Forehand Trajectory of the Big Four

[Luxilon Borg]

If any of you are recording this match, you should be able to freeze it at the particular
frame and confirm that the numbers shown on TV are exactly the same as in the graphic
posted in my OP.

They are. 90 inches is basically 7.5 feet. Cannot be.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

Even then do you think the numbers are correct? I doubt it. I already interpreted it
that way only. As you can see, I said from the ground to the ball at the time the ball
clears the net. Do you think that average height would be about 7.5 feet?

I find it still tough to believe.

 

[brokenshoelace]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

I still find those numbers ridiculous to be honest. Let's think of it that way: The bottom of the tape touches the ground. So in other words, they're saying when the ball clears the net, it's flying 7.5 feet above the ground. Nadal is 6 foot 1. For his forehand to reach that height, it means at one point, it's flying higher virtually over his head. Imagine that you're hitting your forehand with such ferocity, and it's flying 7.5 feet in the air. Just thinking about it from a mechanics' perspective, it makes no sense. Look at Nadal when he strikes the ball, does it look at any point like it's heading UPWARDS while it's in the air? Obviously it goes up to an extent, but not 7 feet high!

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

Even then do you think the numbers are correct? I doubt it. I already interpreted it
that way only. As you can see, I said from the ground to the ball at the time the ball
clears the net. Do you think that average height would be about 7.5 feet?

I find it still tough to believe.

It still sounds off to me. It means Rafa is literally hitting the ball over You Ming's head if he stood at the net with rally balls....

 

[brokenshoelace]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

Even then do you think the numbers are correct? I doubt it. I already interpreted it
that way only. As you can see, I said from the ground to the ball at the time the ball
clears the net. Do you think that average height would be about 7.5 feet?

I find it still tough to believe.

Exactly. By the way, that's how I interpreted the numbers too. That's what net clearance usually means (from the bottom of the net).

FYI, the reason Cahill brought this up on the air is because I tweeted him about it!

 

[brokenshoelace]

The following graphic was shown on TV recently during the telecast of one
of the matches in the current AO. It shows a chart depicting the
the average net clearance, rpm and bounce height of the forehand shots hit by
the big four players during 2013.

http://i.imgur.com/EsVokcc.jpg

It says Nadal's net clearance is 90 inches. That is 7 and half feet. Is that real?
When Nadal hits a forehand, at the time when it crosses the net is the ball
that high from the ground? Seems too high to me.

What exactly is the definition of the term "Net Clearance"?

Apparently, Nadal has the highest net clearance and Fed
comes next. Djokovic's clearance is even below that.
Murray's is even below that.

Obviously, having it very close will lead to lot UFEs with the ball hitting the net.
But, is not it also true that it is undesirable to have huge net clearance (as it
would almost amount to moonballing and/or playing badminton).

What would be the optimal net clearance.

Also, I suppose flat shots will tend to have less net clearance than
top spin shots. Am I correct on that?

Mystery solved.

Cahill...who has been wrong about many things this tourney, claims the number given is from the BOTTOM of the net, NOT from the tape.

He claims this is so due to the fact the net height is not consistent across. Pretty lame for them to take 5 days to explain it.

Even then do you think the numbers are correct? I doubt it. I already interpreted it
that way only. As you can see, I said from the ground to the ball at the time the ball
clears the net. Do you think that average height would be about 7.5 feet?

I find it still tough to believe.

It still sounds off to me. It means Rafa is literally hitting the ball over You Ming's head if he stood at the net with rally balls....

Yeah, exactly. There's no way the ball would land in if it's traveling at that height with that sort of ferocity.

 

[brokenshoelace]

It's really baffling that this was brought to Cahill's attention (by yours truly!), and he still doesn't see that there's something wrong with it. He actually responded to me about it, saying it's from the bottom of the net.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

It's really baffling that this was brought to Cahill's attention (by yours truly!), and he still doesn't see that there's something wrong with it. He actually responded to me about it, saying it's from the bottom of the net.

Tell him Feds racket is 98, not 95, and that Jo W used that new Babalot frame all through the 2013 indoor season, not at the Hopman Cup for the first time.

 

[brokenshoelace]

It's really baffling that this was brought to Cahill's attention (by yours truly!), and he still doesn't see that there's something wrong with it. He actually responded to me about it, saying it's from the bottom of the net.

Tell him Feds racket is 98, not 95, and that Jo W used that new Babalot frame all through the 2013 indoor season, not at the Hopman Cup for the first time.

On twitter, Brad Gilbert corrected the bit regarding Fed's racket.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

It's really baffling that this was brought to Cahill's attention (by yours truly!), and he still doesn't see that there's something wrong with it. He actually responded to me about it, saying it's from the bottom of the net.

Tell him Feds racket is 98, not 95, and that Jo W used that new Babalot frame all through the 2013 indoor season, not at the Hopman Cup for the first time.

On twitter, Brad Gilbert corrected the bit regarding Fed's racket.

Thank god. They need to hire a fact checker just for Cahill..who ironically
Gilbert called the "equipment guru".

But back to OT they should scrap that graphic...

 

[Haelfix]

Honestly im a little surprised by Murray's numbers. On the face of it, it seems he hits a very spinny and wristy forehand with decent net clearage, whereas Djokovic seems to hit flatter balls. There might be a power difference, which could account for some of that, but still the net clearance seems a bit off.

 

[huntingyou]

I can see Nadal's cc forehand going 7 feet off the ground at the time it crosses the net, but that would be his short/angled defensive shot. Typically he hits at 30 inches over the net on clay; I would guess 25 inches on hards when he is dictating play.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I can see Nadal's cc forehand going 7 feet off the ground at the time it crosses the net, but that would be his short/angled defensive shot. Typically he hits at 30 inches over the net on clay; I would guess 25 inches on hards when he is dictating play.

Exactly.

By the way, that "experts" can't see these stats are wrong is embarrassing. Here's what Cahill tweeted at me: "it's the flight height of the ball. He does those heights easily. On clay it's higher."

Yes, Nadal "easily" averages a 7.5 feet net clearance :s

 

[huntingyou]

I can see Nadal's cc forehand going 7 feet off the ground at the time it crosses the net, but that would be his short/angled defensive shot. Typically he hits at 30 inches over the net on clay; I would guess 25 inches on hards when he is dictating play.

Exactly.

By the way, that "experts" can't see these stats are wrong is embarrassing. Here's what Cahill tweeted at me: "it's the flight height of the ball. He does those heights easily. On clay it's higher."

Yes, Nadal "easily" averages a 7.5 feet net clearance :s

They are too busy filling the "empty" space with mindless chatting to bother to with FACTS.

What's the height of the net? I't like 40 inches right?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I can see Nadal's cc forehand going 7 feet off the ground at the time it crosses the net, but that would be his short/angled defensive shot. Typically he hits at 30 inches over the net on clay; I would guess 25 inches on hards when he is dictating play.

Exactly.

By the way, that "experts" can't see these stats are wrong is embarrassing. Here's what Cahill tweeted at me: "it's the flight height of the ball. He does those heights easily. On clay it's higher."

Yes, Nadal "easily" averages a 7.5 feet net clearance :s

They are too busy filling the "empty" space with mindless chatting to bother to with FACTS.

What's the height of the net? I't like 40 inches right?

Height of the net is 3 feet at the middle and 3ft and 6 inches at either end (approximately).