Single handed backhand for juniors...

[Ash_Smith]

Originally Posted by BevelDevil

What backhand grip are you going to have them use?

Also, I'd love to hear your reports on how comfortable these young kids are learning and switching grips, as that aspect seems to confuse a lot of adults.

Single handers will have base knuckle on bevel 1, so eastern backhand. They have to change grip for a two hander too, I use little stickers to mark the grips where I want the base knuckle(s) to sit, so they can look & check and then learn to feel.

cheers

[BevelDevil]

^^^ just curious, why not an extreme eastern? I would think that would be better for kids.

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ I Never start with extreme grips, grips will usually (naturally) slide around as required.

I always start forehands off on bevel 3 or 3/4, knowing it will slip around towards 4 as the player develops and moves through orange, green and finally to yellow ball.
I'm interested to see if the same happens with a single hander.

cheers

[President]

Just wanted to add that the 1-handed backhand enjoys a disproportionate level of success at the top of the game compared to the 2 hander. The percentage of players in the top 20 with single handers is 25%, which I am sure is much higher than the overall percentage of total tennis pros that use that stroke. This would indicate that the single hander is relatively more successful at the top of the game, no?

[slice bh compliment]

^That's a cool stat. Very different. Could be because really only the best one handers make it. Those players would have made it with a two hander, too.

There's nothing uglier than a bad one-hander. It's such a liability. You see it in jrs occasionally. They either switch to a 2, improve the one in a big way or they plateau.

Now, a good one-hander...that turns into a weapon? Nice.

[Patrick Smith]

Originally Posted by drakulie

BTW Patrick, nice post. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks, Drakulie. I ,too, am enjoying your posts.

I am glad that this board allows for "lively" debate and/or conversation. Verbal sparring and confrontation is, as long as it is handled courteously and mindfully of the great goal--which is not to prove the other person wrong or yourself right, but to discern the truth of the matter--is always beneficial to everyone!

[rkelley]

Originally Posted by President

Just wanted to add that the 1-handed backhand enjoys a disproportionate level of success at the top of the game compared to the 2 hander. The percentage of players in the top 20 with single handers is 25%, which I am sure is much higher than the overall percentage of total tennis pros that use that stroke. This would indicate that the single hander is relatively more successful at the top of the game, no?

Not necessarily.

First off how you cut the data makes a big difference. In the top 10 there's only 1 1hbh (10%). What's the percentage in the top 30 or 50? (25% is the same number I get for the top 20 as of this week).

And then more importantly, is the 1hbh making these players more successful, does it not matter, or is it dragging them down and they would they be more successful with a two hander? The percentages alone don't really tell you that.

The one hander is a great shot. I don't think anyone is saying it shouldn't be taught. There is a good discussion on whether it should be taught first or not. Is it superior overall? I think that's really hard to know.

[bhupaes]

IMO, the two hander is easier to learn and easier on the body. I converted to a two hander, from a pretty good one hander, due to elbow problems. I also believe two handers are more powerful and consistent, on the average.

Before anyone starts flaming me let me state that when it comes to playing a match, I believe one handed players may well have an advantage: more variety. They usually have better slices, more feel for backhanded touch shots, and volley better - on the average, of course. I remember that during my 1HBH days, I used to run around my backhand a whole lot more, and hit inside out. Now I don't as much, since I like my two hander... I wonder if it's the same with higher level players (I think so, but that's just IMO). Heck, one handed players may be hitting lots more forehands than two handers and reaping the benefits, for all I know.

So, it's a great question as to what coaches should do. I think it's perfectly okay for a coach to start a kid with the one handed backhand, probably with more emphasis on the slice to begin with, and teach them to topspin when the arm and stabilizer muscles are conditioned enough to handle it. And when the kid wins a grand slam, the coach can say, "See, I taught him that!"

[President]

Originally Posted by rkelley

Not necessarily.

First off how you cut the data makes a big difference. In the top 10 there's only 1 1hbh (10%). What's the percentage in the top 30 or 50? (25% is the same number I get for the top 20 as of this week).

And then more importantly, is the 1hbh making these players more successful, does it not matter, or is it dragging them down and they would they be more successful with a two hander? The percentages alone don't really tell you that.

The one hander is a great shot. I don't think anyone is saying it shouldn't be taught. There is a good discussion on whether it should be taught first or not. Is it superior overall? I think that's really hard to know.

You're right in that the cutting of the data makes a big difference, but I think the top 20 is a relatively good barometer for how effective the stroke is. If I'm not mistaken, many of these players are on the edge of top 10, so its possible that they will dip inside at some point. As for whether the single hander is dragging them down, I think all of them (apart from Federer) have their backhand as their best shot (Gasquet, Almagro, Youzhney, Wawrinka), so I doubt that is the case.

It definitely has a steeper learning curve, but the rewards can be great. (more pace, more spin, more variety, at the price of less stability) I agree with you that it is a very complicated issue and hard to know.

[dennis10is]

Originally Posted by NoQuarter

Who/Where/When has the 1hbh been proven inferior? Who wants to tell Federer, Sampras, Laver, Emerson they won all those Grand Slams with an inferior shot?

You have to stop spreading lies to impressionable juniors and beginners. The TW Board experts have concluded that the 1bh is detrimental to your game.

At my club we have implemented the follow rules, aiming to curb the spread of 1bh addiction.

1: 1bh have to pay 50 percent more on all purchases, dues, court and instruction fees.
2: no more than one 1bh is allowed to be in the same court.
3: If a 1bh is playing, they can only play on the back courts so that the juniors will not see them play.
4: we have many programs to help 1bh members to swtich to 2bh.
5: a "don't ask don't tell policy" about how you hit your backhand.
6: Marriage defense act. A 1bh's marriage is not recognized within the confines of the club.

[dennis10is]

Originally Posted by Patrick Smith

Thanks, Drakulie. I ,too, am enjoying your posts.

I am glad that this board allows for "lively" debate and/or conversation. Verbal sparring and confrontation is, as long as it is handled courteously and mindfully of the great goal--which is not to prove the other person wrong or yourself right, but to discern the truth of the matter--is always beneficial to everyone!

How about accusing somebody of being a liar?

[BevelDevil]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

^^^ I Never start with extreme grips, grips will usually (naturally) slide around as required.

I always start forehands off on bevel 3 or 3/4, knowing it will slip around towards 4 as the player develops and moves through orange, green and finally to yellow ball.
I'm interested to see if the same happens with a single hander.

cheers

Do you normally tell them that it's okay if they slip into a different variation?

I ask this because one of my big regrets is being anal about sticking to the exact grip that I was "supposed" to use (Eastern). At some point, I had accidentally "discovered" the SW grip and played my best tennis with it-- only to force myself to move back to the "correct" grip, which I presumed would pay big dividends in the future for me (it didn't really and, many years later, I eventually consciously switched to SW with great results). I really wish someone had told me earlier about other grips and how they may be good alternatives.

[slice bh compliment]

^Yeah, but you are the bevel devil, so I'm sure your coach just assumed you would improvise.

[Patrick Smith]

Originally Posted by dennis10is

How about accusing somebody of being a liar?

Hi, Dennis. I am capable of enjoying his posts without approving of every sentiment expressed in them or the way it is expressed. Obviously, calling someone a liar is, at face value, detrimental to the overall effect of the debate; however, I am not familiar with the history of Drakulie/CoachingMastery. Perhaps Drakulie has reason to distrust Mr. Smith's word... I don't know enough to make a judgement of either favor.

Straight out calling someone a liar may be blunt, but at times it is perfectly appropriate if the individual will not concede a truth and instead presents something else in its place. Again, though, I am new here, and I have no knowledge of whether it would be right for Drakulie to claim that Mr. Smith is lying. I do not know either of them.

Objectively speaking, Mr. Smith did give me the impression of trying to impress the reader with his teaching credentials and experience--which I do find very impressive, regardless of whether he is correct about this small disagreement of teaching the B-- but I do not think it strictly necessary for him to list it quite so often. He has also responded to posts by Drakulie rather sarcastically and derogatively* (in my humble opinion).

*when he insinuated that all Drakulie did was hound through the forums all day. i.e. not have a life. This is my impression, that's all.

I don't want to trod on anyone's toes, since I AM new here. I respect Mr. (Coach?) Smith's experience and credentials and find them impressive indeed, but it doesn't make him right on everything. If he presents a case without proper evidence for it, it is vulnerable to criticism in just the same way as if I had done it. Respect to both of them.

Patrick

[FedExpress 333]

Lets get back on topic, coach and drakulie....

[CoachingMastery]

Originally Posted by Patrick Smith

Hi, Dennis. I am capable of enjoying his posts without approving of every sentiment expressed in them or the way it is expressed. Obviously, calling someone a liar is, at face value, detrimental to the overall effect of the debate; however, I am not familiar with the history of Drakulie/CoachingMastery. Perhaps Drakulie has reason to distrust Mr. Smith's word... I don't know enough to make a judgement of either favor.

Straight out calling someone a liar may be blunt, but at times it is perfectly appropriate if the individual will not concede a truth and instead presents something else in its place. Again, though, I am new here, and I have no knowledge of whether it would be right for Drakulie to claim that Mr. Smith is lying. I do not know either of them.

Objectively speaking, Mr. Smith did give me the impression of trying to impress the reader with his teaching credentials and experience--which I do find very impressive, regardless of whether he is correct about this small disagreement of teaching the B-- but I do not think it strictly necessary for him to list it quite so often. He has also responded to posts by Drakulie rather sarcastically and derogatively* (in my humble opinion).

*when he insinuated that all Drakulie did was hound through the forums all day. i.e. not have a life. This is my impression, that's all.

I don't want to trod on anyone's toes, since I AM new here. I respect Mr. (Coach?) Smith's experience and credentials and find them impressive indeed, but it doesn't make him right on everything. If he presents a case without proper evidence for it, it is vulnerable to criticism in just the same way as if I had done it. Respect to both of them.

Patrick

I've tried to present objective information from my personal experience regarding the OP's post.

At times, I've included my credentials to a) differenciate myself from others based on experience; b) to hopefully imply that I'm NOT a poser trying to pass myself off as someone whom I'm not. (I notice not too many people are willing to put their real names out there...I am. I don't have anything to hide.) Also, because these are forums that are visited by new people all the time, they may or may not have seen previous posts which may have included this experience.

I have nothing to gain from someone seeing my credentials. They are there for validity and nothing else.

I surely don't have a great deal of free time to visit the boards all that often, hence I only have a few hundred (I think) posts.

And, since many questions are asked over and over by different people, I usually don't offer much advice on strokes as I had years ago when I first visited the site and saw that it was a great place for dialogue.

Unfortunately, I've seen how people seem to attack others, either indirectly or directly. I really have nothing to gain here other than to see what questions are being asked (I do write for different publications), and learn what people are asking or want to know more about. I've seldom mentioned my books or DVD's that are available here...as I don't want to be accused of trying to use these boards to promote them. (I've only mentioned them when someone else brings them up or if I feel that someone might really want to know that they are available.) I've instead mentioned many other books and web sites that I feel offer valuable information.

I have attended USPTA conventions for ten years to learn more from people who have experience and ideas. So, while some of you think I'm out here trying to prove I know everything, I'm still trying to learn from others out there who have different backgrounds and experiences.

Yes, I come from a very competitive area; yes I grew up playing many players who would go on to become very highly world-ranked players; yes, I have coached several world-ranked players and dozens of nationally ranked players, and almost a hundred USTA ranked players.

I mention this not to boast but to share where my experience comes from. It isn't like I'm watching a few players at a club or watching television or YouTube to get my tennis education or where I base my views from. I've read about 100 books on tennis, conversed with world-class pros and try to then share this information the best I can.

If this is offfensive to some of you, then I can't help you. I'm not trying to come off as offensive, but if I am, then I certainly have tried to apologize for this in the past. It is often hard to offer advice here, especially from an educated point of view, and not seem a little like a know-it-all. I try hard not to do this and offer as much objective information as I can. I guess I fail at this at times, according to some.

However, some people still attack and I simply don't have any comeback for this since that's not why I'm here.

I've seen others get attacked and flamed and then they try and do a one-up-manship...something I try to avoid. This is not why I'm here either.

Personally, I would prefer that most people simply just take my advice for what it is, try it if it sounds logical, or don't if it doesn't. It really is as simple as that. I really appreciate the many kind words and appreciation for what I've offered. I've had many express both appreciation as well as share their success from such advice. (That is much more fun for me to read than to try and go back and forth with anyone in a titfortat he-said, she-said commentary!)

If people really don't care for my information, then it is no skin off my teeth to not bother being here at all. It is fun to share with those who understand my intent, but it becomes no fun for me when people start attacking myself or others.

(Has anyone noticed how many posts end up with a complete negative or attacking flavor?)

I'm sure someone will even attack this post. Well, I've tried to explain why I've posted what I've posted. If that isn't good enough, then oh well.

Don't know if I've offered anything to clear the air, but that's the best I can do.

[SFrazeur]

Originally Posted by CoachingMastery

The majority of players with tennis elbow are one-handed backhanders. It is almost rare indeed to find two-handed players get tennis elbow. (If they do, it usually can be traced to poor backhand volley form.)

I agree with you to an extent. A badly hit backhand (one or two hands, ground stroke or volley) where the arm tries to straighten out through the ball is far more likely to cause damage/trauma to the elbow than a bad forehand.

Where I kinda disagree is in the categorizing. Many of those low level players that have very bad chronic Tennis Elbow have such bad mechanics to the point where it is hard to categorize their backhand as actually being one or two handed.

Sure, they will have either one or two hands on the racquet at contact, but it's more complex than that. A "one hander" may be opening up too early (opposite shoulder rotating forward with dominate arm bend) and over rotating too much for a proper one handed backhand. While they only have one hand on the racquet at contact they are using more in the way of "two handed" mechanics. Their intent may have even been to hit with two hands. Blah, blah, intent vs actuality, blah, blah.


-SF

[CoachingMastery]

Originally Posted by SFrazeur

I agree with you to an extent. A badly hit backhand (one or two hands, ground stroke or volley) where the arm tries to straighten out through the ball is far more likely to cause damage/trauma to the elbow than a bad forehand.

Where I kinda disagree is in the categorizing. Many of those low level players that have very bad chronic Tennis Elbow have such bad mechanics to the point where it is hard to categorize their backhand as actually being one or two handed.

Sure, they will have either one or two hands on the racquet at contact, but it's more complex than that. A "one hander" may be opening up too early (opposite shoulder rotating forward with dominate arm bend) and over rotating too much for a proper one handed backhand. While they only have one hand on the racquet at contact they are using more in the way of "two handed" mechanics. Their intent may have even been to hit with two hands. Blah, blah, intent vs actuality, blah, blah.


-SF

Good points and agreed. I probably shouldn't have been so robust in this statement. While in my experience it has been pretty much mostly one-handed backhanders that have both the injury as well as usually questionable form, you are correct that it truly is more complex. I've seen players get tennis elbow from non-tennis activites...and, of course, sustain aggrevation through play once they have it. So yes, there are a number of conditions for anyone to get it. Thanks for an objective point of view!

[Patrick Smith]

Originally Posted by CoachingMastery

(...)

Well said, Sir.

Biomechanically, you are likely to be right regarding the 1HBH. The movement puts the elbow in a rather unstable position in the average recreational player, even with proper form (as far as I can see). I think it would also place the shoulders in an internally rotated and weak position as well, because a huge amount of elbow injuries are caused by shoulder issues. A professional player could probably condition his elbow to handle the stress of a heavy 1HBH, but only if he took good care of his shoulder and maintained his shoulder girdle balance.

Disclaimer: I am a student.

[SFrazeur]

Originally Posted by CoachingMastery

Good points and agreed. I probably shouldn't have been so robust in this statement. While in my experience it has been pretty much mostly one-handed backhanders that have both the injury as well as usually questionable form, you are correct that it truly is more complex. I've seen players get tennis elbow from non-tennis activites...and, of course, sustain aggrevation through play once they have it. So yes, there are a number of conditions for anyone to get it. Thanks for an objective point of view!

To be clear, since I was half asleep when I wrote the above post, I do agree that for the most part the onset of Tennis elbow sustained from actual Tennis activity can be traced back to bad backhand mechanics. The worst strain seeming to be caused by forcing and/or straightening the arm through the ball.


My only disagreement coming from the aspect of "lumping and splitting." I just see too many "no handed" backhands, backhands so mechanically improper and inconsistent where it is difficult to categorize them as one or two handed. I'm sure you know the type of players I am talking about. Same idea as I wrote above, but I would also add the improper use of a backhand slice as a contributing factor as well.

Yes. My disagreement is largely academic.

It is more difficult for someone who does not teach to really see that bad backhands cause more Tennis elbow than forehands. I'm sure there are many, many who have gone to two hands from being a one handed to take strain off their dominate elbow. I can look at a long time player using two hands and tell with good accuracy if they have been primarily one handed in the past. I'm sure you can as well. Any tennis elbow injury is more likely to have come from their time as one handed not a two handed. Someone who is not experienced in analyzing mechanics is not likely to notice.

-SF