hit it to his backhand. On that side is movement isn't tested as much as it is on the forehand. I mean he is already standing there and players are trying to hit it there to begin with, so it fits with the overrall picture of a guy who times the ball well but either can't or isn't willing to do the tedious prep work to get his feet right. I have also noticed that his core looks really flabby lately when he takes off the shirt. The backhand is better than ever, because he doesn't need to move most of the time to hit that shot.

One question lydian, are you teaching your son a one hander for a topspin backhand this has been an interesting divergence in our views. You think the future is one handed, I think it is the past.

It's a demanding sport, no question.

I wonder what will do Djokovic? Will the stretchy bits go loose, or ping?

I still think it isn't like the man is shot physically, I mean the guy was the hottest player on the tour six months ago. To me I think frankly it comes down to desire and psychology. I don't doubt that roger has had wear and tear, or that he has lost half a step compared with his physical peak. But I also think this degradation is very gradual. I think the biggest issue at this stage is the hunger to train, the hunger to focus on all of these details in matches and to the pay the price when you have accomplished everything imaginable. I don't doubt that he has some physical drop off, but I do think that at times people overstate that.

Cheers socal, yeah he's slower on the FH side than BH now...it's why his BH looks relatively stronger than before. The FH uses more core rotation than a SHBH which uses more arm swing in prep. In other words, the issues with his core/back affect his FH more...so he's not getting the rpm, and not getting in position as well for those inside our FHs which require dextrous footwork. The lack of a proper split step may also be a core issue as well as you use a lot of abs in split stepping (slightly lifting your knees up together can use a lot of abs). I just don't think he can train his abs and back muscles like he used to. If you look at him without a shirt these days on you can tell his core is nowhere near as strong as the other top 3s. Paganini, Fed physical coach, once detailed the backwork Federer used to do. I bet he doesn't do that anymore.

My son has a DHBH...and I wouldn't move him from it. For high speed serve returning it's quicker to rotate the shoulders with a DHBH and jab the ball back than SHBH which uses more arm. It's why all the best returners have all had DHBH...Connors, Agassi, Djokovic, Murray. The SHbH has other benefits but they take a long time to pull through...juniors need a workable shot quickly these days.

Yeah BB, as Agassi said about Nadal...he's writing cheques his body can't cash...will apply to Djokovic too, intact I actually think Novak puts his body under more strain than Nadal with those huge splits he does. Nadal's injury issues have all actually stemmed from a congenital deformity not his game style. Nadal has better innate ball striking ability than Novak in my opinion, should Novak's flexibility ever suffer I believe he would suffer significantly.

Back issues probably point to these footwork/core issues, and less training in that area. But of course lack of motivational issues would also detract from core-strengthening work. Or indeed both...but Federer still looks fit to me, very. I just think he can't train his core the same as other areas. Sampras was a better case in point about motivation...yeah he had chronic back issues but his motivation was shot too (maybe catalysed by his back to start with) and from 2001 his on court speed was noticeably reduced. I don't see quite the same extent of issues with Federer, it's on a smaller scale, but the footwork evidence is there nonetheless and it's really hurting him against Djokovic and Murray now (Nadal is a different case in point). Reduced core strength is also reducing his power too...ok he got by in 2012...but at what expense, I wonder if he's paying the price now. However, as mentioned a 80-90% Federer is still good enough to beat just about everyone except 2-3 others, and you can amass an awful lot of ATP points beating everyone outside the top 3-4.

I have to go fellas, good post lydian I have a couple of issues i'd like to discuss with your last post but don't have the time to address them. Check back on the thread because on the Djoko part I actually have some points to make on that. Still a very good post lydian and we will chat soon. Damn it have to go back to work, just when it is getting good.

lydian wrote:Yeah BB, as Agassi said about Nadal...he's writing cheques his body can't cash...will apply to Djokovic too, intact I actually think Novak puts his body under more strain than Nadal with those huge splits he does. Nadal's injury issues have all actually stemmed from a congenital deformity not his game style. Nadal has better innate ball striking ability than Novak in my opinion, should Novak's flexibility ever suffer I believe he would suffer significantly.

Then was Agassi wrong? He wasn't the only person saying it. If it was all down to the deformed feet, why were so many people saying Nadal's knees/body would never last - before anyone knew about the feet?

As a side note I'd like to know when the foot thing was first mentioned and by whom? Was it in Rafa's book?

JuliusHMarx wrote: Was it in Rafa's book?

You being serious?

http://www.rediff.com/sports/2004/apr/21nadal.htm
They said at the time...

Lol...I thought you might disagree about that last para ;-)
Need to check out myself too, catch you all soon.

For Nadal's racquet head speed on FH check out this WTF practice from 5:50 to 6:50 at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPP1R1Gumq4
That kind of ball striking ability is sadly missed at the moment.

lydian wrote:Good technical article Socal...always like these types of discussions.
A few observations my side:

1. Federer is amongst the best ever, quickest footworkers...along with Sampras and Borg (and oddly Kafelnikov had truly incredible footwork too)
2. He used to have an incredibly strong core - his fitness regime was 2nd to none
3. He doesn't rotate his body as fast as he used to do
4. His recovery from full ground strokes to recovery position is slower
5. His back isn't what it was...affects core rotation speed and flexibility
6. He doesn't do the forehand hop step on approaches like he used to do
7. His racquet head speed is lower than it used to be...less rpm, more shots long

Just look at this for his racquet head speed on FH...(only matched by Nadal): https://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=MdcRi-PUdsg
Look at the racquet head speed of the 2nd FH hit in that video, and a few others thereafter.

So what does this all point to? A weakened core.
Less core strength means less speed, less explosiveness, reduced foot speed due to slower trunk movement, less rpm on FH or BH.

Why less core strength? Less gruelling exercise on it. Why? Probably because of his back issues.
They have reduced his ability to maintain the strength of his core.

It's hard to spot it ordinarily but it's all there. His ball striking ability remains great...perhaps even better than ever as its having to compensate for other areas...but the reduced core strength and speed is undermining his ability against the newer players. The fact he's doing as well as he is us testament to his foot striking...plus 80% Federer Footwork is still enough to beat most players. In tennis, footwork is everything...it's what tennis players spend as much time training on as actually striking the ball.

BTW...exactly the same thing happened to Sampras albeit at a slightly younger age (he was dogged by back issues for years with similarly resulting core effects, which when you're an explosive forecourt player are the death knell).

Good post Lydian.

I always wondered why Fed had such a flabby midriff even in his younger days (of course it's more noticeable now). It always seemed so incongrous with the rest of him, which otherwise would be the ideal build for a tennis player. The back is perhaps the reason. He's had back issues since at least 2003, probably earlier.

JHM, we've covered this very same discussion before...do keep up. I posted a lot of links to you some time back. The bone issue in his foot was covered in the press a long time ago.

Yep emancipator, his core is nowhere near as defined as Djokovic/Nadal and Murray.

You know, I'll be controversial and suggest he actually over-trained his back/core from 2000-2003 via that military routine Paganini put him through, and the strain was compounded by his service action. For a guy who was always clearly in such great physical shape fitness wise, his core has looked an anathema to that. I think his youthfulness and core elasticity helped retain his natural foot speed but more laterally I think the lack of strength/training in that area has caught up with him and his foot speed and racquet head speed are really starting to suffer relative to his peak.

It Must Be Love wrote:http://www.rediff.com/sports/2004/apr/21nadal.htm
They said at the time...

I'm not disputing whether or not he has a congenital foot deformity, I don't know, but that article talks about a hairline fracture in his foot - something completely different and caused by repetitive strain or stress.

emancipator wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:http://www.rediff.com/sports/2004/apr/21nadal.htm
They said at the time...

I'm not disputing whether or not he has a congenital foot deformity, I don't know, but that article talks about a hairline fracture in his foot - something completely different and caused by repetitive strain or stress.

Exactly. A fracture isn't congenital. I can't recall where the congenital (i.e. from birth) issue was first mentioned in public. I don't remember anyone posting specific details of that here. But hey, I'm getting on a bit - someone refresh my memory.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Roger Federer is seen as the GOAT (by me as well) on the grounds of his achievements which is fair enough. However, does that make him the most talented player ever? After all even a portion of his fans are junking his form and pointing to his shanking of shots looking ugly. Is that raw genius talent then that he should have all these flaws since 2008. I mean did Borg go through junk phases or was he a genius for the vast majority of his career?

Borg knew himself he wasn't good enough after 81 and hence rightly retired, Borg after 27 would be hammed by like of Mac,Lendl, Wilander etc,. on peak he was a beast but certainly he had no such qualities of Fed to win big names after his peak is over, he neither was capable mentally nor physically.

This theory is seen long time back, Fed made it up with his talent, how long we all have been saying Fed got nothing left in his legs for brutal matches?

emancipator wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:

emancipator wrote:Do u think he produces those shots with the same regularity?

I don't know. He may have done better then, when you take into account the speed of the courts and the quality of the opponents. It's hard to get anything conclusive with that line of debate...

Yet.. you're just as inclined to believe that the 31 year old Federer can move as well as his 25 year old self? I find that line of reasoning even more bizarre.

I think you've misquoted me. Please show me where I talked about movement by providing an exact quote. What I recall is that I said nothing about movement.

The whole discussion is about movement unless you think players stand in one spot and hit inside out forehands. If you're not talking about movement then what is your point? That Federer can still hit an inside out FH when the ball comes directly to him?

Perhaps you haven't been following the discussion.

The little steps were flourishing beautifully at Wimbledon, most notably in the semi's victory over that pansy who lost the USO final.

emancipator wrote:The whole discussion is about movement unless you think players stand in one spot and hit inside out forehands. If you're not talking about movement then what is your point? That Federer can still hit an inside out FH when the ball comes directly to him?

Perhaps you haven't been following the discussion.

You could admit you misquoted me and apologise. The discussion was focused on movement true, but that is not what I was talking about. I do think Federer's movement is worse than before and have observed that for a while.

Also, I don't appreciate stupid comments like "Perhaps you haven't been following the discussion". I don't like that kind of needle. If you can't be more civil, then stop asking questions of me at all.

Also thanks for Lydian's post which was interesting.

Henman Bill wrote:

emancipator wrote:The whole discussion is about movement unless you think players stand in one spot and hit inside out forehands. If you're not talking about movement then what is your point? That Federer can still hit an inside out FH when the ball comes directly to him?

Perhaps you haven't been following the discussion.

You could admit you misquoted me and apologise. The discussion was focused on movement true, but that is not what I was talking about. I do think Federer's movement is worse than before and have observed that for a while.

Also, I don't appreciate stupid comments like "Perhaps you haven't been following the discussion". I don't like that kind of needle. If you can't be more civil, then stop asking questions of me at all.

What are you talking about? Apologise for what? I'm asking you a genuine question in the context of the discussion, ie what is the point that you're trying to make?

I have absolutely no interest in discussing anything with you.

emancipator wrote:
I have absolutely no interest in discussing anything with you.

Something we can agree on.

lydian wrote:Cheers socal, yeah he's slower on the FH side than BH now...it's why his BH looks relatively stronger than before. The FH uses more core rotation than a SHBH which uses more arm swing in prep. In other words, the issues with his core/back affect his FH more...so he's not getting the rpm, and not getting in position as well for those inside our FHs which require dextrous footwork. The lack of a proper split step may also be a core issue as well as you use a lot of abs in split stepping (slightly lifting your knees up together can use a lot of abs). I just don't think he can train his abs and back muscles like he used to. If you look at him without a shirt these days on you can tell his core is nowhere near as strong as the other top 3s. Paganini, Fed physical coach, once detailed the backwork Federer used to do. I bet he doesn't do that anymore.

My son has a DHBH...and I wouldn't move him from it. For high speed serve returning it's quicker to rotate the shoulders with a DHBH and jab the ball back than SHBH which uses more arm. It's why all the best returners have all had DHBH...Connors, Agassi, Djokovic, Murray. The SHbH has other benefits but they take a long time to pull through...juniors need a workable shot quickly these days.

Yeah BB, as Agassi said about Nadal...he's writing cheques his body can't cash...will apply to Djokovic too, intact I actually think Novak puts his body under more strain than Nadal with those huge splits he does. Nadal's injury issues have all actually stemmed from a congenital deformity not his game style. Nadal has better innate ball striking ability than Novak in my opinion, should Novak's flexibility ever suffer I believe he would suffer significantly.

This is absolutely spot on, lydian. Do you coach your son yourself? Plyometrics are just as important as technical training, they pay off hugely in the long run. We do just as much work on sport-specific fitness as the other aspects of the game, people tend to shy away from it at first but then embrace it when the dividends become rapidly apparent. I agree with you on the DHBH, far easier to pick up and learn whilst utilising a lower tariff on the basic stroke than the SHBH. With the technology these days, and the return being so pivotal in the modern game...