PDA

View Full Version : Was Roddick an example of someone who should've had a One Handed Backhand?


Cacoepy
09-09-2012, 02:25 PM
Personally, from watching Roddick I always got the feeling that his backhand slice came much more naturally to him, and the two hander restricted him.

Do you think Roddick would have fared better with a One Handed Backhand?

RF20Lennon
09-09-2012, 02:27 PM
exactly!! his early coach probably talked him into using a two hander as it was the new thing if you will but he really shouldve been a one hander!

Defcon
09-09-2012, 02:41 PM
Roddick didn't have nearly enough talent to hit a 1hbh. It requires a lot more timing, footwork and feel.

BreakPoint
09-09-2012, 02:53 PM
Do you think Roddick would have fared better with a One Handed Backhand?
I think EVERYONE would have fared better with a one-handed backhand. :)

The Bawss
09-09-2012, 02:53 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha Roddick couldn't even manage a two-hander, explain to me how he would have acquired the feel, footwork and timing necessary to take a 1-hander to the top of the game?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

tennisplayer1993
09-09-2012, 02:55 PM
yeah i agree with you guys i don't think he would be able to pull it off. it was a shot for him that was just to put it back into play. it was his weakest wing.

SStrikerR
09-09-2012, 03:09 PM
This is idiotic. What logic led you to this conclusion?

90's Clay
09-09-2012, 03:11 PM
Hes strikes me as someone who should have worked on his footwork, movement, speed and net game. Which would have helped him have a solid backup for his big serve and FH.

You don't have to have a GREAT BH to be very successful.. Neither Fed or Pete had this. But you do have to have to fantastic footwork, movement and speed. Something Roddick was short on which killed him

BreakPoint
09-09-2012, 03:31 PM
Hes strikes me as someone who should have worked on his footwork, movement, speed and net game. Which would have helped him have a solid backup for his big serve and FH.

You don't have to have a GREAT BH to be very successful.. Neither Fed or Pete had this. But you do have to have to fantastic footwork, movement and speed. Something Roddick was short on which killed him
I beg to differ. I think both Sampras and Federer have great backhands. Watch some of Sampras' matches from the early-90's to see what a great backhand he had.

But I agree that Roddick needed to work on his footwork and movement more.

AnotherTennisProdigy
09-09-2012, 03:46 PM
I dunno, but Roddick seems to have a tense swing, it seems like he almost muscles the ball. Also, his problem with the two hander was that he relied to much on the left hand. Take away that left hand? Disaster.

The Meat
09-09-2012, 03:52 PM
If he had a Wawrinka backhand it would have made a good match with his forehand(pre-pushing era).

roberttennis54
09-09-2012, 04:03 PM
Personally, from watching Roddick I always got the feeling that his backhand slice came much more naturally to him, and the two hander restricted him.

Do you think Roddick would have fared better with a One Handed Backhand?

I think you have a point. It is impossible to know without seeing him hit the one handed backhand. His slice actually developed into a great shot and was the second best on tour after Federer's.

Look at someone as talented as Federer and he could not hit a proper two handed backhand. Players are different and I think you need some flexibility when coaching. The two hander is certainly not easier for everyone and Roddick may have been one of those people.

tacou
09-09-2012, 04:28 PM
You people laughing are proving OPs point. Roddick's backhand always looked extremely uncomfortable and "restricted." His slice over the past few years looked much more natural, and during his best matches he hit it very well.

So maybe if he practiced a 1 hander from age 5 or whatever, it would've been a much more natural shot for him. It doesn't involve at all taking the Roddick we know today and applying a new backhand. It could have changed his entire game.

I don't think it would have won him another slam or anything but it's an interesting question. Maybe hill whip it out on the Legends tour.

roberttennis54
09-09-2012, 04:35 PM
Hes strikes me as someone who should have worked on his footwork, movement, speed and net game. Which would have helped him have a solid backup for his big serve and FH.

You don't have to have a GREAT BH to be very successful.. Neither Fed or Pete had this. But you do have to have to fantastic footwork, movement and speed. Something Roddick was short on which killed him

Roddick is fast enough and he does not have great hands. He was never going to become an Edberg. Having said that he improved his volleys until they were decent. What cost him slams is that Federer was better. Worse still Federer not only matched up well game wise, but had the freakish ability to read his serve. If Safin had not got injured in 05, then things would have been different for Roddick. Roddick could always beat Safin no matter how well he played. Had there been a 4 way rivalry, then Roddick would not have changed his game so drastically and with a lucky draw won a couple of slams.

By the way Federer DOES have a GREAT backhand. This is why Federer could beat guys like Davydenko, Agassi and Murray going backhand to backhand for most of the match. When it mattered Federer's backhand was a huge weapon.

Sampras did not have a great backhand, but he had a good solid backhand. It did not really break down in his prime. No matter how much you attacked it. He was very conservative with it though apart from on big points or when he got tired. When a big point came along he would hit it well and aggressively more often than not.

Prime Pete was not the Sampras of the late 90s. His serve and volleys improved post his prime. His backhand deteriorated dramatically as did his forehand, his returns and movement.

Cup8489
09-09-2012, 04:37 PM
I think you have a point. It is impossible to know without seeing him hit the one handed backhand. His slice actually developed into a great shot and was the second best on tour after Federer's.

Look at someone as talented as Federer and he could not hit a proper two handed backhand. Players are different and I think you need some flexibility when coaching. The two hander is certainly not easier for everyone and Roddick may have been one of those people.

Not sure I agree. There's a fair number of people I'd say slice better.

roberttennis54
09-09-2012, 04:45 PM
Not sure I agree. There's a fair number of people I'd say slice better.

Around 2009 I would like to hear those names. Henman and Santoro were gone. Maybe there was someone else lower I have forgotten, but off the top of my head cannot think of a top 30 player around that time with a better slice.

BevelDevil
09-10-2012, 12:16 AM
One aspect of both the 1hbh and 2hbh is proper weight transfer. Roddick does this poorly. Check out the 2nd top-rated comment on this vid, then watch and decide for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULefIkMyZ7c

He'd be in big trouble if he used this kind of footwork on a 1hbh.


On the other hand... maybe the poor weight transfer is a product of him trying to muscle the ball with his left hand, which wouldn't be an issue with a 1hbh.

Also, if he ended up with a weak 1hbh, perhaps that would have forced him to attack the net more, and develop better volleys, earlier in his career....

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 12:25 AM
Hes strikes me as someone who should have worked on his footwork, movement, speed and net game. Which would have helped him have a solid backup for his big serve and FH.

You don't have to have a GREAT BH to be very successful.. Neither Fed or Pete had this. But you do have to have to fantastic footwork, movement and speed. Something Roddick was short on which killed him

i agree. eg. despite james blake not being nearly as successful as roddick, i felt he was more competitive against federer and agassi off the ground than roddick ever was because his footwork and and movement backed up his aggressive forehand.

Russeljones
09-10-2012, 12:46 AM
I think a more pertinent question (in terms of human mehanics) would be whether Roddick could have translated the obvious strength in his right arm and back to an effective OHBH. If we look at Almagro and Wawrinka, for example, we'll see that they have a lot of snap on their backhands and their 1st serves are nothing to sneer at. Would it be possible to reverse-engineer a comparison for an hypothetial OHBH for Roddick?

I must congratulate the OP for coming up with a very interesting talking point and I look forward to the experts' opinions.

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 12:57 AM
dub postdubstep wahwahwah

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 01:04 AM
One aspect of both the 1hbh and 2hbh is proper weight transfer. Roddick does this poorly. Check out the 2nd top-rated comment on this vid, then watch and decide for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULefIkMyZ7c

He'd be in big trouble if he used this kind of footwork on a 1hbh.




roddick is indeed showing poor weight transfer, but i also think he's using it to counter balance his rotation on the backhand, as you noted with his left arm muscling the ball. i don't see the use of it in a two hander though, at least the way roddick is doing it, planted on the ground with a not so angular swing.

monfils and nishikori do it when they're airborne hitting flashy high backhands but they incorporate more angular rotation than roddick does, neither are planted in the way roddick is, and both coil up with their left leg forward before kicking it back.

ironically, i see more use of this technique(roddick's left leg kick thing) in the ohbh than the twohander, since in the ohbh it's crucial to keep your torso and trunk from opening up too much. on tour, fed and gasquet use it regularly depending on where the ball is in relation to them. it is usually used when an ohbh player doesn't need to or is unable to step into the shot with his dominant leg. that's why it's also common on the ohbh return.

edit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghnFZCtkBX0 gasquet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCQ50D2fIKI fed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOyoPZUhUTM&feature=relmfu fed return


which then leads us back to roddick's weight transfer problem in the video. he has so much time to step in fully (indicated by his early unit turn and stutter steps) and follow through with the left side of his body to get back to open stance(one advantage of the twohander), he doesn't. he's robbing himself of potential power and a quick recovery position.

helloworld
09-10-2012, 01:08 AM
Sampras used to have a great two handed backhand as a junior, but changed to 1 hander just 1 year before he turned pro. But again, Roddick is no Sampras, so I don't think he will have the talent to switch to a one hander at will...

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 01:30 AM
apparently, roddick's junior coach didn't want him to win wimbledon 8)

BorisBeckerFan
09-10-2012, 01:39 AM
I beg to differ. I think both Sampras and Federer have great backhands. Watch some of Sampras' matches from the early-90's to see what a great backhand he had.

But I agree that Roddick needed to work on his footwork and movement more.

Agree that both Fed and Pete have/had pretty sweet backhands.

cork_screw
09-10-2012, 12:23 PM
Why so Roddick could have been more inconsistant than he already was?

NikeWilson
09-10-2012, 12:41 PM
omg he would be worse with a 1 hander!

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 02:10 PM
Why so Roddick could have been more inconsistant than he already was?

it can't be much worse than andy's own two hander. there's more upside than down.

West Coast Ace
09-10-2012, 02:16 PM
I think both Sampras and Federer have great backhands.You are a funny guy. Sampras' BH was below average for a pro. I saw plenty of his matches. If he got in rallies he lost. His serve is the reason he has the house in BH, the trophies and the trophy wife. Again, if his BH were that good, there would be a French Open title on his resume.

OP, the real answer is Roddick was let down by his junior coaches - he should have never been put on tour with such a weak BH - didn't matter whether he used 1 or 2 hands. It's obvious he didn't practice it enough. Same with volleys. They stressed winning matches and getting a junior ranking - so his big serve and FH were enough.

WhiskeyEE
09-10-2012, 02:20 PM
With a 1 hander I'd imagine it being of the Lopez/Rusedski type. Just slice everything and every once in a while go over top of it.

tistrapukcipeht
09-10-2012, 02:20 PM
Roddick is no example for anyone about anything.

tistrapukcipeht
09-10-2012, 02:21 PM
What a thread https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT04YklMxRZEXKwPYr_PBoUViBCiKf4Y xiebE4eo9LPICww98dDaQ

bhallic24
09-10-2012, 03:17 PM
is this a joke post? Its like telling me that Roddick don't know how to ride a bicycle, would he have faired better trying a unicycle.

paulorenzo
09-10-2012, 07:19 PM
is this a joke post? Its like telling me that Roddick don't know how to ride a bicycle, would he have faired better trying a unicycle.

a bicycle to a unicycle is not a proper analogy to compare a two hander to a one hander. you're insinuating that the one hander is vastly inferior.

Russeljones
09-10-2012, 10:50 PM
You are a funny guy. Sampras' BH was below average for a pro. I saw plenty of his matches. If he got in rallies he lost. His serve is the reason he has the house in BH, the trophies and the trophy wife. Again, if his BH were that good, there would be a French Open title on his resume.

OP, the real answer is Roddick was let down by his junior coaches - he should have never been put on tour with such a weak BH - didn't matter whether he used 1 or 2 hands. It's obvious he didn't practice it enough. Same with volleys. They stressed winning matches and getting a junior ranking - so his big serve and FH were enough.

Bitter much? Sampras must have been better than average in every department of his game to win 14 Slam titles.

The OP came up with an original question and I am nto surprised it's being swept under the carpet here. All that matters is petty rivalry and snide remarks from pseudo-experts.

PhrygianDominant
09-11-2012, 03:37 AM
Roddick suffered from a lot of bad mechanics in his tennis. His takeback for his two hander was sudden and snappy, and as Aggasi said probably too reliant on his left hand. Roddick may have developed a more attacking game and had better net play if he had learned a 1hander, but who's to say.