tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
So you ignore everyone else I mentioned and just say not talking about the slice? Forgot to mention Youzhny who's playing some great tennis against Tipsy right now on court.
Is the 1HB harder on the body than the 2HB?
- Thread starter THESEXPISTOL
- Start date
Many issues with 1 hander that I know from experience:
Sideways is not natural. When was the last time someone stood sideways and shook hands with you? When was the last time you carried a bag with your right hand in front of the left?
Dominant eye effects are serious. Generally, dominance of eye follows dominance of hand. This affects watching the ball on the 1 hander.
1 hander is very often taken late and not in front. I know, that sounds like it cannot be true. But that is because you don't factor in how much back the person already moved or where he was standing. I saw Feliciano hit a rare backhand topspin after moving diagonally back and allowing the ball to drop. Gasquet hits balls "out in front" from 100 feet behind the baseline. The net effect is that the 1 hander often takes more time, unless it is a reflex kind of flick shot that Fed uses.
Short ball attack on BH is seriously impaired. A 2 hander can put away a short ball with ease, while the 1 hander typically has to make an approach out of it and wait for the next ball.
Timing is much more fragile. This leads to a much lower margin of error. Even the best 1 handers cannot sustain cross court rallies with confidence.
Sideways is not natural. When was the last time someone stood sideways and shook hands with you? When was the last time you carried a bag with your right hand in front of the left?
Dominant eye effects are serious. Generally, dominance of eye follows dominance of hand. This affects watching the ball on the 1 hander.
1 hander is very often taken late and not in front. I know, that sounds like it cannot be true. But that is because you don't factor in how much back the person already moved or where he was standing. I saw Feliciano hit a rare backhand topspin after moving diagonally back and allowing the ball to drop. Gasquet hits balls "out in front" from 100 feet behind the baseline. The net effect is that the 1 hander often takes more time, unless it is a reflex kind of flick shot that Fed uses.
Short ball attack on BH is seriously impaired. A 2 hander can put away a short ball with ease, while the 1 hander typically has to make an approach out of it and wait for the next ball.
Timing is much more fragile. This leads to a much lower margin of error. Even the best 1 handers cannot sustain cross court rallies with confidence.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
Opinions or facts?
Lukhas
Legend
Then avoid doing assumptions if you can't back them up with facts. Keep it to yourself, we understood your advice, no need to repeat.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
You're stating them as facts though.
They are not assumptions, and they are not facts. They are anecdotal observations. Most of the tennis world seems to believe in them, including Martina who said "the two hander is just a more stable shot." Why don't you also ask her to keep it to herself or to "prove" it?
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
Well the biggest difference is she's Martina Navratilova and you're a poster on TTW. People tend to listen more to the former, even if they might not be 100% correct all the time they have experience at the highest level, either playing or coaching wise, in what they are talking about.
Lukhas
Legend
I don't remember Navratilova making rants at TT about the one hander. Did you see her do it? And you didn't reply to this, I'd like to hear your enlightened opinion this time:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7461432&postcount=94
Because I still yet need to see a one hander that somehow "breaks down" at pro level.
Last edited:
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
The forum is open to everyone. Rafter's serve video got posted here by Will @ FYB and look what a sh*tstorm that caused. We used to have Oscar Wegner on the board as well, till he was driven away...cough cough. There's a reason why coaches don't really post here. I've noticed even Will from FYB hasn't been as active in the past few years.
tennispodpro
New User
Why would you give any creedence to what these announcers say—even Martina sometimes. She also made reference that Serena is on her way out because of her age. Gimme a break, 31 and too old for the women's game?
Serena can still win grand slams for probably the next 5 years just on the fact that no one can match up with her physically. She just over-powers everyone.
Anyway, why don't we turn the tables here and point all the deficiencies of the two-handed backhand? I know you can come up with a few.
I like a lot of your threads sureshs but I can't wait for this one to die.
tennispodpro
New User
I'm not, I really thought this thread was suppose to be a joke. Correct me if I am wrong.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
They mostly are troll threads.
Anyways, lets see how fragile Dimitrov's backhand is versus Djokovic. He already lost the first set 6-2, must be because he's using a one hander. If he had a 2 hander it would of been 6-3.
Anyways, lets see how fragile Dimitrov's backhand is versus Djokovic. He already lost the first set 6-2, must be because he's using a one hander. If he had a 2 hander it would of been 6-3.
tennispodpro
New User
Yep, same thing here as I am watching the Haas Isner match. Haas had a godzillion match points in the fourth set and now is down 4-2 in the fifth. (I am probably watching an old match). Anyway, I think Haas is too old to change his backhand now. Too bad.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
4-3 now, Haas broke back. Its not an old match, its live.
tennispodpro
New User
Well, well, well. I am going to apologize here. I get bored during the commercials and end up here sometimes. I guess we all like to be entertained. Anyway, it was a knee-jerk reaction to jump in this thread when I had no business doing so.
Anyway, did you guys see all the one-handed backhands Isner was hitting towards the end of that match. I guess it's not too late for John to make the switch.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
So Haas will face Youzhny, that'll be one fragile match.
tennis_hack
Banned
Suresh and Netspirit - and all you other 1hbh haters (funny how a lot of the pro-2hbh camp are ANTI 1hbh, whereas we in the pro-1hbh camp also like the 2hbh) - the 1hbh-using pro's on tour just owned you.
Do you know why?
Because in the R4 of the French Open this year, eight out of the sixteen people left in the draw are using 1hbh's. That's 50%. In the top 200, do you think 50% of them use a 1hbh? Nope, not even close. Probably less than 10% use the 1hbh.
You were the one that brought up the 1hbh being unusable at the 'pro-level' due to it being 'fragile'. Well, you are proven wrong on two counts;
1). Since there are around less than 10% of the pro's in the top 200 using the 1hbh, yet at this Slam, 50% of the pro's left in the draw are using 1hbh, the stats would argue that the 1hbh is especially useful at the elite pro level. Statistically speaking, if you're one of those 10%, you have a higher chance of being left in the draw later.
2). What surface is the FO played on? Clay. Clay is the highest bouncing, most baseline-orientated surface there is, especially in best of 5 sets. This surface places a premium on the reliability of your groundstrokes. Yet, the 1hbh is doing best on that surface. To contrast, only four of the sixteen R4 players at last year's Wimbledon had 1hbh's - half the number at this year's French.
I have looked at the 1hbh/2hbh nature of opponents left in R4 in Slams since the year 2003 - and the average number of 1hbh players left at R4 is lowest at Wimbledon (4.7), and highest in the French Open (5.2). So it's lowest in the fastest, most serve/volley-orientated surface, and highest in the slowest, most baseline-orientated surface.
You might say that all these players are in their mid-age to elderly tennis years, and the 1hbh is on it's way out, and you might be right. But that's not the fault of the 1hbh. That's the fault of the coaches forcing the 2hbh on everyone, even those who are more naturally suited to the 1hbh. By virtue of their actual Grand Slam results and ranking places, the veterans on tour with 1hbh's have proven that they can boss around all the youngsters with 2hbh's, despite their age. The fault is with the coaching system, not the stroke itself.
So, before you anti-1hbh crew spout off cliches about the 'fragility' and 'antiquated nature' of the 1hbh that you have just heard somewhere and are trying to sound knowledgeable by regurgitating, actually analyze the stats.
Do you know why?
Because in the R4 of the French Open this year, eight out of the sixteen people left in the draw are using 1hbh's. That's 50%. In the top 200, do you think 50% of them use a 1hbh? Nope, not even close. Probably less than 10% use the 1hbh.
You were the one that brought up the 1hbh being unusable at the 'pro-level' due to it being 'fragile'. Well, you are proven wrong on two counts;
1). Since there are around less than 10% of the pro's in the top 200 using the 1hbh, yet at this Slam, 50% of the pro's left in the draw are using 1hbh, the stats would argue that the 1hbh is especially useful at the elite pro level. Statistically speaking, if you're one of those 10%, you have a higher chance of being left in the draw later.
2). What surface is the FO played on? Clay. Clay is the highest bouncing, most baseline-orientated surface there is, especially in best of 5 sets. This surface places a premium on the reliability of your groundstrokes. Yet, the 1hbh is doing best on that surface. To contrast, only four of the sixteen R4 players at last year's Wimbledon had 1hbh's - half the number at this year's French.
I have looked at the 1hbh/2hbh nature of opponents left in R4 in Slams since the year 2003 - and the average number of 1hbh players left at R4 is lowest at Wimbledon (4.7), and highest in the French Open (5.2). So it's lowest in the fastest, most serve/volley-orientated surface, and highest in the slowest, most baseline-orientated surface.
You might say that all these players are in their mid-age to elderly tennis years, and the 1hbh is on it's way out, and you might be right. But that's not the fault of the 1hbh. That's the fault of the coaches forcing the 2hbh on everyone, even those who are more naturally suited to the 1hbh. By virtue of their actual Grand Slam results and ranking places, the veterans on tour with 1hbh's have proven that they can boss around all the youngsters with 2hbh's, despite their age. The fault is with the coaching system, not the stroke itself.
So, before you anti-1hbh crew spout off cliches about the 'fragility' and 'antiquated nature' of the 1hbh that you have just heard somewhere and are trying to sound knowledgeable by regurgitating, actually analyze the stats.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
Deep breath tennis_hack. No need to start typing novels.
tennisdad65
Hall of Fame
2HBH is harder on the core and legs, but 1HBH is harder on the elbow and shoulders, even with perfect technique. Even male pro's in the top 100, with 1HBH have had tennis elbow.
And it is just silly to try and go over the ball with a 1HBH, when it is shoulder height or above. As great as Fed is, he never got this issue right. Nadal absolutely eats up his slice backhand and topspin backhand. Fed should have figured out how to underspin or flatten the high balls.
And it is just silly to try and go over the ball with a 1HBH, when it is shoulder height or above. As great as Fed is, he never got this issue right. Nadal absolutely eats up his slice backhand and topspin backhand. Fed should have figured out how to underspin or flatten the high balls.
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
Underspin is slice, and flattening out a shoulder high ball deeper behind the baseline...low percentage and will sit up after the bounce.
tennispodpro
New User
Jack, don't worry, Talk Tennis is NOT the center of the tennis universe. It's just one little satellite, among many out there that floats around and gathers up this stuff.
Don't get sucked in like I did this morning; and you know what happened. You're taking this way to serious. This is just one of those threads that leads to nowhere. Think of it as entertainment. Enjoy the rest of the French Open.
Avles
Hall of Fame
This says it all I think.
It's true that most of the 1hbh practitioners are a little older-- but that doesn't change the obvious and inescapable fact that right now the 1hbh is an extremely viable shot at the highest levels.
Seems laughable to suggest that it's inherently inferior at the rec level.
Dude I am not in any camp. I hit a 1 handed BH, and 2 hander only on reflexive half volleys. I tried to switch to a 2 hander many times but failed. It is too late for me to cultivate ambidexterity and hip rotation and why bother, because my 1 hander is better than most of the 1 handed guys I play with. I also have proper technique, which those guys completely lack, so that makes me like a king of the old farts. But outside that circle life is different ....
Lukhas
Legend
In fact, since they're so close to retirement, it should be even easier to exploit that backhand no? They shouldn't be able to take the pounding... But they seem alright. :lol:
Last edited:
You don't count women among people?
How many of your male numbers are skewed by older players? How many 1 handers do you see in the younger pros, juniors, junior Slam champions, college?
WildVolley
Legend
For the average rec player the 1hbh probably causes more injuries than the 2hbh. I say this because I think that tennis elbow is more common among 1hbh rec players than 2hbh players.
I am also curious about the claim that 1 handed BHs cause imbalanced bodies. Are there any studies on this? Seems to be a serious matter.
tennis_hack
Banned
Hell no I'm not counting women in this discussion.
That's right, a lot of these 1hbh guys are older players. They're old and slow, and STILL the younger guys with the godly 2hbh's are not breaking down these old mens' 1hbh's on the highest bouncing and slowest and most baseline-orientated surface out there in a best of five format.
And you still dare to call the 1hbh a fragile and inconsistent shot?
You're right that there probably are next to no 1hbh's on the boy's tour. All that says is that coaches are short-sighted and forcing everyone to fit the same mold.
The old guys with the 1hbh's on tour have just proven that their shot is still extremely viable at the most elite of levels, and has topspin advantages that aren't available to the 2hbh and work great on clay. They have proven it with their rankings and by an awesome number of them reaching the last 16 of the French Open.
On the other hand, all the coaches have proven is that they don't care, and will continue to force whatever brings most early success on their kids.
OK, got it. Women don't count and younger people don't count. All successful coaches are wrong. You are the only one who knows the real truth.
WildVolley
Legend
I think that tennis causes imbalanced bodies, even if you hit with the 2hbh. I'm right handed and my body isn't balanced, even though I primarily used the 2hbh when I played as a child. I now use weights to offset some of the imbalance and think that's a good idea for any tennis player.
However, I did recently switch back to the 2hbh to take stain off my shoulder and get myself to rotate more evenly off both sides.
At the professional level, it doesn't seem to be that 2hbh players have longer career than 1hbh players. But I think that tennis elbow is probably the dominant injury among amateurs and that very bad 1hbh form that stresses the arm because of the weak position of the hand probably means that the 1hbh is more injury prone. I never had any elbow issues playing 1hbh even though I use poly.
How do you know if your body is imbalanced? I am sure my body is badly imbalanced in every possible way, but how do you self-diagnose that?
tennis_hack
Banned
You actually follow women's tennis? I feel sorry for you.
Why don't you tell me how 8 out of 16 ATP pros have with 1hbh's have made the R4 of 2013 FO if the 1hbh is such an inconsistent and fragile shot? Why haven't these old men been destroyed by people with 2hbh's?
No I don't think coaches have got it wrong. I think they know how to make money by sticking with what works to bring early success whilst ignoring the option that could bring equal success over the long-term, with that success coming in different ways (like by hitting more angles instead of by being able to return serves better).
Is it killing the variety of the game? Yes. Do I begrudge them for doing it? No, because they have to make a living. It's a shame that a very viable shot with unique properties and advantages will die out, that's all.
I'd like to know why you seem to be so happy about the 1hbh dying out and the game becoming more homogenized? What personal vendetta do you have against it?
WildVolley
Legend
For me it is easy to determine. I'm a rh and when I lie flat on the ground, the right side of my chest is actually slightly higher than the left. A chiropractor noticed that my right shoulder actually sits a little lower than my left. The muscular development of my right arm is slightly greater than my left and my right wrist is thicker than my left.
These differences won't necessarily cause problems, but I don't think it is good to have large muscular differences that can pull the spine to one side. I think that scar tissue from injuries can be a bigger problem if mobility becomes limited.
Working with dumbbells allows you to easily target the weaker side and get things more in balance. Whenever I do shoulder exercises for throwing, I hit my left side just as hard as my right even though I don't throw or serve with my left hand.
I think that pretty much says everything. No need for me to comment.
Lukhas
Legend
Moot point to say 1HBH favours body imbalance. If you were so worried about body imbalance, you wouldn't be playing tennis to begin with.
Sure Schiavone and Henin were nobodies at RG, especially given their small frames. Especially Schiavone since she seems to eat clay for dinner and revives each time the surface is on. Because women ain't hitting 1HBH doesn't mean it suddenly does poorly. It merely means coaches aren't making them learn 1HBH, which is a different point altogether.
Last edited:
tennis_hack
Banned
The women's game is very different. There is much less variety in the women's game. And this is why many people are turned off by it and think it's deteriorating in quality.
But you seem to want a similar thing to happen to the men's game, no? Why else are you licking your lips at the prospect of a tennis world with no 1hbh's? You want a men's game with less variety? Homogenization is the best thing ever for you.
I got my wife to examine these symmetries for me now, with me lying down flat, sitting up, and standing. No imbalances! Left and right are like mirror images!
Though I am sure a chiro will find many imbalances ......
Last edited:
Having lived through every Fed-Nadal match with my stomach tightening up whenever the ball went to Fed's BH, I don't want that kind of torture any longer.
Lukhas
Legend
So your problem is with Nadal abusing Federer's backhand and little else. No need to comment I guess... People, you can go home, nothing else to see! :-?
tennis_hack
Banned
So Federer and Nadal are the only two tennis players in the world then! Silly me, I thought there were more of them out there!
In your own words: "I think that pretty much says everything. No need for me to comment."
tennispodpro
New User
Oh, so that's what this is all about. You're worried about a Nadal Federer final. I agree, it will be pretty boring. But what Nadal does to Fed's backhand is the same as what he does to all the two-handers. However, Brandt crushed those spinny Nadal high balls and had no problem doing it with a one-handed backhand. Unfortunately, Fed is not going to grow anymore.
tennispodpro
New User
No, then the scores would be even worse as Fed's game would be one dimensional like everyone else. Two handers hate high balls too. Did you see when Nadal broke Fognini's spirit?
He does it to everyone. Why can't we just admit that Nadal wants it more than everyone else? He hustles more, he's in better shape, he breaks down all his opponents until they don't believe anymore that they can beat him. It's not about the one-handed or two-handed backhand.
Getting back to the thread title, the 1 hander is actually easier on the body, because it encourages a net game for shorter points, and allows you to be lazy on the BH and still eke out a living.
I mean, look at Feliciano Lopez. The guy is basically asleep during his matches.
I mean, look at Feliciano Lopez. The guy is basically asleep during his matches.
Last edited:
tennis_balla
Hall of Fame
Where do you come up with this stuff?
