Top 3 Fastest Forehands at the 2025 Australian Open | Bent Arm vs Straight Arm

[@IntuitiveTennis]

Fonseca Forehand Analysis 👉 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z5nMqJaJh8Sjr7Msi=9KRWuLcP04pRVFn3

[@TVUntilTomorrow]

Very good coach, one thing though.. I would argue a reason to want straight arm FH can be because as I have experienced although at the sacrifice of continuity (for the time being) when you hit a straight arm FH it just feels SOOO good. Like throwing a football spiral for the first time. I’m trying to chase that feeling. Notice when alcaraz and them straight arm guys hit it’s like they are throwing the arm it’s a thing of beauty. Although I know the fastest FH in history usually are bent arm, in my personal opinion I’d rather sacrifice the very top end speed for a really nice swing feel and way better looking shot

[@Mary-z9f1j]

You always surprise your viewers! Thank you for such engaging content! 🌺💚

[@miguellauandos1902]

Great video as always. Can you consider making 2 others. One on how to hit a slice serve on the add side like JJ Wolfe and Opelka, extreme bender. And another on the importance of getting under the ball on forehands, backhands and kick serves. Ty

[@bordum2]

I think he made a reel on the opelka slice serve about a week ago

[@Marco-gk3kr]

Very thanks for your analys work. I see so many Academys what learn every people the same style and i am not a fan from this. I am also a coach and i let them find their own styles. Because i think its easier for them after to addapt new variation. Thx for your time

[@hobonickel840]

centrifugal force and the laws of dynamics lend to a drawn in rather than extended arm for speed and power, especially if you go from extended to drawn at contact .. yes, I certainly agree .. cheers

[@sj-mf8zz]

Hi Coach, can you do a video on tennis burnout and how to schedule breaks in tennis training/matches?

[@hertor8803]

Be interesting to know whether either style has more likelihood of injury than the other.

[@DeltoidBeast]

Correct. Point is to create efortless and great racket head speed with strong and long contact point.

[@AlanSchorsch]

And by that logic, the straighter the arm the better.

[@TheMitso]

@@AlanSchorsch no. You can have a long contact point with both “techniques”.

[@themrstroke]

Maybe most telling on the forehand comparisons is this new "shot quality" quantitative ranking on the forehands. For the 2024 season, the top 3 were Sinner, Alcaraz, and Novak at 1-2-3. They were all very close though.

[@mikechan231]

Wish there was a link to that video you did 5 years ago…

[@TheMitso]

Bent vs Straight is mostly a stylistic difference I think (as you say). I will say that I don’t think excessively bent forehands at contact are desirable. I would argue that you want extension into the shot, whether that is with a bent or a straight arm at contact depends on the rest of the technique and is highly influenced by the forehand grip (all else equal, grips that get more western necessitate more of a bent arm/point of contact further back, as they close the racquet face at contact). The extension expresses itself as contact in front the of the body, whereas strong bending draws contact closer towards the body (not laterally but longitudinally if you want to call it that). My belief is that good extension into the shot makes for a more solid and reliable stroke, but it can definitely be achieved with both expressions of a forehand stroke. I anticipate that people will respond with players like Perricard and Opelka who have much more bent but strong forehands. I think we should remember that they are very tall and have long levers due to their body dimensions. In their case they might naturally produce enough acceleration due to their long levers, such that they prefer this kind of technique. Anyhow, my take is that so long as extension into the shot is achieved, it doesn’t matter whether the forehand is bent or straight. Whatever feels more comfortable or works better for the player.

[@allahousalami]

It dépends on your bone structure muscle insertion but i think on physics it is better to have steaight arm because it produces mode power with less effort

[@KalebEr-gz2of]

are you going to try the new dunlop sx line?

[@propgee]

the contact in front is the most fundamental part of the forehand. If you haven't uncoiled don't try hitting the ball. your contact will be all over the place, leading to inconsistent strokes. straight or bent doest really matter like Nick said

[@JoeEngineersThings]

His (the first guy mentioned) contact looks a little further towards the tip of the racket which would result in higher racket head speed at contact.

[@Dasato123]

I want to know how fast that disrespectful forehand that Kyrgios hit at Nadal was. I believe it was way out but it would be interesting to know how fast a pro can hit a forehand, period. 😅

[@jayp123]

That wasn't even a forehand 😂 more of a slap shot

[@Lewythefly]

The problem with the straight arm forehand is you have to position yourself much further away from the ball. This is not easy to do, its very difficult in fact. It's far easier to see and time the ball when it's closer to you. The majority of tennis players have a bent elbow and very few have a straight arm.

[@TheMitso]

Not true.

[@Lewythefly]

@TheMitso it is true, I've tried it myself on the practice court

[@TheMitso]

@@Lewythefly then you tried wrong idk what to tell you. I’ve used both competitively at different parts of my tennis playing life. If you strike a technically clean bent or straight arm forehand, the lateral separation is not meaningfully different just due to the bend. Contact has to move more forward with a straight arm, however, point of contact more in front is not the same as saying “you have to position yourself much further away from the ball”, which reasonably would be interpreted as lateral separation from the ball. You strike the ball in front not to the side of your body. The forehand grip certainly influences how much lateral separation you need, but the differences are minor and not worth emphasising how you do. Even then, “needing” more separation isn’t a strict downside, needing to create more separation is the flip side of having more effective reach on the run/when the opponent stretches you on the forehand side.

[@Lewythefly]

@@TheMitso I've never seen anyone who can successfully switch between the two styles, especially not in competition so I think you are being misleading. Take a look at an image of Alcaraz or Fed vs someone like Sinner and you will see that Sinner is closer to the ball. You can even see the difference in the thumbnail of this video.

[@TheMitso]

@@Lewythefly at no point did I say I switched between the two in the same match, read carefully. Of course I wouldn’t switch between the two in a competitive setting now, though I can play both in practice no problem. Anyhow, players differ in more than whether the forehand is bent or not, so the comparison you draw is moot. Federer in particular is a bad comparison as he has a modern eastern grip.

[@tijgertjekonijnwordopgegeten]

I think Perricard can still have this much power because his arms are really long already.

[@benjaminscottmorris4474]

That is speed of shot, but what about consistency of shot?

[@Pedro-op6zj]

wow you're so smart 😮

[@NamesAreRandom]

No mention of spin. If it's just straight speed through the court you might find a female player actually ends up the fastest because they hit very flat. The men however hit with a ton of spin so trying to judge power of a forehand by straight speed is inaccurate (or Nadal would have a terrible forehand).

[@alnorris251]

Maybe Perricard can hit a 200km per hour forehand if he switches to straight arm😮

[@scapinluca1872]

Two are out. Maybe they need something else.

[@DorothyWalker-k7o]

Very inspiring videos! Thank you for the new ideas! 😘🍭

[@KenFlanagan]

I like listening to this presenter and always find him engaging but his explanation is not only unclear it’s incomplete and as a result doesn’t make logical sense. Firstly comparing three speeds of the ball? How? This is not scientific in any way and so is open to complete inaccuracies. Basic science tell you if you want to compare two or three things then we must use a controlled environment and reduce or eliminate other variables. Simple physics tells you about moving objects and relative velocity. At the most basic level the speed of the incoming ball will kinetically affect the energy and speed of the returning ball. Likewise the angle of contact. The string bed and its energy conservation. Hardly rocket science. So unfortunately everything we know about measuring these three players is questionable given the basis of this video and “observation” or measurement. Putting all that to one side anyone who has changed grips from semi eastern to full western will know what your arm will want to do and why. This naturally creates a greater angle of incidence when contacting a rising ball coming towards you. The ultimate conservation of momentum will be a combination of racket face angle to contact, string bed, racket stiffness and so on. Are all three players using the same racket?? All things being equal if we just want to consider how fast the racket is moving at contact looking at the grip and lever length and circular motion of the stroke is all going to impact on the speed of the ball leaving the racket. How is the speed measured. A peak speed or an average. We all know what spin does to the trajectory of a ball but what does this mean in terms of velocity? Do the math. All in all this is literally the least scientific or biomechanical way to explain an observation let alone the technique. This idea of tennis fundamentals and style is just a fudge for not knowing what is really going on. True freezing the contact point is wholly misleading but isn’t that obvious given the swing is a three dimensional kinetic action not a static pose. Seriously.