To say 1handers are more creative is such an oxymoron, it is not even funny.

[Andres]

Originally Posted by Golden Retriever

If the 1HBH were better than the 2HBH then why weren't Wawrinka no.2, Gasquet no.3, Haas no.4 so on and so forth? Why aren't you in the pro circuit for that matter? I really want to see how you gonna spin this one.

Because tennis is NOT an endless backhand to backhand crosscourt rally until someone misses or someone hits a winner.

If it was, there's a chance they could be #2, #3 and #4. Of course, unless Nalbandian is active

BH Tennis Rule #2:
Lefties would have to play DTL endlessly against righthanders.

[Golden Retriever]

Originally Posted by Andres

Because tennis is NOT an endless backhand to backhand crosscourt rally until someone misses or someone hits a winner.

If it was, there's a chance they could be #2, #3 and #4. Of course, unless Nalbandian is active

BH Tennis Rule #2:
Lefties would have to play DTL endlessly against righthanders.

If their 1HBH were superior, they could force their opponents into an endless BH to BH rally until their opponents' inferior 2HBH misses or they hit a superior 1HBH winner.

[chess9]

The two-handed backhand looks like a monkey trying to have sex with an elephant. If you like beasty shots, go for it. But, if you want to look like an elegant athlete, stick with the one-hander!

Is the two-hander better or worse than the one-hander? Frankly, I think it's mostly a matter of training, preference, and body type. Hit what works for you.

I've never hit against a guy who had a devastating two-handed backhand. I've hit against plenty of guys with devastating forehands and one-handed backhands, however. The older guys around here, particularly the Hispanic clay courters will demolish you with their one-handed backhands. You have no idea where it's going!

-Robert

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Wrong. I guess alot of pro's have no talent because they sure as heck can not hit a consistent one hander. Steffi graf had to retort to slice. Sources say fernando gonzalez improved his backhand, he know slices much more due to consistentcy. I think rafter only sliced. Heck only a extremely very rare few in pro tennis have been noted to having great one handed backhand.

Mens:
Kuerten
Gasguet

Womens:
Henin


The truth is the one hander IS a begginer stroke. Most begginers who play at the park naturally play with a one hander. They try the two hander and have no clue. It's a shot that needs to be taught. If you start off with a clean slate who wouldn't want a two hander that's more consistent, better for groundstrokes, and returns? And less shank prone? Why would anybody choose the one hander that's literally impossible to master even for pro's?

Wawrinka, Haas, Pavel, Federer, Kohschreiber, Gasquet, Almagro, Rochus, etc. don't have consistent backhands? What are you smoking, dude?

Oh, and since when is a slice backhand not a consistent backhand?

Ken Rosewall is considered to have one of the best backhands ever and he sliced 100% of his backhands.

If the 2HBH is not a beginner stroke, then why do almost all kids who start to play tennis start with 2HBH's?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Golden Retriever

If the 1HBH were better than the 2HBH then why weren't Wawrinka no.2, Gasquet no.3, Haas no.4 so on and so forth? Why aren't you in the pro circuit for that matter? I really want to see how you gonna spin this one.

If the 2HBH were so great, why aren't Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Soderling, Del Potro, Davydenko, Tsonga, Verdasco, Simon, Monfils, Stepanek, Ferrer, Berdych, Hewitt, Ferrero, Nalbandian, Querry, Andreev, Tipsarevic, Seppi, should I go on? #1?

Heck, like 85% of the Top 100 have 2HBH's, yet none of them are #1. Statistically, that proves that the 1HBH is superior. If you had a roulette wheel and 85% of the slots were red and you bet on red, it would be nearly impossible for you to lose 10 out of 10 spins.

[edberg505]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If the 2HBH were so great, why aren't Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Soderling, Del Potro, Davydenko, Tsonga, Verdasco, Simon, Monfils, Stepanek, Ferrer, Berdych, Hewitt, Ferrero, Nalbandian, Querry, Andreev, Tipsarevic, Seppi, should I go on? #1?

Heck, like 85% of the Top 100 have 2HBH's, yet none of them are #1. Statistically, that proves that the 1HBH is superior. If you had a roulette wheel and 85% of the slots were red and you bet on red, it would be nearly impossible for you to lose 10 out of 10 spins.

LMAO, hard to argue with that logic.

[ubermeyer]

Originally Posted by chess9

I've never hit against a guy who had a devastating two-handed backhand.

I can't believe this

[Ultra2HolyGrail]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Wawrinka, Haas, Pavel, Federer, Kohschreiber, Gasquet, Almagro, Rochus, etc. don't have consistent backhands?

Besides federer who has won a GS? Who is in the top 10?

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Oh, and since when is a slice backhand not a consistent backhand?

Ken Rosewall is considered to have one of the best backhands ever and he sliced 100% of his backhands.

Why do you think rosewall, graf, rafter, slice all their backhands? Because if they tried to hit a real one hander they couldn't get it in. More proof the one hander is soo hard to be consistent they must retort to sliceing every single backhand. How many two handers have to retort to sliceing every single time? How can one handers of the past have more variety if they are sliceing EVERY single backhand?

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If the 2HBH is not a beginner stroke, then why do almost all kids who start to play tennis start with 2HBH's?

Because they are taught early on the superior shot. If they just self taught themselves at the park like many do they would start off with one handers. No need to start bad habits early.

[pmerk34]

Originally Posted by Mick

you don't step around it and unload your forehand? one of my doubles partners, who is a much more advanced player, always would criticize me when i don't do this. he doesn't believe in returning a shot with a 1 handed backhand when you can return it with a forehand

Your partner would be correct. So would Lendl and Federer

[Ultra2HolyGrail]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Heck, like 85% of the Top 100 have 2HBH's, yet none of them are #1. Statistically, that proves that the 1HBH is superior. If you had a roulette wheel and 85% of the slots were red and you bet on red, it would be nearly impossible for you to lose 10 out of 10 spins.

Let me get this straight. If you want to be number one you should choose a one handed backhand? Even though 90% of the top 10 own two handers? And 85% of the top 100 have two handers? And only ONE player in the top 100 has only won a grand slam with a one handed backahand? And that one handed backhand is being noted inferior to the rest of the top 10? And when federer is gone two handers will rule every grand slam and top10? You really are a card BP.

[heycal]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Um...that's the point! When 99% of the movies were filmed in black and white, filming a movie in color was being creative because it was different from the norm. These days, when 99% of the movies are filmed in color, doing a movie in black and white is being creative because it's different from the norm and also because there's really no other reason to do a black and white movie these days than to be creative or "artsy" and to stand out from the crowd.

I still you are still struggling to learn what "creative" means. For some reason you keep confusing "different" with "creative". Guess you're more of a numbers guy than a words and logic guy, huh?

Here's a hint: create-ive.

Good luck in your quest to master the English language.

[edberg505]

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Besides federer who has won a GS? Who is in the top 10?



Why do you think rosewall, graf, rafter, slice all their backhands? Because if they tried to hit a real one hander they couldn't get it in. More proof the one hander is soo hard to be consistent they must retort to sliceing every single backhand. How many two handers have to retort to sliceing every single time? How can one handers of the past have more variety if they are sliceing EVERY single backhand?




Because they are taught early on the superior shot. If they just self taught themselves at the park like many do they would start off with one handers. No need to start bad habits early.

And name me at two hander that has 15 slams. LOL, people are singing that same on ole song that they were singing when Pete retired. Uh oh, Pete retired. The death of the one hander. Then along came Federer. Hahahaha. There will just be someone else with a one hander that comes along and start kicking people's teeth in too.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Besides federer who has won a GS? Who is in the top 10?

Why do ALL the GOAT's Federer, Sampras, and Laver ALL have 1HBH's?

With 85% of the pro tour having 2HBH, how come NONE of them are #1? I mean, heck, what are the odds of that? Even if the 2HBH was as good as the 1HBH, you would expect a 2HBH player to be #1 85% of the time. Yet, over the past 30 years, 1HBH players have been #1 85% of the time. That CLEARLY proves the 1HBH is superior since with even only just 15% of the players, they are #1 85% of the time. Simply indisputable!

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Why do you think rosewall, graf, rafter, slice all their backhands? Because if they tried to hit a real one hander they couldn't get it in. More proof the one hander is soo hard to be consistent they must retort to sliceing every single backhand. How many two handers have to retort to sliceing every single time? How can one handers of the past have more variety if they are sliceing EVERY single backhand?

Huh? What do you mean by "resorting to slicing"? Slicing is one of the most effective shots in tennis. Ask the millions of people that have lost to Graf, Rosewall, Navratilova, Federer, etc.

And if slicing is so bad, why does Murray slice half the time even though he has one of the best 2HBH's in the world?

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Because they are taught early on the superior shot. If they just self taught themselves at the park like many do they would start off with one handers. No need to start bad habits early.

No, it's because the 2HBH is the easier shot and takes less effort and is quicker to develop, and beginners need to start with things that are easy. You don't teach calculus and partial differential equations to a 5 year old that doesn't even know how to add and subtract yet.

[T1000]

one hand backhand > two hand backhand

More variety
More power
Better disguise (try disguising a drop shot with a two hander)
Ask Sampras why he switched from a two hander to a one hander

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Gorecki

oh... and it's Capisce!

Um...no, it's Capiche.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...erm=capiche%3F

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by heycal

I still you are still struggling to learn what "creative" means. For some reason you keep confusing "different" with "creative". Guess you're more of a numbers guy than a words and logic guy, huh?

Here's a hint: create-ive.

Good luck in your quest to master the English language.

Here's a hint: Get a clue.

Like I've already said, if you've created a guy in the black shirt in an office full of only white shirts, you are creative because you've just created something that didn't exist in your office: a guy in a black shirt.

You have to be create-ive to create something that is out of the ordinary.

[jms007]

I think a one-hander pretty much forces you to use other shots on the backhand because it´s not as easy to execute as a two-hander in pressure situations. So I don't think it has anything to do with some inherent creativity in the shot, it's just necessity.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by edberg505

And name me at two hander that has 15 slams. LOL, people are singing that same on ole song that they were singing when Pete retired. Uh oh, Pete retired. The death of the one hander. Then along came Federer. Hahahaha. There will just be someone else with a one hander that comes along and start kicking people's teeth in too.

People have been harping the death of the 1HBH ever since the days of Borg/Connors.

Of course, then came Vilas, then McEnroe, then Lendl, then Becker, then Edberg, then Sampras, then Rafter, then Kuerten, then Federer. LOL

[nfor304]

Originally Posted by Ultra2HolyGrail

Wrong. I guess alot of pro's have no talent because they sure as heck can not hit a consistent one hander. Steffi graf had to retort to slice. Sources say fernando gonzalez improved his backhand, he know slices much more due to consistentcy. I think rafter only sliced. Heck only a extremely very rare few in pro tennis have been noted to having great one handed backhand.

Rafter definitely did not only slice.

He sliced more than most players because he tried to come to the net at every opportunity. He did manage to beat players like Guga and Ferrero on clay, and also managed to beat Agassi and break him from the baseline during his career. He had a pretty solid 1 hander.

[nfor304]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Wawrinka, Haas, Pavel, Federer, Kohschreiber, Gasquet, Almagro, Rochus, etc. don't have consistent backhands? What are you smoking, dude?

Oh, and since when is a slice backhand not a consistent backhand?

Ken Rosewall is considered to have one of the best backhands ever and he sliced 100% of his backhands.

If the 2HBH is not a beginner stroke, then why do almost all kids who start to play tennis start with 2HBH's?

You can add Corretja, Pioline, Gaudio, Costa to that list. All guys who had better backhands than forehands and all top 10 and either grand slam finalists or winners. Also dont forget Mantilla who was top 10