Effective force transmission in the closed-stance two-handed backhand stroke depends on coordinated lower-limb movement. This study investigated the temporal characteristics of lower-limb synergies and their relationship with angular momentum transfer in the supporting leg. Sixteen elite and fourteen sub-elite tennis players performed backhand strokes captured via synchronized force platforms and motion capture. Singular value decomposition (SVD) was used to extract synergy patterns, and cross-correlation functions (CCF) assessed the temporal relationship between synergy activation and angular momentum across foot, shank, thigh, and pelvis segments. Three consistent synergies were identified in both groups. However, elite players displayed better synergy structures and tighter temporal synchronization (p < 0.05). Specifically, Synergy 1 enhanced angular momentum transfer in the thigh and pelvis, Synergy 2 improved rotational control in the shank and pelvis, and Synergy 3 facilitated footwork adjustment and postural stability. These synergies showed stronger correlations and more consistent timing in elite athletes. The findings suggest that optimizing lower-limb synergy timing enhances angular momentum transfer efficiency, rotational stability, and coordination during stroke execution, offering valuable insight for performance training in tennis.
HileyMJYeadonMR.Optimum technique for generating angular momentum in accelerated backward giant circles prior to a dismount. J Appl Biomech2003; 19: 119–130.
2.
ShafizadehMBonnerSBarnesA, et al. Effects of task and environmental constraints on axial kinematic synergies during the tennis service in expert players. Eur J Sport Sci2020; 20: 1178–1186.
3.
ShafizadehMBonnerSFraserJ, et al. Effect of environmental constraints on multi-segment coordination patterns during the tennis service in expert performers. J Sports Sci2019; 37: 1011–1020.
4.
AkutagawaSKojimaT.Trunk rotation torques through the hip joints during the one-and two-handed backhand tennis strokes. J Sports Sci2005; 23: 781–793.
5.
ElliottBFleisigGNichollsR, et al. Technique effects on upper limb loading in the tennis serve. J Sci Med Sport2003; 6: 76–87.
6.
KiblerWVan Der MeerD. Mastering the kinetic chain. In: RoetertPGroppelJL (eds) World-class tennis technique. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2001, pp. 99–113.
7.
SciasciaAThigpenCNamdariS, et al. Kinetic chain abnormalities in the athletic shoulder. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev2012; 20: 16–21.
8.
BartlettRWheatJRobinsM.Is movement variability important for sports biomechanists?Sports Biomech2007; 6: 224–243.
9.
FederolfPBoyerKAndriacchiT.Application of principal component analysis in clinical gait research: identification of systematic differences between healthy and medial knee-osteoarthritic gait. J Biomech2013; 46: 2173–2178.
10.
d’AvellaASaltielPBizziE.Combinations of muscle synergies in the construction of a natural motor behavior. Nat Neurosci2003; 6: 300–308.
11.
LatashMLScholzJPSchönerG.Motor control strategies revealed in the structure of motor variability. Exerc Sport Sci Rev2002; 30: 26–31.
12.
HakenHKelsoJSBunzH.A theoretical model of phase transitions in human hand movements. Biol Cybern1985; 51: 347-356.
13.
KiblerWB.Biomechanical analysis of the shoulder during tennis activities. Clin Sports Med1995; 14: 79–85.
14.
HaudumABirklbauerJMüllerE.The effect of external perturbations on variability in joint coupling and single joint variability. Hum Mov Sci2014; 36: 246–257.
15.
PreatoniEHamillJHarrisonAJ, et al. Movement variability and skills monitoring in sports. Sports Biomech2013; 12: 69–92.
16.
WilsonCSimpsonSEVan EmmerikRE, et al. Coordination variability and skill development in expert triple jumpers. Sports Biomech2008; 7: 2–9.
17.
BusquetsAMarinaMDavidsK, et al. Differing roles of functional movement variability as experience increases in gymnastics. J Sports Sci Med2016; 15: 268.
18.
ButtonCMacleodMSandersR, et al. Examining movement variability in the basketball free-throw action at different skill levels. Res Q Exerc Sport2003; 74: 257–269.
19.
WagnerHPfusterschmiedJKlousM, et al. Movement variability and skill level of various throwing techniques. Hum Mov Sci2012; 31: 78–90.
20.
ElliottB.Biomechanics and tennis. Br J Sports Med2006; 40: 392–396.
21.
NewellKM.Constraints on the development of coordination. In: WadeMGWhitingHTA (eds) Motor development on children: aspects of coordination and control. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, 1986, p. 341.
22.
HileyMJZuevskyVVYeadonMR.Is skilled technique characterized by high or low variability? An analysis of high bar giant circles. Hum Mov Sci2013; 32: 171–180.
23.
ThapaRKKumarASharmaD, et al. Lower limb muscle activation during instep kick from different approach angles and relationship of squat jumpwith 10-m sphnt, 30-m sprint, static balance, change of direction speed and ball velocity among soccer players. J Phys Educ Sport2019; 19: 2264–2272.
24.
Dos’ SantosTThomasCComfortP, et al. The effect of angle and velocity on change of direction biomechanics: an angle-velocity trade-off. Sports Med2018; 48: 2235–2253.
25.
FalchHNRædergårdHGvan den TillaarR.Effect of approach distance and change of direction angles upon step and joint kinematics, peak muscle activation, and change of direction performance. Front Sports Act Living2020; 2: 594567.
26.
ShibataSShimanaTKadoJ, et al. Mechanism for control of ball spin rate by the upper limb in baseball pitching based on singular value decomposition. J Biomech2023; 153: 111603.
27.
ErdfelderEFaulFBuchnerA.GPOWER: a general power analysis program. Behav Res Methods1996; 28: 1–11.
28.
FaulFErdfelderEBuchnerA, et al. Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods2009; 41: 1149–1160.
29.
SongYCenXWangM, et al. The influence of simulated worn shoe and foot inversion on heel internal biomechanics during running impact: a subject-specific finite element analysis. J Biomech2025; 180: 112517.
30.
ChenDSunDLiF, et al. Identifying the primary kinetic factors influencing the anterior–posterior center of mass displacement in barbell squats: a factor regression analysis. Sensors2025; 25: 572.
31.
SongYCenXWangM, et al. A systematic review of finite element analysis in running footwear biomechanics: insights for running-related musculoskeletal injuries. J Sports Sci Med2025; 24:370.
32.
BesierTFSturnieksDLAldersonJA, et al. Repeatability of gait data using a functional Hip Joint Centre and a mean helical knee axis. J Biomech2003; 36: 1159–1168.
33.
ChinAElliottBAldersonJ, et al. The off-break and “doosra”: kinematic variations of elite and sub-elite bowlers in creating ball spin in cricket bowling. Sports Biomech2009; 8: 187–198.
34.
ElliottBReidMCrespoM. Technique development in tennis stroke production. London: International Tennis Federation, 2009.
35.
ZhangSSadoNFujiiN.High-accuracy tennis players linearly adjust racket impact kinematics according to impact height during a two-handed backhand stroke. Sports Biomech2025; 24(3): 694–707.
36.
WangL-HLinH-TLoK-C, et al. Comparison of segmental linear and angular momentum transfers in two-handed backhand stroke stances for different skill level tennis players. J Sci Med Sport2010; 13: 452–459.
37.
WinterDA.Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
38.
WhitesideDElliottBCLayB, et al. Coordination and variability in the elite female tennis serve. J Sports Sci2015; 33: 675–686.
39.
ZatsiorskyVM.Kinetics of human motion. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2002.
40.
d’AvellaABizziE.Shared and specific muscle synergies in natural motor behaviors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2005; 102: 3076–3081.
41.
KrishnamoorthyV.Muscle synergies during standing [PhD dissertation]. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University; 2003.
42.
LatashMLScholzJPSchönerG.Toward a new theory of motor synergies. Motor Control2007; 11: 276–308.
43.
VesperCVan Der WelRPKnoblichG, et al. Making oneself predictable: reduced temporal variability facilitates joint action coordination. Exp Brain Res2011; 211: 517–530.
44.
BrutonMO’DwyerN.Synergies in coordination: a comprehensive overview of neural, computational, and behavioral approaches. J Neurophysiol2018; 120: 2761–2774.
45.
ReschechtkoSLatashML. Stability of hand force production. I. Hand level control variables and multifinger synergies. J Neurophysiol2017; 118: 3152–3164.
46.
HugFAvrillonSIbáñezJ, et al. Common synaptic input, synergies and size principle: control of spinal motor neurons for movement generation. J Physiol2023; 601: 11–20.
47.
FederolfPReidRGilgienM, et al. The application of principal component analysis to quantify technique in sports. Scand J Med Sci Sports2014; 24: 491–499.
48.
WhitesideDElliottBLayB, et al. The effect of age on discrete kinematics of the elite female tennis serve. J Appl Biomech2013; 29: 573–582.
49.
ReidMElliottBAldersonJ.Lower-limb coordination and shoulder joint mechanics in the tennis serve. Med Sci Sports Exerc2008; 40: 308–315.
50.
ChowJWParkS-ATillmanMD.Lower trunk kinematics and muscle activity during different types of tennis serves. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil2009; 1: 1–14.
51.
Hernández-DavóJLMorenoFJSanz-RivasD, et al. Variations in kinematic variables and performance in the tennis serve according to age and skill level. Int J Perform Anal Sport2019; 19: 749–762.
52.
LambrichJMuehlbauerT.Biomechanical analyses of different serve and groundstroke techniques in tennis: a systematic scoping review. PLoS ONE2023; 18: e0290320.
53.
HeYFeketeG.The effect of cryotherapy on balance recovery at different moments after lower extremity muscle fatigue. Phys Act Health2021; 5: 255–270.
54.
GroppelJL.A kinematic analysis of the tennis one-handed and two-handed backhand drives of highly-skilled female competitors. Thesis, The Florida State University, Florida, 1978.
55.
LatashMLAnsonJG.Synergies in health and disease: relations to adaptive changes in motor coordination. Phys Ther2006; 86: 1151–1160.
56.
VereijkenB.The complexity of childhood development: variability in perspective. Phys Ther2010; 90: 1850-1859.
57.
KarandikarNVargasOOO. Kinetic chains: a review of the concept and its clinical applications. PM&R2011; 3: 739–745.
58.
ScholzJPSchönerG.The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task. Exp Brain Res1999; 126: 289–306.
59.
ScholzJPSchönerG. Use of the uncontrolled manifold (UCM) approach to understand motor variability, motor equivalence, and self-motion. In: LevinM (ed.) Progress in motor control: skill learning, performance, health, and injury. New York, NY: Springer, 2014, pp.91–100.
60.
PinderRADavidsKRenshawI, et al. Manipulating informational constraints shapes movement reorganization in interceptive actions. Atten Percept Psychophys2011; 73: 1242–1254.
