Single handed backhand for juniors...

[5263]

Originally Posted by Avles

Y

Still, my (totally armchair) perspective is that Fed's return works extremely well for getting the ball in play, but that he's less able to be aggressive with it than someone like Djokovic or Murray.

Maybe armchair here as you say, but right on target and anyone here being
honest should be willing to admit the same.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

I'm not saying anything really. Just providing some #'s in case ppl want to use them for argument's sake.

only youznhy in top 10 for 2nd serves.
the other 1 handers seem to be in clumps toward the lower half of the top 20's.

Maybe the stats might look different at lower levels such as 6.0 / open players. Idk.
I like my 1hbh because it's cool.

Yes, I know what you mean. I love one handers in general and enjoy using them
in my matches as well. They are cool to hit and look beautiful when done well.
Mine probably is not that cool looking though, lol. I'd say once the pt is in play,
they are about even and pretty good for second serves as well, but Imo it is
quite clear that the 2 hander has the upper hand against big serves by a wide
margin.

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by 5263

Yes, I know what you mean. I love one handers in general and enjoy using them
in my matches as well. They are cool to hit and look beautiful when done well.
Mine probably is not that cool looking though, lol. I'd say once the pt is in play,
they are about even and pretty good for second serves as well, but Imo it is
quite clear that the 2 hander has the upper hand against big serves by a wide
margin.

yes. the numbers support this.

hitting a dipping passing shot w/ a 1hbh feels good.

[boramiNYC]

Originally Posted by Cheetah

2012 2nd Serve Return Points Won
Points Won Total Points % Matches
1. Andy Murray 1374 2450 56 72
2. Novak Djokovic 1515 2718 56 87
3. Rafael Nadal 756 1378 55 48
4. David Ferrer 1390 2555 54 91
5. Mikhail Youzhny 875 1635 54 54

Career 2nd Serve Return Points Won
Points Won Total Points % Matches
1. Alberto Berasategui 7687 13658 56 477
2. Andre Agassi 16704 29909 56 899
3. Patrick McEnroe 4681 8449 55 251
4. Rafael Nadal 11512 20799 55 705
5. Thomas Muster 11092 20083 55 625
6. Michael Chang 14990 27181 55 810
7. Andy Murray 8561 15542 55 502
8. Carlos Costa 7369 13387 55 431
9. Byron Black 8293 15069 55 501
10. David Nalbandian 9831 17994 55 564


2012 1st Serve Return Points Won
Points Won Total Points % Matches
1. Rafael Nadal 870 2299 38 48
2. Novak Djokovic 1500 4238 35 87
3. Gilles Simon 1105 3238 34 68
4. Juan Monaco 893 2624 34 58
5. David Ferrer 1347 3974 34 91
6. Flavio Cipolla 563 1663 34 40
7. Carlos Berlocq 824 2449 34 56
8. Kei Nishikori 825 2485 33 55
9. Benoit Paire 893 2739 33 52
10. Marin Cilic 900 2774 32 58
11. Andy Murray 1212 3770 32 72
12. Marcel Granollers 705 2218 32 46
13. Richard Gasquet 915 2885 32 64
14. Fabio Fognini 693 2190 32 46
15. Radek Stepanek 667 2130 31 50
16. Stanislas Wawrinka 863 2762 31 55
17. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez 645 2080 31 45
18. Roger Federer 1259 4063 31 83
19. Fernando Verdasco 790 2556 31 54
20. Mikhail Youzhny 822 2667 31 54

Career 1st Serve Return Points Won
Points Won Total Points % Matches
1. Guillermo Coria 5374 14921 36 332
2. Magnus Gustafsson 8363 24423 34 539
3. Jordi Arrese 3825 11279 34 246
4. Rafael Nadal 10935 32249 34 705
5. Filippo Volandri 4858 14413 34 365
6. Slava Dosedel 5953 17685 34 383
7. Andy Murray 8130 24153 34 502
8. David Ferrer 10939 32517 34 734
9. Tomas Carbonell 4843 14410 34 314
10. Alberto Berasategui 7435 22185 34 477
11. Nikolay Davydenko 11284 33774 33 751
12. Juan Ignacio Chela 9253 27729 33 603
13. Karol Kucera 7495 22540 33 537
14. Novak Djokovic 8954 26943 33 592
15. Stefan Edberg 7449 22544 33 492
16. Juan Monaco 6553 19833 33 448
17. Guillermo Canas 6914 20930 33 447
18. Gilbert Schaller 3483 10576 33 245
19. Andrei Chesnokov 4614 14030 33 341
20. Brad Gilbert 3474 10641 33 229
21. Roger Federer 16757 51357 33 1076

thanks for numbers cheetah,

5263,
the ranking difference for these stats exaggerate the actual diff. look at %.

2012 2nd serve rtn. the best of 2h 56% vs best of 1h 54%. difference is 2%. out of 100 2nd serves, returning 56 of them vs 54 of them. this difference is smaller than the ranking on this list suggests.

2012 1st S rtn. dj 35% vs berlocq 34%; murray 32% vs gasquet 32%. again 1h stack up pretty well against your best ever in history returners.

based on these numbers you would discourage a junior developing 1h. i wouldn't. also i believe we might be seeing the best 2hbh now but the best 1hbh is yet to come. once the point starts, 1h can offer advantages over 2h if the playing style is well matched with technique.

i concede there is slight advantage for return but overall i believe it could be overcome with the style and gamesmanship. and that adv may not be as significant as it looks from these stats.

[5263]

Originally Posted by boramiNYC

thanks for numbers cheetah,

5263,
the ranking difference for these stats exaggerate the actual diff. look at %.

i concede there is slight advantage for return but overall i believe it could be overcome with the style and gamesmanship. and that adv may not be as significant as it looks from these stats.

I never suggested discourage the one hander.
Not sure how you see the stats as exaggerating anything except a 1 handers chances.
Why start a point in a hole when there is a better option?

No reason to look at second serve pts since this whole pt is about big 1st serves.
Even looking at 2012 avg means little in general imo. I think you have to look
at results against big servers 1st serves to be on topic.
Some of the 1 hander players didn't have much exposure to the big servers,
so their stats looked better imo.
I think the advantage is way bigger than these stats when watching a match
where you see Fed chip his rtn into the pt, as opposed to DJ rifling back rtns
with authority whenever he wants to be more aggressive.

[NLBwell]

Just picked a year at random from when Federer was #1.

Four of the top 10 guys who were best at winning points returning first serves were one-handers (I'm sure higher than the percentage on the tour then). Maybe it is just that there are less one-handed guys these days. Playing lots of matches on clay courts certainly affects the statistics.

2005 1st Serve Return Points Won

Points Won
Total Points
%
Matches

1. Rafael Nadal
1520 4123 37% 89

2. Guillermo Coria
1395 3843 36% 82

3. David Ferrer
1191 3329 36% 72

4. Nikolay Davydenko
1268 3577 35% 86

5. Gaston Gaudio
1182 3375 35% 76

6. Roger Federer
1486 4283 35% 85

7. Filippo Volandri
772 2227 35% 56

8. David Nalbandian
1020 3011 34% 63

9. Gael Monfils
756 2304 33% 47

10. Tommy Robredo
1084 3314 33% 68

[boramiNYC]

Originally Posted by 5263

I never suggested discourage the one hander.
Not sure how you see the stats as exaggerating anything except a 1 handers chances.
Why start a point in a hole when there is a better option?

No reason to look at second serve pts since this whole pt is about big 1st serves.
Even looking at 2012 avg means little in general imo. I think you have to look
at results against big servers 1st serves to be on topic.
Some of the 1 hander players didn't have much exposure to the big servers,
so their stats looked better imo.
I think the advantage is way bigger than these stats when watching a match
where you see Fed chip his rtn into the pt, as opposed to DJ rifling back rtns
with authority whenever he wants to be more aggressive.

1hbh players start the point in a hole whenever they are returning? watching the top players never felt that way. and these top 1handers regularly beat lower ranked 2handers who might even have big serves. 2h doesn't mean you'll be able to return like Dj some day and 1h doesn't mean you won't be able to return better than Fed some day. also I'm not a fan of Feds chip return but it is very effective. most of the time you cannot hit a winner off that. Fed made the best out of it and achieved a winning record that won't be matched in a long time. return is important but serving even more so. not all great 2h returners have great serves and if you do congrats you have high ranking but vast majority never achieve that kind of level so you can't sit pretty cuz you have 2hbh.

[5263]

Originally Posted by NLBwell

Just picked a year at random from when Federer was #1.

Four of the top 10 guys who were best at winning points returning first serves were one-handers (I'm sure higher than the percentage on the tour then). Maybe it is just that there are less one-handed guys these days. Playing lots of matches on clay courts certainly affects the statistics.

2005 1st Serve Return Points Won

1. Rafael Nadal
1520 4123 37% 89

2. Guillermo Coria
1395 3843 36% 82

3. David Ferrer
1191 3329 36% 72

4. Nikolay Davydenko
1268 3577 35% 86

Few things to take into account imo.
1st is that 1st 4 are all 2 handers.
2ond is looking at the yr total doesn't tell us about who they faced.
the yr I checked...2012... the top guy with a one hander had not faced the
known big servers.
3rd is I looked at how to 2handers did against Delpo & Fed's serve, then looked how top
1 handers did. In each case I looked at the % was way better for 2 handers.
(I also looked at several other big severs and each case, 2handers were significantly better)
Your point is well taken though.

[5263]

Originally Posted by boramiNYC

1hbh players start the point in a hole whenever they are returning? watching the top players never felt that way. and these top 1handers regularly beat lower ranked 2handers who might even have big serves. 2h doesn't mean you'll be able to return like Dj some day and 1h doesn't mean you won't be able to return better than Fed some day. also I'm not a fan of Feds chip return but it is very effective. most of the time you cannot hit a winner off that. Fed made the best out of it and achieved a winning record that won't be matched in a long time. return is important but serving even more so. not all great 2h returners have great serves and if you do congrats you have high ranking but vast majority never achieve that kind of level so you can't sit pretty cuz you have 2hbh.

So now you are suggesting the 1 hand rtn is just as good because players can
win with it? really?
No one said you can't win with a 1 hander or that a 2 hander can make you
serve better, lol. No one said that rtn was as important as serve, did they
No one said Fed couldn't chip into a pt with his one hander or that all you had to
do was have a 2 hander and sit pretty.

Really surprised that it is hard for anyone to see that against a very big 1st
serve, that the 2 hander has an edge, but I guess if you are confused by all
that distraction above, maybe that explains it??

Maybe I was lucky to have a very big server make it more clear for me. He
told me that whenever he sees he is facing a 1 hander he feels it is a big
advantage for him and explained that he now had a low risk place to go any time he
needed it. If facing a 2 hander he felt it was way more risky to go at the body or
to the Bh wheel house, because it may just come back with interest from a
2 hander. If they had the 2 hander, he then focused on overpowering the Fh
when he needed to go that route, which he could do, but was way harder than
overrunning the 1 hander Bh.

The overpowering option is not something most of us have, but with very big
servers, on important points, they can bear down more thru the box and limit
the risk and having to go to a 2ond serve.

[FrisbeeFool]

Originally Posted by 5263

So now you are suggesting the 1 hand rtn is just as good because players can
win with it? really?
No one said you can't win with a 1 hander or that a 2 hander can make you
serve better, lol. No one said that rtn was as important as serve, did they
No one said Fed couldn't chip into a pt with his one hander or that all you had to
do was have a 2 hander and sit pretty.

Really surprised that it is hard for anyone to see that against a very big 1st
serve, that the 2 hander has an edge, but I guess if you are confused by all
that distraction above, maybe that explains it??

Maybe I was lucky to have a very big server make it more clear for me. He
told me that whenever he sees he is facing a 1 hander he feels it is a big
advantage for him and explained that he now had a low risk place to go any time he
needed it. If facing a 2 hander he felt it was way more risky to go at the body or
to the Bh wheel house, because it may just come back with interest from a
2 hander. If they had the 2 hander, he then focused on overpowering the Fh
when he needed to go that route, which he could do, but was way harder than
overrunning the 1 hander Bh.

The overpowering option is not something most of us have, but with very big
servers, on important points, they can bear down more thru the box and limit
the risk and having to go to a 2ond serve.

Great anecdotal evidence about a big-server you know. Here's some more anecdotal evidence from another big server: Pete Sampras. One of the players he hated to face and did not match up well against was Michael Stich. Agassi, who you site as an example of the prototypical great returner, was an easier matchup for the big-serving Sampras.

Please, watch some pro tennis on tv. You will see players like Federer, Almagro, Wawrinka, and Haas hitting monster one-handed topspin returns against the the biggest servers in the game.

Players of all levels can succeed with either style. It's all about what's comfortable for them.

[Avles]

Originally Posted by FrisbeeFool

Please, watch some pro tennis on tv. You will see players like Federer, Almagro, Wawrinka, and Haas hitting monster one-handed topspin returns against the the biggest servers in the game.

I'm pretty sure that most of us here watch quite a bit of pro tennis on TV. But the fact that some pro players can hit monster topspin 1HBH returns tells us little or nothing about how the 1HBH and the 2HBH compare, in general, on service returns.

Also, the idea that the 2HBH is a more versatile stroke on returns did not originate in this thread. Lots of very experienced coaches seem to hold this view. For example, here's a video on the subject by the head coach at BYU, 2012 USPTA professional of the year:

http://www.tennisresources.com/index...v=1&vidid=2384

So I don't think it makes sense to foreclose the discussion by saying "watch some tennis, players hit good 1hbh returns too" and "either one can work, it's a matter of preference." Sure either stroke can work, but the question is whether there's a difference in what they can do, and how readily they can do it.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Avles

Also, the idea that the 2HBH is a more versatile stroke on returns did not originate in this thread. Lots of very experienced coaches seem to hold this view. For example, here's a video on the subject by the head coach at BYU, 2012 USPTA professional of the year:

http://www.tennisresources.com/index...v=1&vidid=2384

Very nice link, thanks for posting that. Frisbee would do well to take his own
advice. His Sampas vs Agassi/Stich example is full of holes.
Sampras often talked of how key it was for him to keep the serves out of Andre's
2hander zone and if you watch some matches on tv, you could see it
in action. Stich didn't match up well against Pete due to his 1hander rtn, lol
Nice try though.

[Avles]

Originally Posted by 5263

Stich didn't match up well against Pete due to his 1hander rtn, lol

Stich did have some success against Sampras, but I don't know that his service return was the reason.

I actually just glanced at Sampras's book "A Champion's Mind" (on Google Books). In his section on Stich he mentions Stich's second serve as a strength but says nothing about the return.

And Pete says if he were creating an "ultimate player" from his opponents he'd use Agassi's return, but he'd also take a look at Hewitt and Chang's returns. So I don't think he'd agree with FrisbeeFool's take.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Avles

Stich did have some success against Sampras, but I don't know that his service return was the reason.

I actually just glanced at Sampras's book "A Champion's Mind" (on Google Books). In his section on Stich he mentions Stich's second serve as a strength but says nothing about the return.

And Pete says if he were creating an "ultimate player" from his opponents he'd use Agassi's return, but he'd also take a look at Hewitt and Chang's returns. So I don't think he'd agree with FrisbeeFool's take.

I went to a utube vid and watched Pete and Stich feast on each others 1 hander
with just about any 1st serve they put there. Thought they should have used it
more, but seemed to save it for bigger points.

[BirdieLane]

When looking at these return stats, you can't just say, look, there are more 2BH so there. That was what drew my first post on this thread. If you want to look at top X (lets say top 20), you need to understand the backhand profile of the pool of players that produced it.

So if data is collected on 10000 players, and 10% of them have 1BH, then you'd expect to see 2 in the top 20. If you see three, you can argue that the 1BH is better. If you see one, you can argue that the 2BH is better.

But taking a step back, and again, considering the 1BH as a path you'd put a junior on, I don't think you can dismiss it. Same point. If 10% of aspiring pro boys have 1BH but 25% of top 100 pros have have 1BH, it can be argued that the 1BH junior has a 2.5x better chance of being a pro.

I tend to agree that 2BH is a better choice vs first serves. I think it's hard to put a finger on why a larger percent of 1BH make it thru to the top level. But I liked the point made earlier by NLBwell:

Originally Posted by NLBwell

...the variety of possible shots and the processes that you have to go through as you develop to have a really good one-handed backhand help the player progress.

So agree that a player w a 1BH approaches the game differently and uses the variety of his 1BH to set up the rest of his game. I think the point is that the 1BH player is less likely to depend on a simple game based on power and more often, look to set up their strengths.

Interestingly, Nadal plays a game that is very much like a player with a 1BH would play. Against any sort of big or wide serve to the BH, he tends to go with the slice rather than his 2BH. And his footwork and determination to get FH shots are very much like most 1BH players.

Also, I think players sometimes hurt themselves going after the 1BH because thats a predictable play and then the 1BH player is just playing on half a court. It seems like this is often the case for Fed. In fact, except for when Fed plays Nadal (who breaks down nearly everyones BH...not just Feds), the players who have success against him actually break down his FH and have either great xcourt FH (Del Potro) or great DTL backhands (Djoker).

But on the whole, I'd also say that the rarity of the 1BH helps a player with a 1BH succeed since they are a different animal that requires different tactics and you are forced to hit different shots - some that are very uncomfortable (such as trying to hit a 2BH off a short chip return).

[5263]

Originally Posted by BirdieLane

If you want to look at top X (lets say top 20), you need to understand the backhand profile of the pool of players that produced it.

I don't agree, but it's a semi reasonable theory I guess. You can come up with
a ton of reasons why pools produce one thing or another. Maybe the current 1 handers
would be way better with 2 handers. We just don't know. Maybe your theory is
right, but it doesn't agree with what I've seen or experienced. Like Frisbee says,
watch a match and see how 1 handers fare against big 1st serves. It's not pretty.
Maybe more players use 2 hands because they realize it is more versatile overall?
We just don't know why. Likely mostly due to starting young and needing 2 hands
to control the stick.

I think you have to realize that we are talking of one narrow area where the 2
hands is markedly better at doing a certain thing. Not saying it is better over
all or that you should not choose to play with the one hander. If you don't mind,
or even like going to the slice more often against big first serves, then by all
means, consider the 1hander if you like it. I think the 1 hander requires less
demanding movement and positioning than the 2 hander. Do you want to debate
that idea of the 1 hander being better?

[5263]

Originally Posted by BirdieLane

So agree that a player w a 1BH approaches the game differently and uses the variety of his 1BH to set up the rest of his game. I think the point is that the 1BH player is less likely to depend on a simple game based on power and more often, look to set up their strengths.

Approach the game different by choice or force??
All the good players can volley and slice pretty much on par with most 1 handers.
As you point out, some 2handers deploy a more varied approach to the tactics.

[BirdieLane]

5263, I agreed with you that 2BH is better for first serve returns, right? And other things as well.

The OP was should a junior 'choose' to develop a 1BH vs a 2BH. I think it's a great question and we can argue pro's and con's all day and I feel like the 2BH might come out net positive once the dust settles in such a debate.

Which is why it's so interesting to acknowledge that 1BH players seem to have a better 'rate of success' in terms of becoming professional tennis players than 2BH players. Possibly by more than 2x (if we can agree that <12% of aspiring juniors had 1BHs)

And on your question of choice or force - I think forced. But does it matter?? Probably less ability to just crank a winner on one side 'forces' a player to learn the game at a deeper...or at least different...level.

I don't know why...but looking at the number of pros with 1BHs - there's something about a 1BH that definitely does NOT DOOM a players prospects...but curiously, seems to increase them when you consider the rate of success of players with 1BH vs 2BHs.

For the record, I just looked at current rankings and 7 of the ATP top 25, or 28% have 1BH. And yesterday I looked at 9 of top 20 (45%) in ATP doubles rankings have 1BH.

I just think there's something going on that we can't put our finger on because in most debates, the 2BH camp seems to come out on top. But it's undenyable that when you look at aspiring juniors, far less than 28% have 1BH....which clearly indicates that 1BH juniors have a higher success rate than 2BH juniors. And that is a fact that applies directly to the OP.

[2ndServe]

2 handers definitely have better returns on the whole but 1 handers throughout history have had better transitional and net games. They also tend to be more offensive. I'm sure they develop better slices and probably a stronger hitting arm, shoulder and wrist from hitting one handers.

[5263]

Originally Posted by BirdieLane

5263, I agreed with you that 2BH is better for first serve returns, right? And other things as well.

The OP was should a junior 'choose' to develop a 1BH vs a 2BH. I think it's a great question and we can argue pro's and con's all day and I feel like the 2BH might come out net positive once the dust settles in such a debate.

Which is why it's so interesting to acknowledge that 1BH players seem to have a better 'rate of success' in terms of becoming professional tennis players than 2BH players. Possibly by more than 2x (if we can agree that <12% of aspiring juniors had 1BHs)

Great post IMO and I agree, choosing a 1 hander does not even approach doom.
I agree it is a very reasonable choice if the right reasons are there. I now
see you understand I was just picking the 2 hander if there was need for help
with the choice due to the advantage against the very prevalent big serves
of today. Also 2 handers of today transition and volley as well or better than
the 1 handers, so that is not an up to date issue on this imo.
I do think there are several great things about the 1 hander and it can be THE
right choice as well.