The myth that pro's with 1hbh's are weaker against high balls...

[Tropikal_Knights]

Has the OP ever played tennis....if you did you would know that this thread makes no sense....

in fact it is one the ....... threads I have read......

A high ball to your backhand 1 handed is possibly the worst thing that can happen.......especially is the high ball has a tonne of topspin and side spin on it

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by above bored

Only continental and eastern gripped backhands, such as that used by Federer, make higher balls more challenging. Nevertheless, you can still hit a decent enough ball. Semi-western backhand grips, such as that used by Almagro and Kohlschreiber, are more comfortable for high backhands, but not so good for low balls. These principles are well established, based on the anatomical reality for all players, not just because of the Federer/Nadal match-up.

You are always going to be at an anatomical disadvantage if you are going toe to toe against another pros forehand with your backhand. Forehands are almost always stronger than backhands, regardless of the opponent, but especially in the case of Nadal, who has a forehand better than most.

Correct.

I would also add though that eastern/conti bhs generally are easier to slice off of. So even though high bhs are a bigger challenge compared to semis/west grips, the player can use the slice when the ball is high.

The problem is that the natural cross court slice goes straight to nadal's fh, which he has no trouble whipping.

end thread

/

[above bored]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

I may not have mastered the 2hbh, but it is a simple anatomical fact that there is less range of motion when you have two hands on the racket when reaching up high. With the1hbh you have more range of motion, but most people are too weak in their shoulders and/or wrists to capitalize on the advantage.

If you have strong shoulders and wrists, however, you are in an advantage over a 2hbh's in terms of what you can do with a high ball. You can drive down on the ball (though not as easily as with a 2hbh) OR you can loop upwards on the ball, because you have more range of motion. With a 2hbh, you can't loop back an already head height ball, because your swing is shorter and does not finish high enough to impart topspin on a ball of this height. Looping back a high shot back with heavy spin is a safer and higher percentage option than driving it downwards.

Of course I don't have experience of hitting against Nadal's forehand, but there are 'Nadal's' of my local park who are the same level as me, and who try to kick it up to my backhand and I love dealing with that shot on my one-hander. I deal with head-height balls on my 1hbh better than low balls, or even normal-height balls, but I use a semi-western 1hbh grip. Of course if Nadal kicked up to my backhand I couldn't handle it, but if I were at nadal's level, my backhand would be a lot better than it is, so you can't really compare things that way, can you?

Not to mention there are pro's with 1hbh's who CAN go toe-to-toe with Nadal's forehand with their 1hbh's. Gasquet can use his own heavy topspin off that wing to angle Nadal off the court, probably so could Kuerten, Wawrinka can easily drive through a high ball and Kohlschreiber, Gaudio and Almagro don't do anything too flashy, but are just very stable against high balls. All these players lose to Nadal (when they lose) for reasons other than their 1hbh's.

In fact, do you notice the trend that when a pro player has a 1hbh, it is a more often than not a very strong backhand (Lopez notwithstanding)?

I think all the pros are pretty strong in their wrists, forearms, shoulders and core. Amateurs less so, so it will obviously help if they strengthen up.

My comments below are assuming optimal technique, not bad technique or less than optimal.

You are right that there is less range of motion with a 2hbh and that it is more difficult to loop the ball or impart topspin, but you are wrong that this makes for lower percentage shots on high balls. What the 2hbh loses in these areas, it gains in the stability in the racket head you inherently get by using two hands. However strong you are, a 2hbh will always have a more stable head, all other things being equal. The nature of the shot means you can guide and power through the ball more safely, in a way you can’t with a 1hbh. The restricted motion of the stroke also, ironically, adds an extra layer of control.

The 1hbh is a completely different stroke and requires completely different technique, but can be equally effective at its best, just in a different way. It gives you easier access to power and spin, but not necessarily control, because of a less stable head and the greater possibility for extension through the stroke. It can loop balls better than the 2hbh, but it cannot drill them, including high balls, as well. I think Agassi had the best technique for the driven 2hbh in the game and the clip below shows him drilling many balls, including high ones, safely and in a way you simply cannot do as well with a 1hbh, all other things being equal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3uiZvHN9f8

All the players you mentioned at the end have more extreme 1hbh grips than your classic continental and eastern grips, and they are all better players on clay, where loopy, top spun shots are more effective than driven top spun shots with flatter trajectories. However, I don’t know if that constitutes handling high balls better, since on hardcourts and grass they are less effective at being able to drill high balls through the court in the way the best 2hbhs can. So what one deems as more effective at its best, really depends on the surface.

Incidentally, regarding the more extreme gripped 1hbhs, many kids end up adopting those grips precisely because they help them cope with the balls bouncing above their heads. Justine Henin at 5’ 5’’ also needed an extreme grip for her 1hbh to cope with high balls, but neither her nor the players you mentioned would be dealing with high balls in the same way if they used a more modest continental or eastern grip. As the saying goes, grip = destiny.

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by Tropikal_Knights

Has the OP ever played tennis....if you did you would know that this thread makes no sense....

in fact it is one the ....... threads I have read......

A high ball to your backhand 1 handed is possibly the worst thing that can happen.......especially is the high ball has a tonne of topspin and side spin on it

Not sure why I keep getting asked this. Guess people think it sounds cool.

Yes I do play, and I face certain people who will try to pick on your backhand by looping forehands (either left handed or inside out righty) to your backhand. I excel at beating these kinds of loopy players because my backhand is so stable with high balls, and I have a good range of motion to hit up on high balls that would not be possible with a 2hbh.

If I had a 2hbh, I could perhaps drive down on these high balls and go DTL for a winner, but it's a bit of a risky shot as driving down requires less net clearance.

Instead, with the topspin afforded to me with my 1hbh, I simply kick the high balls given to me back cross-court up at my opponents, and though they're good at dishing out the high balls to me, I've found that many of them can't deal with it when I kick the ball up over their heads.

As I've said before, your experience with high balls with the 1hbh is going to be different to mine if you're using a continental or eastern backhand grip compared to my semi-western grip.

I'll admit that my 1hbh grip gives me significant weaknesses as well - I have to hit way out in front, can't deal with big flat-hitters nearly as well as I deal with topspin monkeys, I have to slice it back if I get sliced to my backhand, and returning flat first serves is such a nightmare I am contemplating using a 2hbh just for ROS.

But high balls to my backhand are my favorite thing to let rip on.

[RogerRacket111]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

Not sure why I keep getting asked this. Guess people think it sounds cool.

Yes I do play, and I face certain people who will try to pick on your backhand by looping forehands (either left handed or inside out righty) to your backhand. I excel at beating these kinds of loopy players because my backhand is so stable with high balls, and I have a good range of motion to hit up on high balls that would not be possible with a 2hbh.

If I had a 2hbh, I could perhaps drive down on these high balls and go DTL for a winner, but it's a bit of a risky shot as driving down requires less net clearance.

Instead, with the topspin afforded to me with my 1hbh, I simply kick the high balls given to me back cross-court up at my opponents, and though they're good at dishing out the high balls to me, I've found that many of them can't deal with it when I kick the ball up over their heads.

As I've said before, your experience with high balls with the 1hbh is going to be different to mine if you're using a continental or eastern backhand grip compared to my semi-western grip.

I'll admit that my 1hbh grip gives me significant weaknesses as well - I have to hit way out in front, can't deal with big flat-hitters nearly as well as I deal with topspin monkeys, I have to slice it back if I get sliced to my backhand, and returning flat first serves is such a nightmare I am contemplating using a 2hbh just for ROS.

But high balls to my backhand are my favorite thing to let rip on.

What level do you play 3.5 ?

[jrs]

I high balls are problem for 1 hbh - then wouldn't it make sense to hit the ball early on the rise or late when the ball is falling. Essentially, if you are hitting 1hbh high - you are out of position!

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by jrs

I high balls are problem for 1 hbh - then wouldn't it make sense to hit the ball early on the rise or late when the ball is falling. Essentially, if you are hitting 1hbh high - you are out of position!

Well, not if you like hitting the high balls more than the normal height ones?

Dunno if I'm a 3.5 or whatever - I'm not in the states.

[Hops]

head-high? pshaw. what about two feet over your head?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIJfQ6adFqY

[Relinquis]

Originally Posted by Hops

head-high? pshaw. what about two feet over your head?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIJfQ6adFqY

^ Respect.

10Respects

[bjsnider]

I hit both, and not only does the high ball nullify the power of the 1hbh, it works in reverse for the 2hbh, where a high ball actually feeds into the power of that shot.

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by bjsnider

I hit both, and not only does the high ball against the 1hbh, it works in reverse for the 2hbh, where a high ball actually feeds into the power of that shot.

haha, look at the link to Gasquet's backhand. Hell, even look at the link to Gaudio's backhand earlier in this thread. You are not even going to be able to reach up that high with two hands on the racket, let alone get a meaningful hit on it.

[BevelDevil]

It's not a myth, but I think it's often exaggerated.

I think there's definitely a strike-zone "gap" (on the upper side) between the 2hbh and the 1hbh (with the 2hbh being higher).

This gap is huge at the lower recreational level where people are using the wrong grips for the 1hbh and/or don't have the right timing.

As the skill level rises, the gap shrinks but doesn't completely close.

There are always exceptions (weak 2hbhs, strong 1hbhs), but I'm talking about the typical cases.


But what's the reason behind this?

I think the main reason is that to get the racket head high above the shoulders, the 1-hander supinates more before contact. The longer the lag between the beginning of supination and contact, harder it is to time right.

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

Anyway, try the chin ups, rows and reverse flyes - strengthen the hell out of the upper back and posterior shoulder musculature and let me know how you get on then with high 1hbh's...

What part of the swing does chin ups help with?

[above bored]

Originally Posted by World Beater

Correct.

I would also add though that eastern/conti bhs generally are easier to slice off of. So even though high bhs are a bigger challenge compared to semis/west grips, the player can use the slice when the ball is high.

The problem is that the natural cross court slice goes straight to nadal's fh, which he has no trouble whipping.

end thread

/

Yeah, the slice is an additional option for the milder grip.

[above bored]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

haha, look at the link to Gasquet's backhand. Hell, even look at the link to Gaudio's backhand earlier in this thread. You are not even going to be able to reach up that high with two hands on the racket, let alone get a meaningful hit on it.

A 2hbh would be able to deal with both of those balls very effectively, but like I said before, you have to have the correct technique. You can’t just try the 2hbh for a couple of weeks or months and expect to have it down. It takes many years. In many ways it’s a more complicated stroke mechanically, because it requires more kinetic harmony between the 2 arms, torso and feet. Still, once you get it right I think the more stable head makes it easier to control the ball for most.

The 1hbh clearly has more reach above the head, since in principle you can potentially go as high as an overhead smash, but you don’t seem to be aware that you can go well above the head with the 2hbh too (just a tad shorter than a fully extended overhead) and create good pace and spin, but the positioning of your body has to be more precise, because of the more restricted reach. The left arm is also a key component for a righty looking to get power that high up.

[bjsnider]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

haha, look at the link to Gasquet's backhand. Hell, even look at the link to Gaudio's backhand earlier in this thread. You are not even going to be able to reach up that high with two hands on the racket, let alone get a meaningful hit on it.

If the ball is really high you'll see players with 2hbh jump into the shot, which is quite devastating.

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by bjsnider

If the ball is really high you'll see players with 2hbh jump into the shot, which is quite devastating.

Gasquet also does a jumping 1hbh, he hit a winner off a Nadal forehand in Monte Carlo using it.

As for how chin ups will help with the 1hbh - they strengthen the posterior shoulder musculature as well as the lats. Both of these help to adduct and extend the arm, which are actions that occur in the 1hbh.

If all these people complaining how hard it is to hit a high 1hbh were doing chin-ups with an additional 140lbs tied around their waist, I wonder how hard they would find to hit a high 1hbh. My guess is nowhere near as hard as they are currently finding it.

Tennis players are always going on about how they shouldn't touch weights, but you can get stronger without getting heavier.

[Relinquis]

an additional 140lbs?!

gasquet is a tennis player, not mr olympia!

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by Relinquis

an additional 140lbs?!

gasquet is a tennis player, not mr olympia!

I can do it, and I'm not Mr. Olympia.

[Relinquis]

that's 63 kg or so.

basically he should ask his girlfriend to hang on to him as he does chin ups while wearing a tennis bag full of his gear...

[dominikk1985]

maybe fed uses a more conservative grip (like he does on his FH)?

I think players who use an extreme BH grip deal better with high balls to their
1HBH.