PDA

View Full Version : Two forehands?


uc3
08-16-2007, 03:45 PM
What do you guys think of having two forehands? I am developing a lefty forehand and I'm making rapid progress. To me it makes sense because the forehand seems more physiologically favorable then the backhand. Maybe 30 years from now we might see more players on the tour with two forehands? Discuss.

dave333
08-16-2007, 04:19 PM
You'd have to switch hands=bad idea.

Just do a 2 hander instead. A 2 hander is like a lefty forehand. People practice lefty forehands to make their 2 handers better.

WildVolley
08-16-2007, 04:49 PM
I've always been intrigued by this idea. For a lot players, the two handed backhand is really just a two handed forehand with the left hand.

If you have enough time, why not let go with the other hand and take a larger swing?

I believe if you are going to use this technique, you should hold the racquet in a ready position with one hand almost on top of the other. This makes switching hands almost instantaneous, or at least no slower than rotating to a backhand grip.

ProStaff Legend
08-16-2007, 04:53 PM
it would take more time to prepare on the "backhand" forehand and would give ur opponent when hititng to that side. y not just spend the same amount of time mastering ur backhand?

Bodacious DVT
08-16-2007, 04:55 PM
i saw this in tennis magazine a few years ago.

there was a pro tournament where both of the finalists used 2 forehands. there wasnt a single backhand hit in the entire match.

i dont see the major problem being switching grips, but rather when to start teaching this technique. you would almost have to start the kid with two forehands from day one. perhaps it would be a better idea if the kid was naturally ambidextrous.

usfferjenn
08-16-2007, 04:55 PM
i used to do that when i first learned to play and my coach used to hate that. i'm a natural left-hander and use a two handed backhand. i think i may try this.

Rafa freak
08-16-2007, 04:56 PM
Bad idea..

EricW
08-16-2007, 05:45 PM
I'd say go for it.. might be interesting

stevekim8
08-16-2007, 06:35 PM
i saw this on PoT lol

called "nitouryuu"

echizen ryoma and echizen nanjirou was using it

In D Zone
08-16-2007, 09:23 PM
What do you guys think of having two forehands? I am developing a lefty forehand and I'm making rapid progress. To me it makes sense because the forehand seems more physiologically favorable then the backhand. Maybe 30 years from now we might see more players on the tour with two forehands? Discuss.


Let me invite you to read up on this topic. I started back this July about the 2 handed Forehand....

One of the major contributor to this forum, TennisMastery (authored a self titled book) has provide some very indept analysis on the 2 handed Forehand.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=145778

J. Lee, Tennis Baller
08-16-2007, 09:31 PM
haha "Two Swords" Techinique - I hope your ambidextrous...

gonevcrazy
08-16-2007, 09:32 PM
lol I love it whenever a PoT reference is made in relation to reality.

But all joking aside, one of my friends actually played a fella who actually did this! The guy was all forehand shots! He'd switch hands whenever it's appropriate and guess what, he beat my friend. Could be interesting to try if u're somewhat ambidextrous ;)

i saw this on PoT lol

called "nitouryuu"

echizen ryoma and echizen nanjirou was using it

uc3
08-16-2007, 09:56 PM
I'm not interested in talking about the double handed forehand. I'm not interested in talking about Fabrice Santoro.

I'm talking about having the ability to use a one-handed forehand on both the left and right sides. Remember, a one handed forehand will allow you the most reach out of any stroke, so having it on both sides would be a crazy advantage.

And as for ambidextrosity, it's already been proven that one can learn how to use their "weaker" side and even it out.

I used to brush my teeth with my right hand. I tried it with my left and I could barely do it because the motor movements hadn't been learned yet. Three years later I can brush my teeth right my left hand so much better than my right.

SoBad
08-16-2007, 10:12 PM
If it's working for you why not. I've only seen it once myself - a girl in USTA women's opens match. Was a thrill to watch because of the whole effective weirdness of her game. Served lefty, not much pace but plenty of spin on the serve. Baseline game - classic "pusher" - no-pace some-topspin semi-lob forehands from either side. Over and over again until her opponent (typical solid baseliner) missed. Her opponent was going nuts. Started coming in, only to get passed with a solid forehand from whichever side. Needless to say, the two-forehanded "pusher" girl won the match.

ipodtennispro
08-16-2007, 11:46 PM
What do you guys think of having two forehands? I am developing a lefty forehand and I'm making rapid progress. To me it makes sense because the forehand seems more physiologically favorable then the backhand. Maybe 30 years from now we might see more players on the tour with two forehands? Discuss.

It does make sense. Unfortunately, only the old folks at our club have caught on to it. Maybe they have become wiser? This could be the next break through in the modern game. Somebody, someday will break through on the professional level - it's just a matter of time. Forget the two hands on both sides.

Go for it! and Good Luck

Tennismastery
08-17-2007, 12:34 AM
Unless you are totally ambidexterous, and have the time to train both hands so that they are relatively equal, it could be done. However, even a guy as great as Luke Jensen was, a guy who could and would serve with both hands over 120 mph, would not switch hands after the serve.

Ideally, the concept has merit as far as learning to serve since there is a big advantage being able to throw in a left handed kick and a right handed kick or slice serve in any point. But, beyond that, there is not much advantage other than a slight advantage of reach to spend the necessary time trying to master two forehands.

The switching of hands can become burdensome and, considering that you would still have to hit backhands when a rally became so fast or considering you would not have time to switch hands at the net, you would still have to learn a backhand too...so, in reality, you would end up having to learn one more stroke, at minimum, than any other player.

I'm not saying it can't be done. It would just be rare, indeed.

jmverdugo
08-17-2007, 09:14 AM
I think it would be a mess at the net or taking the ball early, you cant change hands faster than no changing hands at all.

ipodtennispro
08-17-2007, 11:42 AM
I think it would be a mess at the net or taking the ball early, you cant change hands faster than no changing hands at all.

Your game would adapt around this method. Look at Nadal, he stands 10 feet, sometimes 15 behind the baseline and he is winning most of these points. He is not taking the ball early. But when he HAS too he can. It is whatever position your comfortable in. He probably is the only player on the pro circuit who has adapted his opposite hand in this manner - made it totally versatile.

I agree, this would have to be trained at an early age and would require a lot of vision training, however, with the two players I know who use it in the seniors they have no problem with switching hands at the net. Again, the speed is different in the seniors game. The REACH factor has many advantages. At the younger levels the stronger fit type Nadal players (true athletes) will blossom with this method. Especially if your not comfortable at the net. (Like many pro players)

It's all about adaptation, trial and error - not listening to negative coaches who say it CANNOT be done. What will be neat about this breakthrough is that the person will have broken the mold, just like Borg. There are no teaching manuals for this method. You said, "I think it would be mess at the net, etc". You can only speculate --- this can only be conceptualzed in your brain right now. You have to get passed that first.

We only see pros right now using this method out of desperation. But when they see it in a different light (as a weapon) - it changes everything.

Just thoughts

RiosTheGenius
08-17-2007, 11:49 AM
I think it all depends on what level you play. at lower levels of play you could have enough time to switch hands and adjust grip. anything over 4.0 would be a little crazy in my opinion.

MaximRecoil
08-17-2007, 01:32 PM
Switching hands would be no problem if you don't mind hitting with one hand with a higher-up grip than the other hand. That way, your ready stance would have both hands on the grip, one just above the other, and switching hands wouldn't really be switching at all, it would simply be a case of releasing the hand you are not going to use and taking a swing (most people already have both hands on the racket in between shots anyway).

I knew a girl who played like that naturally. It isn't something she decided to learn, she was just quite ambidextrous and using two forehands was what had always come naturally to her, from the first time she picked up a racket. She did pretty well.

cujays
08-17-2007, 03:00 PM
how would you volley

WildVolley
08-17-2007, 03:29 PM
how would you volley

I don't think the volley would be much of an issue. Hitting a backhand volley usually isn't any more difficult than hitting a forehand one. If there isn't time, I think it would make sense to volley with just one hand.

The difficulty is with overheads. The backhand overhead is a difficult shot for most people. If you have time, switching to the other hand would make for a more powerful shot. I'm not certain how quickly you could switch hands for the overhead.

jonline
08-17-2007, 04:16 PM
I've always been intrigued by this idea. For a lot players, the two handed backhand is really just a two handed forehand with the left hand.

If you have enough time, why not let go with the other hand and take a larger swing?

I believe if you are going to use this technique, you should hold the racquet in a ready position with one hand almost on top of the other. This makes switching hands almost instantaneous, or at least no slower than rotating to a backhand grip.

Or would you use a semi-western grip or whatever your regular forehand grip is? Wouldn't that make more sense for a left-handed forehand?

I know a person that hits like this. It's a little odd, but it seems to work.

jmverdugo
08-17-2007, 05:09 PM
Your game would adapt around this method.
This is true and it can definitely be done, we can only speculate about it effectiveness.
It's all about adaptation, trial and error - not listening to negative coaches who say it CANNOT be done. What will be neat about this breakthrough is that the person will have broken the mold, just like Borg. There are no teaching manuals for this method. You said, "I think it would be mess at the net, etc". You can only speculate --- this can only be conceptualzed in your brain right now. You have to get passed that first.
Again you are right but I think the only way somebody would teach this it would have to be to his own child, because no parents who knows the most little thing about tennis would let this happen.
We only see pros right now using this method out of desperation. But when they see it in a different light (as a weapon) - it changes everything.
You are right about this, Im pretty sure this is how it has happened with all the other strokes, this could be the way, but again they would practice it just to do it on emergency situations.
Just thoughts
Same thing here :)
Switching hands would be no problem if you don't mind hitting with one hand with a higher-up grip than the other hand.
Well, I do not know, if you hit a heavy ball with the hand that high it wont be stable, unless you train that fist really hard to get a really firm grip.
That way, your ready stance would have both hands on the grip, one just above the other, and switching hands wouldn't really be switching at all, it would simply be a case of releasing the hand you are not going to use and taking a swing (most people already have both hands on the racket in between shots anyway).
But if you already have your both hands on the grip why don’t you just hit a THBH? You may have more reach but again if your are in the kind of situation that you need more reach you will loose stability.
Imagine that you hit a heavy ball of center and with your hand that high on the grip. If you put the ball back you will definitely be kill.

Whoa this was long. :)

usfferjenn
08-17-2007, 05:27 PM
okay so i tried this earlier today and it wasn't too bad switching around. it did take some getting used to because the first few times my grip wasn't as strong on my right side as opposed to my dominant hand (which is my left) which makes sense since it isn't my stronger arm. it was interesting to try, but i don't think i'll be abandoning my backhand anytime soon.

uc3
08-17-2007, 08:48 PM
Nice, keep it up. It gets easier everyday. Here's the secret. Practice it everyday. If you have time practice it multiple times during the day, like 40 minutes in the morning, 40 minutes in the afternoon, then 40 minutes in the evening.

The more you swing that racquet the more your brain will become comfortable. Doing it in intervals is great because it helps your brain recover in between the practice. Sleep is also important because although I can't explain it I believe it helps solidify the motor motions that take place. Another thing you can try is to change the grips when you practice, like semiwestern, eastern, so your arm can get used to swinging from different angles. The more directions the more your brain is stimulated. Good luck

thundaga
08-17-2007, 09:20 PM
i think i read somewhere that sharapova used a lh fh as a junior... can anyone confirm?

tennisnj
08-18-2007, 08:38 AM
I've used 2 forehands, 2 backhands, 2 serves since I was a junior, first starting out. My dad noticed how easy it was for me to do things ambidextrously, so I practiced all shots equally. To me, it helped offset the fact I was/am small in stature, & needed to work even harder to get to the levels I have achieved. I played 4 years in HS & played D1 college with this 'irregular' technique (as one opponent once told me) & continue to play in 5.0+ leagues & tournaments all over. If a player can learn extra weapons, why shouldn't they?

Kobble
08-18-2007, 01:43 PM
I like the idea of using a forehand for the high balls. I've practiced with a left-handed forehand, and the pace is not a big as my two hander, but the spin is something I can't duplicate. The forehand when hit with a western grip has huge loop and kick that I can't generate with my backhand. Problem is I don't have the control to completely make the switch.I have though about using it on high balls, though.

soggyramen
08-18-2007, 02:56 PM
first thing my coach taught me how to do before i learned my two handed back hand was using a lefty forehand which on the run i've found to be quite handy to slice the ball back into the court to get back into the point

MaximRecoil
08-18-2007, 03:10 PM
Well, I do not know, if you hit a heavy ball with the hand that high it wont be stable, unless you train that fist really hard to get a really firm grip.

But if you already have your both hands on the grip why donít you just hit a THBH? You may have more reach but again if your are in the kind of situation that you need more reach you will loose stability.
Imagine that you hit a heavy ball of center and with your hand that high on the grip. If you put the ball back you will definitely be kill.
The height of your hand on the grip has nothing to do with stability. You will get less power, same as if you were using a shorter racket, but you'd still have more reach than with a two-handed backhand, or than with a one-handed backhand for that matter.

Amscray
08-18-2007, 07:35 PM
Technically, your backhand should have the potential to be stronger than your forehand. Since you are swinging outwardly and away from your center of gravity, you don't have to slow down your swing. When hitting a forehand, you swing inwardly, causing a loss of headspeed. Still, the forehand feels less unnatural for most people, so I guess that's why most prefer it. Plus, the backhand usually has more wind-up time.

kingkong
08-18-2007, 07:49 PM
it can and has ben done, but unless your coordination is already as good in your non dominant hand as it is in your dominant hand, your non dominant forehand will never be as good as your natural forehand.
If reach is your conceren just use a one hander.

ipodtennispro
08-25-2007, 02:35 PM
This is true and it can definitely be done, we can only speculate about it effectiveness.

Again you are right but I think the only way somebody would teach this it would have to be to his own child, because no parents who knows the most little thing about tennis would let this happen.

You are right about this, Im pretty sure this is how it has happened with all the other strokes, this could be the way, but again they would practice it just to do it on emergency situations.

Same thing here :)

Well, I do not know, if you hit a heavy ball with the hand that high it wont be stable, unless you train that fist really hard to get a really firm grip.

But if you already have your both hands on the grip why donít you just hit a THBH? You may have more reach but again if your are in the kind of situation that you need more reach you will loose stability.
Imagine that you hit a heavy ball of center and with your hand that high on the grip. If you put the ball back you will definitely be kill.

Whoa this was long. :)

Sorry, I am going to make it even longer, however I have a couple of more important points to bring up.

1. Considering that 75% of all shots in tennis are forehands and serves it makes sense to have two forehands in the long run. We cannot under estimate human potential but as you say it will probably take an ambitious parent or coach to start this at an early age.

2. As for as bio mechanics are concerned, there is a tremendous amount of overload to one side of the body with the one hand and the two handed backhand. Look at Nadal's physique, there is definately an imbalance there. To share the load, both sides of the body would be used and stressed equally. Longivity wise, a pro could potentially play into their 30's, even longer and possbily less injury with this method.

Just more thoughts.

racquet_jedi
08-25-2007, 09:39 PM
Well, if you injured one of your arms/hands, what would you do then?

ipodtennispro
08-26-2007, 09:20 AM
Well, if you injured one of your arms/hands, what would you do then?

Use the other one until that one gets better.

Frank Silbermann
08-27-2007, 08:37 PM
Does it take much longer to change hands? Compared with having a two-handed backhand, it takes only as much extra time as is required to let go with your other hand.

Would it work at the net? No, because you have to be able to protect your body. But the one-handed backhand volley is not that difficult to develop. (Hint: You don't need topspin on that shot.)

Would there be time to switch hands on the overhead smash? I guess that would depend on whether your opponent can hit a 100mph lob -- and make it go in!

Would the choked-up side be weak? Not much weaker than a two-handed backhand -- there, too, the power is provided by the hand that is choked up. I'd avoid a racket that's head-light. Also, I'd choose one with a moderate head size so the sweet spot is not too close to my choked-up hand.

Would a western grip be used for both forehands? No, I'd choose between a strong eastern and a semi-western. Since you don't have a backhand to run around, you won't be bashing shots inside-out (i.e., reverse cross-court). You'll want a grip that optimizes for the straight down-the-line and the cross-court.

Medved
08-27-2007, 09:29 PM
Do players ever hit their two handed backhands with a semiwestern grip? It seems so difficult to do that. I guess that would be why I would favor a left handed forehand exclusively.