Golden Retriever
Hall of Fame
Is this something historical if everyone in the top 10 has a 2HBH?
1 handed backhands are becoming more and more scarce.
that seems to be the trend, but a certain grigor dimitrov comes to mind, and it makes me feel better about the future of the one handed backhand.
the damn frustrating thing about it is that one of the most solid backhands in the men's game is a 1h bh (gasquet) which proves pretty definitively that it's not the 1 or 2 hands, but the player which makes the backhand lethal. thankfully for 2hbh proponents, he's a nutcase and will probably never get himself together enough to be a consistent top 10 contender.
In the top 50 there are 15 players with one-handed backhands right now.
Would you consider that a lot?
Wawrinka got the best 1 hander
Not a coincidence that he has the worst bh in the top 10.
Not a coincidence that he has the worst bh in the top 10.
Agree, Also Haas had a great 1HBH
with the way Federer dominated the game the last couple of years, I think we will see a lot of kids within the next 5-10 years with one handers.
My opinion on why there are more two handers in the game is that kids looking to become professional players are very results oriented now a days. 1hbh take longer to develop than 2hbh and not only the stroke itself but a person has to develop the physical strength to make this an offensive weapon. I don't think that kids have the patience to develop it today. It's a bit of a shame because players no tour are starting to look like clones of one another in terms of their play.
The serve often kicks up higher and has a tremendous amount of spin and pace that makes it hard for one handers to handle.I have heard by now from two pros, one male and the other female, that the main advantage of the 2 hander in the modern game is the return of serve. Since it is the second most important stroke, it has a disproportionate importance.
I have heard by now from two pros, one male and the other female, that the main advantage of the 2 hander in the modern game is the return of serve. Since it is the second most important stroke, it has a disproportionate importance.
I think all the 2HBH players that have lost to Federer on the pro tour would disagree.That's just sour grapes, perhaps just admit the two hander is better for the way elite level men's tennis is played now.
Feds return of serve is equal to Agassi's. He does very well against huge servers.
Federer is playing like Moya now standing at the left corner looking to hit only forehands.
that seems to be the trend, but a certain grigor dimitrov comes to mind, and it makes me feel better about the future of the one handed backhand.
My coach tells me the two hander is much easier to learn. Pros are so competitive & pressured from an early age they go with the two hander as they want fast results.
Feds return of serve is equal to Agassi's. He does very well against huge servers.
I think all the 2HBH players that have lost to Federer on the pro tour would disagree.
I think all the 2HBH players that have lost to Federer on the pro tour would disagree.
I have a simple theory and I could be totally wrong, but I think this is what explains the efficacy of the 2HBH vs 1HBH in today's game.
What a 1HBH gives a player is slightly greater reach. In fact that's the only option for a good slice or a defensive get when the ball is way off the court. The 2HBH trades that extra reach for power, stability and what I would call "vertical reach", i.e ability to handle higher bounces better*. The only prerequisite is that a player has to be in position to take the ball closer to his/her body.
With this in mind, I think the slowing of all surfaces and the increased athleticism of players has had a pretty drastic effect on the efficacy of the 2HBH shot. The ball doesn't skid through the court as much, bouncing higher in the process and athletic players like Nadal and Murray are able to make gets which were the exception a generation ago.
All this said, the one-hander will continue to be around, although in much less numbers. As for 1HBH top ten players, I bet the proportion will stay the same as for all the players in the ATP.
* In the case of the high backhand, swinging a single arm from back to front while keeping it raised involves smaller muscles like the deltoids. Adding another hand to the equation improves the situation drastically because now stronger muscles like the biceps brachii are helping. The other issue is wrist cocking to keep the ball down. Its far easier to turn a wrist towards the inside of the hand than outside.
That's just sour grapes, perhaps just admit the two hander is better for the way elite level men's tennis is played now.
pick up easier a 2HBH and therefore right now it's more popular.
I don't think there is a better/worse BH.
I think there are better/worse players
The fact is that young kids pick up easier a 2HBH and therefore right now it's more popular.
Think about the women tour.
There are maybe 5-6 1HBH players in the firs 100, and still if Justine didn't retire she still would be the undiscussed #1.
There is a well-known tennis coach who posts in the Tips area and he has debunked this myth. The 2HBH is being preferred these days for a good number of reasons, not just strength limitations of youngsters.
Hmmm....did it ever cross your mind that perhaps having a one-handed backhand is one of the things that makes him one of the greatest players ever?Fed is one guy, who happens to be one the of the greatest players if not the greatest ever. I'm not going to use him as an example of one handed backhands coming back into vogue.
Hmmm....did it ever cross your mind that perhaps having a one-handed backhand is one of the things that makes him one of the greatest players ever?
The other two players that most people mention as being the greatest ever are Laver and Sampras. Guess what? They also had 1HBH's, just like Federer. Not exactly a coincidence, is it?
Hmmm....did it ever cross your mind that perhaps having a one-handed backhand is one of the things that makes him one of the greatest players ever?
The other two players that most people mention as being the greatest ever are Laver and Sampras. Guess what? They also had 1HBH's, just like Federer. Not exactly a coincidence, is it?
And now most players are 2 handers.In Laver's time, most players were 1 handers. It doesn't count.
Um...could that be because there are just more two-handers on the pro tour than there are one-handers? He plays more opponents that have 2-handers so of course he's going to lose more to opponents with 2-handers. It's common sense. He has also lost to one-handers in the past like Blake, Gasquet, Haas, Karlovic, etc.Now the players who consistently beat Federer are all 2 handers. While 1 handers like Blake, Wawrinka and Haas give him no trouble at all.
Um...could that be because there are just more two-handers on the pro tour than there are one-handers? He plays more opponents that have 2-handers so of course he's going to lose more to opponents with 2-handers. It's common sense. He has also lost to one-handers in the past like Blake, Gasquet, Haas, Karlovic, etc.
BTW, don't Roddick, Davydenko, Hewitt, Fish, Safin, etc. have two-handers?
Um...could that be because there are just more two-handers on the pro tour than there are one-handers? He plays more opponents that have 2-handers so of course he's going to lose more to opponents with 2-handers. It's common sense. He has also lost to one-handers in the past like Blake, Gasquet, Haas, Karlovic, etc.
BTW, don't Roddick, Davydenko, Hewitt, Fish, Safin, etc. have two-handers?
Federer loses to players with good 2 handers like Murray, Nadal, Djoker and Nalbandian in backhand ralleys a good 2 hander will always beat a good 1 hander.
Yes if you take a high level two hander like Djoker and rally him against a high level one hander like Blake, the one hander will make more mistakes. These two handers just grind out the topspin all day
i wouldnt call blake a high level one hander, his rank is a result more of the fh than the backhand. and yeah, in a straight rally the 2hbh may be more consistent. but the two players mentioned most here, Wawrinka and Gasquet, don't tend to hit rally shots with their backhands, rather they tend to go for winners. Wawrinka with his 1hbh definitely stayed with Djokovic in....was it Rome? last year, the clay final. djokovic came out, because he's got more weapons over all. but Wawrinka's backhand was definitely not letting him down.
And now most players are 2 handers.
Can you reverse the concept???
Um...could that be because there are just more two-handers on the pro tour than there are one-handers?