![]() |
The one handed backhand: liabilities and benefits
I was wondering if anyone could present points regarding the value of this stroke.
More specifically, I was expecting some support behind these ideas: Are the critics justified about the pitfalls of using one hand; Why or why not; What makes sort of ggame does this stroke fits best; Can it rival its two handed counterpart; Etc. All inputs are valued, obviously. Sometimes, arguments inspire innovation and it improves our understanding. Let‘s see what y‘all have to say about this. |
Just to get started, some basic points:
Advantages: Farther reach Better complement to the slice More power potential (though debated in another thread) Disadv.: Less stable hitting structure (Therefore) Harder to get consistent Difficult to drive through shots above the shoulder |
As for reach, only the slice has more reach, which a 2hbh can do as well.
A topspin 1hbh needs to be taken well out front, so there is no reach advantage, and possibly a disadvantage because it needs to be hit early. As for high shots above the shoulder, it's a draw. Neither is ideal, and a 1hbh slice is the best. For return of serve, a jumping 2hbh seems very effective. |
Quote:
http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/column...ederer_1712164 |
Quote:
Regardless, thanks for the input. It summarizes very well the usual preconceptions people have about this stroke. |
Quote:
|
the single-handed backhand is prettier.
is it just me or is it easier to hit aggressively angled cross court top spin shots with the one-handed backhand? With the two hander i feel more bunched up and can't let it rip. |
two hander is faster rate of growth.
one hander is late bloomer, but has higher growth potential. |
I can hit a slower ball a lot better with my single hander. I can rally and return better with my two hander.
I seem to volley better on days where I hit a 1hbh...but that could be my imagination. |
Ultimately, with a skilled player holding the racquet, the biggest issue with a 1hbh is return of serve against big servers. The ball is coming so fast, with so much spin, it's really hard to get around and be offensive with the return. You can chip and block, but it's hard to consistently rip it. The 2hbh allows you to get around and punch over an aggressive return even if you're in a really awkward position - as is often the case with returning serves.
Otherwise everything else is more or less a wash IMO. I think you can get a bit higher racquet velocity with a 1hbh, so more pace or spin. The 2hbh allows you to get more on balls that you're forced to muscle over You can flick a two hander cross court in a way that you can't do with a one hander. High balls and short balls should not be weaknesses with a proper one hander. Everyone needs a good one handed slice. With a one hander your volleys, if you volley, might be a tad crisper on the bh side. If you're willing to deal with the return of serve issue, try the 1hbh. It's beautiful shot. BTW, I hit a 2hbh. |
not sure if it contributes to this thread, but i´m saying it anyway:)
most beginners i work with have a tendency for either the onehander or the twohander. not for logical reasons i´m sure but nevertheless. that´s what i go with to begin with. it´s easy to change in the first few months. great point by Lee, that the advantage in reach isn´t as much as commonly thought. |
Quote:
Just wrong. |
For me:
1 hander is better for: a) Low balls b) More topspin c) Little bit extra reach d) More pace than 2 hander 2 hander is better for: a) High balls b) Return of serve c) Redirecting hard shots d) Scooping balls up that land near my feet |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Better return of serve for the two hander? Disagree, You have better reach on the one hander and the return itself is a lot steadier (although the two hander return is more offensive on the return). |
"Reach" is more than just about arm reach.
It's about being able to lunge, or run through the ball, and put some controlled heat on it. I think the 1hbh has the lead here. The freer range of motion of the arm on the 1hbh allows for clean shots when taking a big step and/or leaning over. Also note the 1-hander does not have to open his shoulders as much as the 2-hander, if at all. In this reach regard, I think the 1hbh wins out vs. the closed-stance 2hbh heavily, and still probably has a lead over the open-stanced 2hbh (unless it is Djokovic's). Btw, one thing I think Wawrinka did well vs. Djokovic was precisely this. He would run to his left, take a huge step, stoop down and hit a bomb, seemingly effortlessly. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
not stable*?! how so?
the single hander is far more 'stable' than the double hander. you have your whole body weight behind the shot, can swing freely unimpeded by having to balance both arms; the double handed backhand is basically a forehand with your non-dominant arm while having your dominant arm as a 'helper' or training wheels. and for hitting low balls or on the rise, you can basically hit balls as they bounce while scraping the surface of the court. * On groundstrokes. |
Quote:
You have another hand on the handle. It is more stable because of the 'helper' hand. If you can find somebody that serves really hard, try and return it both ways. I'm guessing your footnote is conceding that point though. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:07 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse