1HBH - does it matter if you don't spread back you non-hitting arm?

[tank_job]

Apparently when you hit a 1hbh, coach says the non-hitting arm must be flung backwards at the same time the hitting arm is flung forwards - so you look like some humanoid eagle spreading its wings at the point of contact.

However, when I tried to do this, my backhand fell apart and I could hardly get a ball over the net.

This is frustrating because my 1hbh is my better shot and I felt like nothing was wrong with it, yet the coach said I needed to make the change anyway.

It felt like all the power was gone, because usually my chest opens up towards the net on the follow through to add a bit of power, but with the non-hitting arm being flung backwards that was impossible, and I feel like it was preventing me from using my core in the shot.

To me it doesn't make sense - I don't know how moving part of your body in the opposite direction to the momentum of the shot could impart more power to the stroke?

Should I stick with this arm flinging backwards business even though it feels unnatural to me and at the moment it is preventing me from hitting decent backhands - because it will be worth it in the end?

 

[radioavenger]

if your bh works why screw it up by doing something unnatural?
I personally leave it like Roger Federer, straight down across my body. I learnt tennis by watching videos and playing practice matches with better in the sport than me people and never cared for coaches but that is my choice.

 

[btownsoccer22]

I have a 1hbh also and I don't spread my other arm. To be honest I don't know what spreading your arm would really contribute to in the way of a better 1hbh.

I would just keep doing what you are doing.

 

[[ GTR ]]

Wawrinka doesnt do it, I dont think it is exactly necessary but does help in keeping your body from opening up too soon.

Plus the better looking backhands have the non dominant arm back for balance such as Federer, Gasquet, Haas

 

[1HBH Rocks]

You know, you don't have to exaggerate it... you can just barely move it. The point of it is to ensure that you do not open up too early and keep your upper body from falling back to compensate for your hitting arm's acceleration. Some players do it very mildly most of the time, but they ALL do it to some degree.

Look at Wawrinka... he does it only just a little, barely moving his arm back, but it still moved back a bit from his hips. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=re0qITKSZfs

 

[OldFedIsOld]

Bringing the non-dominant hand back keeps you balanced during your shot, by not doing this you are inhibiting yourself from fully driving into the ball. When you first started serving did you like the continental grip? Probably not, but you learned to use the grip and in the end it helped you develop your serve.

On a side note, remember your non-dominant hand grips the racquet throat and pulls it back. Think of it like a rubber band being pulled back and then being released, the energy from releasing it outwards will bring the non-dominant hand back naturally.

 

[tank_job]

Bringing the non-dominant hand back keeps you balanced during your shot, by not doing this you are inhibiting yourself from fully driving into the ball. When you first started serving did you like the continental grip? Probably not, but you learned to use the grip and in the end it helped you develop your serve.

On a side note, remember your non-dominant hand grips the racquet throat and pulls it back. Think of it like a rubber band being pulled back and then being released, the energy from releasing it outwards will bring the non-dominant hand back naturally.

I definitely use the non-dominant arm to pull back the racket and then sort of sling-shot the dominant arm forward to contact from there - but I don't purposefully fling the non-dominant arm further back after letting go of the racket like a 'reverse fly' (shown below - skip to 48 seconds into it);

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnXb1dh_RjQ

I dunno what my non-dominant arm arm does after letting go of the racket - probably something similar to Wawrinka or Gasquet's slight backwards motion - but I know it's definitely not as exaggerated as that reverse fly that my coach wants me to do. I feel the reverse fly motion saps energy out of the shot instead of contributing to it.

 

[OldFedIsOld]

I definitely use the non-dominant arm to pull back the racket and then sort of sling-shot the dominant arm forward to contact from there - but I don't purposefully fling the non-dominant arm further back after letting go of the racket like a 'reverse fly' (shown below - skip to 48 seconds into it);

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnXb1dh_RjQ

I dunno what my non-dominant arm arm does after letting go of the racket - probably something similar to Wawrinka or Gasquet's slight backwards motion - but I know it's definitely not as exaggerated as that reverse fly that my coach wants me to do. I feel the reverse fly motion saps energy out of the shot instead of contributing to it.

Low balls where you bend your knees I guess you could do without the reverse fly sort of motion, but when you get a shoulder or higher ball than you need to drive into it. Then you will probably feel the reverse fly.

 

[BevelDevil]

The more you open up your body, the less you need to check back with your off arm.

Wawrinka, Gasquet, and Garcia-Lopez open up their bodies a lot.

Also, the more extreme your grip, the more natural it will seem to open your body.

Your coach may just be robotically telling you to follow the textbook without seeing you're opening up your body.

It's good you are questioning your coach's advice. Ultimately, teachers are there to help you teach yourself. Maybe you should openly discuss this with your coach.

I feel the reverse fly motion saps energy out of the shot instead of contributing to it.

Players with big reverse flys, like Feder and Dimitrov, generate much of their power through a whipping action, a relaxed arm, and supination ("rolling the wrist over"). For this kind of stroke, you need a more abrupt weight transfer and significant upwards thrust with your front leg. It is also important to note that both Fed and Dimitrov don't straighten their hitting arm until midway through their forward swing. This helps them accelerate the racket more.

 

[Tenisfan]

Apparently when you hit a 1hbh, coach says the non-hitting arm must be flung backwards at the same time the hitting arm is flung forwards - so you look like some humanoid eagle spreading its wings at the point of contact.

However, when I tried to do this, my backhand fell apart and I could hardly get a ball over the net.

This is frustrating because my 1hbh is my better shot and I felt like nothing was wrong with it, yet the coach said I needed to make the change anyway.

It felt like all the power was gone, because usually my chest opens up towards the net on the follow through to add a bit of power, but with the non-hitting arm being flung backwards that was impossible, and I feel like it was preventing me from using my core in the shot.

To me it doesn't make sense - I don't know how moving part of your body in the opposite direction to the momentum of the shot could impart more power to the stroke?

Should I stick with this arm flinging backwards business even though it feels unnatural to me and at the moment it is preventing me from hitting decent backhands - because it will be worth it in the end?

The non-dominant arm plays a critical role - check out Henin, Federer, Guga, Mauresmo, Rafter. Squeeze your shoulder blades together as you finish upwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdDwMj3_WMA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bByvWPmMZ_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbvPiz6cXyk&feature=related

 

[ace_pace]

My coach told me that the non-dominant hand's purpose is to guide the racket (hold onto the racket during the swing all the way to the hips). Then you let it go and it will naturally spread like wings.

 

[BevelDevil]

OP, if you wish, you can still do the reverse fly yet still open your body by:

1. delaying your "fly" until after your body has opened. A way to time this is to simply let go of your racket a little later, then flinging your off arm out.

2. instead of flinging your off hand to the side, you can fling it more downwards. This will reduce the rotation negation.

So the affect of the fly depends on timing and angle.

The non-dominant arm plays a critical role - check out Henin, Federer, Guga, Mauresmo, Rafter. Squeeze your shoulder blades together as you finish upwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdDwMj3_WMA

Lol, that Henin video shows how much she doesn't do the reverse fly. I never noticed that til now. Her left hand pretty much stays bent and at her side.

Here's what an extreme reverse fly looks like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uVCOQY50OA


Henin and Mauresmo tend to open their bodies more than Fed/Dimitrov/Kuerten, so therefore their arms won't do the reverse fly as much, or at all. Mauresmo opens more than Henin.

Here's Mauresmo opening her body, with zero reverse fly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYlGVIvkn5s#t=0m30s

OP's coach might tell her she's doing it wrong.

Then you let it go and it will naturally spread like wings.

I don't think this is true for a lot of people.

 

[tank_job]

Bevildevil, tbh, my 'reverse fly' will probably look quite abbreviated - probably not as abbreviated as Mauresmo in that vid you linked (where Mauresmo's non dominant hand actually seems to be coming through with the rest of her torso) - but similar to Wawrinka, Henin or Gasquet.

Dimitrov's reverse fly follow-through is so exaggerated - you wonder if it's hindering his recovery to the next shot if he doesn't hit an outright winner!!

Realizing some top pro's do not do the reverse fly, I may not be so inclined to add it to my stroke as it will be an extra thing to think about and will result in my f'ing up much more than if I didn't think of it. I may just let my non-dominant arm do whatever it does naturally after letting go of the racket.

You said that the grip of the backhand makes a difference - my bh grip is the base of index knuckle is on bevel 8, and heel pad is either on bevel 1 or the ridge between bevel 8 and 1. I dunno, does that make it a semi-western 1hbh grip?

 

[Cheetah]

weird grip.

 

[Korso]

The left hand keeps balance in your swing. Wether you bring it back or keep it to your side, the left hand needs a purpose. Go with what is more natural for you.

 

[tennis_balla]

The left hand keeps balance in your swing. Wether you bring it back or keep it to your side, the left hand needs a purpose. Go with what is more natural for you.

Correct. The non-dominant hand plays a key role in every shot you hit in tennis.

In terms of the one-handed backhand its up to you how much you want to bring the non-dominant hand back after contact, as I do not believe it to be a black or white issue although the use of that hand is key in executing a well struck one-hander.

This is difficult to give an accurate tip because there is no video of you hitting your backhand so your coach could be dead on, but you're just not liking the change because its different.

 

[connico]

Video yourself and see what your arm does, you will discover that it does something similar if not eagle. Its more than likely achieving the same thing.

At the end of the day, your body will react naturally. If naturally it doesn't do it and your hitting a good backhand than do it. But in most cases your going to get more if your letting your non dominate arm free itself up and eagle out.

 

[BevelDevil]

my bh grip is the base of index knuckle is on bevel 8, and heel pad is either on bevel 1 or the ridge between bevel 8 and 1. I dunno, does that make it a semi-western 1hbh grip?

You probably shouldn't use this grip. It is very awkward an no pro uses this. I think it's a little disturbing how your coach hasn't caught this.

I suggest you consider moving your knuckle forward and your heel pad back.
Try out the "Extreme Eastern" that Henin, Kuerten and (I think) Garcia-Lopez use, among other players. Put your index knuckle on the ridge between 8 and 1, heel pad somewhere between 7 and 8 ("7.5").

Other grips:

The standard modern Eastern grip (like Federer): knuckle bevel 1, heel pad bevel 8.

A more "hammered" Eastern grip (probably Gasquet): knuckle bevel 1, heel pad 7.5.


I think any of these grips would be an improvement over your current one. And I think the improvements would come quickly.

Also, if you are going to move your heel pad to 7.5, you should consider widening your buttcap by wrapping it in 3 extra layers of over grip. Otherwise your heelpad may begin to slip.


Just curious: Where did you learn the grip you are using now?

 

[tank_job]

Beveldevil, I am having trouble with the 'heel pad' terminology, the heel pad of the hand is a large area and could be said to be covering a variety of different bevels of the racket. The base of the index knuckle is specific, smaller area and I can say that the base of my index knuckle is definitely on bevil 8.

You are mentioning that various players have their heel pads more anticlockwise on the racket than their index knuckles!! To me that is anatomically impossible - which suggests that we are calling the 'heel pad' different things.

I thought that on a righty 1hbh topspin grip - hammer grip = the index knuckle and heel pad are on the same bevel (eg. both on bevel 1), and pistol grip = the index knuckle is shifted more anticlockwise than the heel pad (eg. index knuckle on bevel 8, heel pad on bevel 1).

I can't imagine the index knuckle being more clockwise compared to the heel pad [eg. index knuckle on bevel 1, heel pad on bevel 8] because my hand doesn't even physically bend that way for a backhand grip because the thumb gets in the way. And that is what you're calling a 'pistol grip', correct? As I said, I think I have a different (wrong?) idea of what the 'heel pad' is to you.

All I know is, to find my grip, I have a hammer grip full western forehand, and when I find my backhand grip from the forehand grip, I shift the front part of my hand (including the index knuckle) one bevel anticlockwise so it is now on bevel 8, not bevel 1 - but I leave the back of my palm where it was for the forehand grip. This is what I thought was a pistol grip semi-western backhand grip?

 

[Cheetah]

Beveldevil, I am having trouble with the 'heel pad' terminology, the heel pad of the hand is a large area and could be said to be covering a variety of different bevels of the racket. The base of the index knuckle is specific, smaller area and I can say that the base of my index knuckle is definitely on bevil 8.

You are mentioning that various players have their heel pads more anticlockwise on the racket than their index knuckles!! To me that is anatomically impossible - which suggests that we are calling the 'heel pad' different things.

I thought that on a righty 1hbh topspin grip - hammer grip = the index knuckle and heel pad are on the same bevel (eg. both on bevel 1), and pistol grip = the index knuckle is shifted more anticlockwise than the heel pad (eg. index knuckle on bevel 8, heel pad on bevel 1).

I can't imagine the index knuckle being more clockwise compared to the heel pad [eg. index knuckle on bevel 1, heel pad on bevel 8] because my hand doesn't even physically bend that way for a backhand grip because the thumb gets in the way. And that is what you're calling a 'pistol grip', correct? As I said, I think I have a different (wrong?) idea of what the 'heel pad' is to you.

All I know is, to find my grip, I have a hammer grip full western forehand, and when I find my backhand grip from the forehand grip, I shift the front part of my hand (including the index knuckle) one bevel anticlockwise so it is now on bevel 8, not bevel 1 - but I leave the back of my palm where it was for the forehand grip. This is what I thought was a pistol grip semi-western backhand grip?

What bevildevil said is correct. I can't even hold the racquet the way you describe w/o pain.

 

[tank_job]

Are we describing the bevels the same way?

If you take a racket, hold it out in front of you so that the butt cap is directly facing you (and the beam of the racket - NOT the strings - is facing the sky), the top bevel is bevel number 1, then one anticlockwise from that is bevel 8, right?

So a hammer grip full eastern 1hbh grip would be all of your knuckles over bevel 1. (I'll stop talking about the heel pad, cuz I'm pretty sure I'm referring to the wrong thing - I'll talk about the bases of each knuckle so I can't go wrong...)

My backhand grip is that my knuckles are spread diagonally so that the knuckles of the ring and pinky fingers are over bevel 1, the knuckle of the middle finger is over the ridge between bevel 1 and bevel 8, and the knuckle of the index finger is over bevel 8. As far as I understand it, if the knuckles of all fingers are on same bevel, it is a 'hammer' grip, and if the knuckle of index finger is spread slightly anticlockwise from the knuckles of other fingers, it is a 'pistol' grip? So I have a pistol grip...?

And it really causes no pain or even mild discomfort whatsoever to hold the racket like this!!

 

[BevelDevil]

I am having trouble with the 'heel pad' terminology, the heel pad of the hand is a large area and could be said to be covering a variety of different bevels of the racket.

Black dot is the heel pad

Let's use this definition.

I thought that on a righty 1hbh topspin grip - hammer grip = the index knuckle and heel pad are on the same bevel (eg. both on bevel 1),

That still wouldn't be a hammer grip. That's more of a "classic" grip which would probably make for a mild pistol grip.

and pistol grip = the index knuckle is shifted more anticlockwise than the heel pad (eg. index knuckle on bevel 8, heel pad on bevel 1).

This would be more of an extreme pistol grip.

Someone recently posted a video and picture of his pistol grip. Here's how I responded:

^^^ pistol grip

On a full hammer grip, you index knuckle and little knuckle would be lined up on the same bevel. However, no one advocates that because a full hammer is awkward.

However, people come close: My index knuckle on bevel 1 and little knuckle on 1.5, my heel pad around 7.5 Though I would still classify this as "hammer."


So using the "heel pad" terminology above, what is your backhand grip like?

 

[tank_job]

OK, thanks, now I know what the heel pad is!! My heel pad is on the ridge between bevels 6 and 7.

My pinky and ring finger knuckles are over bevel 1, my middle finger knuckle is over the ridge between bevels 1 and 8, and my index finger knuckle is over bevel 8...

What would you call that?

 

[BevelDevil]

That's a pretty extreme grip. I guess "semi-western" is a good description.

No wonder you open up so much. If this grip works for you, then that's fine. But I encourage you to experiment with moving everything forward/upwards by a 1/2 bevel. So index knuckle on ridge 8/1, heel pad around 7.

Btw, how tall are you?

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

...

Here's Mauresmo opening her body, with zero reverse fly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYlGVIvkn5s#t=0m30s

OP's coach might tell her she's doing it wrong...

She does look off balance on that one -- her timing (and position) might not have been ideal. Look at her very next backhand return (about the 40 sec mark). Her left arm does move backward to limit her torso rotation. Her upper body rotation may also depend on whether she is hitting x-court or straight.

 

[tank_job]

That's a pretty extreme grip. I guess "semi-western" is a good description.

No wonder you open up so much. If this grip works for you, then that's fine. But I encourage you to experiment with moving everything forward/upwards by a 1/2 bevel. So index knuckle on ridge 8/1, heel pad around 7.

Btw, how tall are you?

I'm only average height - you're probably thinking I probably have to hit high balls all the time, but although I'm more comfortable with that than low balls, most of the people around my area are the old-skool flat hitting/low slicing sort, so I get tons of opportunities to practice hitting backhand topspin off of slice and low balls.

The height the ball comes in at is not so much a problem, but I find that WIDE balls are the death of my 'semi-western' backhand grip.

So when I'm pulled very wide and don't want to hit a defensive slice, I change my grip to a conservative eastern backhand grip, and give it a flat slap in desperation.

Same thing when I'm pulled out very wide on the forehand - if the opponent is at the net and I can't be too defensive I'll change my western forehand grip to an eastern forehand grip just so I can get a better 'desperation slap' at the ball.

Is it legitimate for extreme grippers to make changes like these with desperate shots?

 

[Tenisfan]

OP, if you wish, you can still do the reverse fly yet still open your body by:

1. delaying your "fly" until after your body has opened. A way to time this is to simply let go of your racket a little later, then flinging your off arm out.

2. instead of flinging your off hand to the side, you can fling it more downwards. This will reduce the rotation negation.

So the affect of the fly depends on timing and angle.




Lol, that Henin video shows how much she doesn't do the reverse fly. I never noticed that til now. Her left hand pretty much stays bent and at her side.

Here's what an extreme reverse fly looks like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uVCOQY50OA


Henin and Mauresmo tend to open their bodies more than Fed/Dimitrov/Kuerten, so therefore their arms won't do the reverse fly as much, or at all. Mauresmo opens more than Henin.

Here's Mauresmo opening her body, with zero reverse fly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYlGVIvkn5s#t=0m30s

OP's coach might tell her she's doing it wrong.




I don't think this is true for a lot of people.

You missed my point. I gave several examples which are not identical but which all use the principle of opening up the chest by squeezing the shoulder blades together. Look and you will see that Henin and Mauresmo surely do this. Even among the men shown as examples they sometimes have the arm go back more or less, up or down, elbow bent or straight - that's not the common point. Depending on the overall movement of the body during each unique shot the non-dominant arm will be somewhat differently placed, but the common denominator is that the chest expands and the shoulder blades squeeze together.

 

[Tenisfan]

Here's Mauresmo opening her body, with zero reverse fly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYlGVIvkn5s#t=0m30s

OP's coach might tell her she's doing it wrong.

This is not a good example - 2 of of 4 shots are slices, which have different technique altogether

 

[OldFedIsOld]

Here's Mauresmo opening her body, with zero reverse fly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYlGVIvkn5s#t=0m30s

OP's coach might tell her she's doing it wrong.

In matches she sometimes does the reverse fly, not easily seen because she rotates her a body a lot more than other pros do. Personally I would rather have a backhand like Dimitrov's and Wawrinka's rather than Mauresmo, more aesthetically pleasing and looks a lot more stable.

 

[tank_job]

In matches she sometimes does the reverse fly, not easily seen because she rotates her a body a lot more than other pros do. Personally I would rather have a backhand like Dimitrov's and Wawrinka's rather than Mauresmo, more aesthetically pleasing and looks a lot more stable.

haha, what, you choose your shots based on aesthetic value?

 

[Tenisfan]

You said that the grip of the backhand makes a difference - my bh grip is the base of index knuckle is on bevel 8, and heel pad is either on bevel 1 or the ridge between bevel 8 and 1. I dunno, does that make it a semi-western 1hbh grip?

You can put your thumb on the back of the strings, then the back of the handle to find the 1hbh grip placement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQRgnqWtUOY&feature=plcp

 

[OldFedIsOld]

haha, what, you choose your shots based on aesthetic value?

Aesthetics = smooth flowing and effortless, why not?

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

To the OP: I would try to learn the technique that your coach is having you learn. Once you learn this, you will not need to hit every BH that way. You will eventually find some situations were it works quite well and other situations where you are better off hitting it differently.

If you are losing power with this new technique, your timing or mechanics are probably not yet correct.

The non-dominant arm plays a critical role - check out Henin, Federer, Guga, Mauresmo, Rafter. Squeeze your shoulder blades together as you finish upwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdDwMj3_WMA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bByvWPmMZ_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbvPiz6cXyk&feature=related

Yes, the left (non-dom arm) is used for more than just balance. The shoulder blades are squeezed together for the reverse fly action -- and the chest muscles are stretched while the upper back muscles are contracted.

This action of the left arm (for a righty), keeps the back shoulder back -- this limits the hip and torso rotation in the mid and latter parts of the stroke. There is usually plenty of coil for the prep phase of the BH. The body then quickly uncoils to start the forward swing.

Once the forward swing is underway, the hips and torso stop abruptly (or slows down considerably) so that the kinetic energy is completely transferred to the should/arm and racket. If the torso continues to rotate, the transfer is not as complete -- however, the residual rotation can still be utilized -- but it may not be quite as efficient as a complete transfer.

In strokes where the back shoulder/arm is attached to the racket (the FH and 2-handed BH), the rotation of the torso should continue because the back shoulder needs to come around to execute the shot properly. This is not the case for the 1-handed BH.

Even tho' the back shoulder stops moving when the torso rotation ceases, the front shoulder can still continue forward and around by expanding the chest and squeezing the shoulder blades together. You can see this action quite well with Federer, Gasquet, Henin and Dimitrov.

Some players are able to leave the left arm where it lets go of the racket (rather than flinging it backward) and still limit their body rotation. This would still yield a fairly complete kinetic transfer. However, they might not get quite a much upper back contraction (and chest expansion).

Sometimes you will see a player rotate the upper body somewhat more for x-court shots than other shots. At other times, you may see the upper body continue to rotate in order to quickly move to the recovery (ready) position.

 

[Tenisfan]

Aesthetics = smooth flowing and effortless, why not?

I agree! Many people model their shots after their favorite pros. If they can identify and duplicate the technique that is great. If they can't pull it off due to their conformation, fitness, etc. then they can find another pro to emulate that is a better match to their capabilities. The idea is to experiment until you find what works and feels best for you.

 

[tank_job]

To the OP: I would try to learn the technique that your coach is having you learn. Once you learn this, you will not need to hit every BH that way. You will eventually find some situations were it works quite well and other situations where you are better off hitting it differently.

If you are losing power with this new technique, your timing or mechanics are probably not yet correct.




Yes, the left (non-dom arm) is used for more than just balance. The shoulder blades are squeezed together for the reverse fly action -- and the chest muscles are stretched while the upper back muscles are contracted.

This action of the left arm (for a righty), keeps the back shoulder back -- this limits the hip and torso rotation in the mid and latter parts of the stroke. There is usually plenty of coil for the prep phase of the BH. The body then quickly uncoils to start the forward swing.

Once the forward swing is underway, the hips and torso stop abruptly (or slows down considerably) so that the kinetic energy is completely transferred to the should/arm and racket. If the torso continues to rotate, the transfer is not as complete -- however, the residual rotation can still be utilized -- but it may not be quite as efficient as a complete transfer.

In strokes where the back shoulder/arm is attached to the racket (the FH and 2-handed BH), the rotation of the torso should continue because the back shoulder needs to come around to execute the shot properly. This is not the case for the 1-handed BH.

Even tho' the back shoulder stops moving when the torso rotation ceases, the front shoulder can still continue forward and around by expanding the chest and squeezing the shoulder blades together. You can see this action quite well with Federer, Gasquet, Henin and Dimitrov.

Some players are able to leave the left arm where it lets go of the racket (rather than flinging it backward) and still limit their body rotation. This would still yield a fairly complete kinetic transfer. However, they might not get quite a much upper back contraction (and chest expansion).

Sometimes you will see a player rotate the upper body somewhat more for x-court shots than other shots. At other times, you may see the upper body continue to rotate in order to quickly move to the recovery (ready) position.

Thanks for the post.

You seem speak authoritatively on the subject of 'kinetic transfer' - who have you heard it from that kinetic transfer on the 1hbh is only complete if the torso is not allowed to rotate vs if the torso is allowed to rotate towards the net on the follow-through?

I get that you obtain an extra bit of range-of-motion (ROM) if you squeeze the right shoulder blade back at the completion of the stroke so the chest 'expands' - but the non-dominant arm being flung backwards will not make a difference to the ROM of the right shoulder since you can retract one shoulder blade without retracting the other... And surely the squeezing of the shoulder blades would create a very minimal bit of extra ROM anyhow?

By contrast, rotating the torso towards the net will create a significant addition of ROM?

From what I've read on this thread, the role of the non-dominant arm being flung back is to prevent rotation of the torso, but to me, it seems intuitive that you will get more, not less power from a shot if your torso is allowed to rotate with your arm and shoulder, regardless of whether you're playing a shot where the dominant shoulder starts facing away from the ball (2hbh and forehand) or if it starts facing towards the ball (1hbh).

I could understand your argument if you said that flinging the arm back sacrifices power for control, but you're telling me it actually adds to the power...

EDIT: oh, yeh, I should add that the guy telling me to add this reverse fly motion is not technically a coach, he is just a decent player who uses a 1hbh himself. He gets paid to supervise hitting sessions when the coach is absent. I'm not sure if that makes him a 'coach' or not. The actual coach himself hasn't said anything about my backhand, only my forehand!!

 

[Cheetah]

Thanks for the post.

You seem speak authoritatively on the subject of 'kinetic transfer' - who have you heard it from that kinetic transfer on the 1hbh is only complete if the torso is not allowed to rotate vs if the torso is allowed to rotate towards the net on the follow-through?

I get that you obtain an extra bit of range-of-motion (ROM) if you squeeze the right shoulder blade back at the completion of the stroke so the chest 'expands' - but the non-dominant arm being flung backwards will not make a difference to the ROM of the right shoulder since you can retract one shoulder blade without retracting the other... And surely the squeezing of the shoulder blades would create a very minimal bit of extra ROM anyhow?

By contrast, rotating the torso towards the net will create a significant addition of ROM?

From what I've read on this thread, the role of the non-dominant arm being flung back is to prevent rotation of the torso, but to me, it seems intuitive that you will get more, not less power from a shot if your torso is allowed to rotate with your arm and shoulder, regardless of whether you're playing a shot where the dominant shoulder starts facing away from the ball (2hbh and forehand) or if it starts facing towards the ball (1hbh).

I could understand your argument if you said that flinging the arm back sacrifices power for control, but you're telling me it actually adds to the power...

physics. kinetic chain. one link fires then completes and energy is transferred. that's the most efficient way.
can you crack a whip by moving your hand fast and continuously moving your hand? no. the hand stops. energy transfers to the next segment of the whip. that segment stops and transfers to the next. the end result is a crack. if there is no 'separation' of links there will be no crack of the whip.
same principal for a fh and a serve and so on and so on. if you keep rotating you be one of those ppl who 'over rotate' and have weak shots. look at fed's fh. his torso stops rotating when it's square to the net and then the arm flies around.

 

[tank_job]

physics. kinetic chain. one link fires then completes and energy is transferred. that's the most efficient way.
can you crack a whip by moving your hand fast and continuously moving your hand? no. the hand stops. energy transfers to the next segment of the whip. that segment stops and transfers to the next. the end result is a crack. if there is no 'separation' of links there will be no crack of the whip.
same principal for a fh and a serve and so on and so on. if you keep rotating you be one of those ppl who 'over rotate' and have weak shots. look at fed's fh. his torso stops rotating when it's square to the net and then the arm flies around.

ok, but if you hit the 1hbh in a closed stance, your chest faces the side wall, then your non-dominant hand doing the reverse fly stops your torso from rotating at all, so where has the kinetic energy from the torso even been generated from in the first place to be passed on to the hitting arm?

Seems to me that would just be 'arming' the shot.

Was I wrong in thinking that in all shots, the torso should be rotating through the point of contact?

Would you say that over-rotating or under-rotating the torso is more the common error of rec players?

 

[Cheetah]

your chest should start facing the back fence on a 1hbh

 

[Netspirit]

^ Not if you plan to hit cross-court. Too much rotation if you start completely backwards, or too little power if you do not over-rotate (because you would be meeting the ball out in front at the end of your radius where the shoulder anatomy starts to slow you down).

 

[BevelDevil]

You missed my point. I gave several examples which are not identical but which all use the principle of opening up the chest by squeezing the shoulder blades together.

But the topic of this thread isn't what the shoulder blades are doing, it's what the left arm is doing. Yes, everyone squeezes their shoulder blades together, I'm not contesting that.

What I'm talking about is the general principal that the more you want to open your body at contact, the less you need to check your rotation with your left arm. Is anyone here disputing this?

The position of the left arm indicates how much checking you are trying to do.

but to me, it seems intuitive that you will get more, not less power from a shot if your torso is allowed to rotate with your arm and shoulder, regardless of whether you're playing a shot where the dominant shoulder starts facing away from the ball (2hbh and forehand) or if it starts facing towards the ball (1hbh).

I could understand your argument if you said that flinging the arm back sacrifices power for control, but you're telling me it actually adds to the power...

Don't get bogged down in this debate. If you're using a semi-western backhand grip then much of this talk doesn't really apply to you.

Your extreme grip typically means you will have to open up more, thus reverse fly less (or not at all).

Keep in mind that Dimitrov uses a very mild Eastern grip. This means he is making contact with the ball closer to the body, thus making it much more important to avoid over-rotation.

The actual coach himself hasn't said anything about my backhand, only my forehand!!

Maybe that means your backhand is decent and doesn't need changing.

This is not a good example - 2 of of 4 shots are slices, which have different technique altogether

Watch the whole Henin video. On most of her topspin shots her left hand stays up at her side.

Compare that with a Federer warm up video. Most of his shots his arm goes back.

Yes, there are always exceptions, but the difference in tendencies between the two is clear.

Seems to me that would just be 'arming' the shot.

Don't compare your stroke with Federer/Dimitrov type swings. Your stroke is completely different.

But if you want to understand, Fed is basically flinging his arm at the ball. So when he checks his rotation, his arm is already flying towards the target. There's no need for further rotation of his body.

Think of it like throwing a frisbee. You don't need full rotation to throw a frisbee well.


But like I said, a SW backhand stroke is a different creature. Since the SW backhand is very rare (no pro I know if uses it), much of the advice people give you either won't apply or will have to be adjusted to account for your grip. So make sure the advice you take accounts for the fact you are using this very extreme, and unusual grip.

 

[Cheetah]

^ Not if you plan to hit cross-court. Too much rotation if you start completely backwards, or too little power if you do not over-rotate (because you would be meeting the ball out in front at the end of your radius where the shoulder anatomy starts to slow you down).

disagree. the chest will still face the back fence at the start. i didnt say 'completely backwards'.

can you show me a video of a pro w/ a 1hbh in a normal hitting situation going cc that doesn't start facing the back fence? I say you can't.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

...
This would be more of an extreme pistol grip.

Someone recently posted a video and picture of his pistol grip. Here's how I responded:

^^^ pistol grip

On a full hammer grip, you index knuckle and little knuckle would be lined up on the same bevel. However, no one advocates that because a full hammer is awkward.

However, people come close: My index knuckle on bevel 1 and little knuckle on 1.5, my heel pad around 7.5 Though I would still classify this as "hammer."

The terminology here appears to be incorrect. The hammer and pistol grips are variations of the continental grip (bevel 2), not the Eastern BH grip (bevel 1). The 2nd (modern) grip that BD indicates is still not quite a SW Bh grip (bevel8). It is a bevel 1 variation of the Eastern Bh grip. Image from Mountain Ghost:

.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Note that Tennis Magazine calls out the bevel designations differently. However, they placement of the hand (base index knuckle) is consistent with common usage. As they show it, the image on the left is the standard Eastern Bh grip and the image on the right is the SW Bh (extreme Eastern) grip.

As I said in the previous post, the hammer grip is a bevel 2 grip -- the continental grip (or a variation of the conti grip). Think about it. When you wield a hammer , your base index knuckle would not be on the top. Placing it on the top would make hammering very awkward. The index knuckle is shifted somewhat to the side -- as it could be for the Continental grip. This is how the conti grip became to be know as the hammer or chopper grip.

I am unsure about the origin of the pistol grip terminology. I don't know anyone who uses the term and I don't believe its usage is widespread. I believe it is more commonly used to describe a table tennis grip. This makes more sense for ping pong than it does for court tennis.

 

[Torres]

Apparently when you hit a 1hbh, coach says the non-hitting arm must be flung backwards at the same time the hitting arm is flung forwards - so you look like some humanoid eagle spreading its wings at the point of contact.

However, when I tried to do this, my backhand fell apart and I could hardly get a ball over the net.

This is frustrating because my 1hbh is my better shot and I felt like nothing was wrong with it, yet the coach said I needed to make the change anyway.

It felt like all the power was gone, because usually my chest opens up towards the net on the follow through to add a bit of power, but with the non-hitting arm being flung backwards that was impossible, and I feel like it was preventing me from using my core in the shot.

To me it doesn't make sense - I don't know how moving part of your body in the opposite direction to the momentum of the shot could impart more power to the stroke?

Should I stick with this arm flinging backwards business even though it feels unnatural to me and at the moment it is preventing me from hitting decent backhands - because it will be worth it in the end?

You don't say what level you play at, but the last thing I would be worrying about is the finish on the non-dominant arm. There are far more important things to practice and focus on with the 1HB.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuBRallEByc&feature=related

 

[Larrysümmers]

its something that should come naturally. i just kind of happens. forcing yourself to do this/ thinking about it, will eff up your shot

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Thanks for the post.

You seem speak authoritatively on the subject of 'kinetic transfer' - who have you heard it from that kinetic transfer on the 1hbh is only complete if the torso is not allowed to rotate vs if the torso is allowed to rotate towards the net on the follow-through?

I get that you obtain an extra bit of range-of-motion (ROM) if you squeeze the right shoulder blade back at the completion of the stroke so the chest 'expands' - but the non-dominant arm being flung backwards will not make a difference to the ROM of the right shoulder since you can retract one shoulder blade without retracting the other... And surely the squeezing of the shoulder blades would create a very minimal bit of extra ROM anyhow?

As Cheetah has already discussed, the complete kinetic transfer is what physics tells us. I learned about the kinetic chain from another coach in the 1980s. He is the first one I heard speaking of the kinetic chain. Jack Gropel also studied & wrote about the subject extensively in the 80s and 90s.

I think you misinterpreted what I said about the role of the non-dom arm. It does not increase the ROM of the front shoulder. The back arm action facilitates stopping the back shoulder and rotation of the body during the forward swing. Squeezing the shoulder blades will increase ROM of the front shoulder if the back shoulder action is halted.

Now if the back arm does not move backward, it is still possible to stop the action of the back shoulder. You can leave the back arm where that hand released from the racket and still abruptly stop the body rotation. If you have a vigorous swing, the front shoulder can still achieve a full range of motion. In this case the dominant arm pecs stretch and the shoulder blade contraction is less. While some players (like Henin) can do this, many others will continue their body rotation during the forward swing if they do not employ the reverse fly action.

With Henin's extreme Eastern (SW) grip, you do see her torso open up a bit more than Federer and others do. However, she still limits/stops her torso rotation during the forward swing to contact much/most of the time. You will sometimes see her torso rotate again well after the contact -- near the end of her follow thru. However, her torso has usually stopped (or slowed considerably) prior to contact,during the forward swing. Her post-contact rotation is often her extreme front shoulder action pulling her torso around. This action also serves to get her back to a recovery/ready position.

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqBEErW0vTA&t=2m

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdDwMj3_WMA&t=52s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqBEErW0vTA&t=1m

 

[tank_job]

As Cheetah has already discussed, the complete kinetic transfer is what physics tells us. I learned about the kinetic chain from another coach in the 1980s. He is the first one I heard speaking of the kinetic chain. Jack Gropel also studied & wrote about the subject extensively in the 80s and 90s.

I think you misinterpreted what I said about the role of the non-dom arm. It does not increase the ROM of the front shoulder. The back arm action facilitates stopping the back shoulder and rotation of the body during the forward swing. Squeezing the shoulder blades will increase ROM of the front shoulder if the back shoulder action is halted.

Now if the back arm does not move backward, it is still possible to stop the action of the back shoulder. You can leave the back arm where that hand released from the racket and still abruptly stop the body rotation. If you have a vigorous swing, the front shoulder can still achieve a full range of motion. In this case the dominant arm pecs stretch and the shoulder blade contraction is less. While some players (like Henin) can do this, many others will continue their body rotation during the forward swing if they do not employ the reverse fly action.

With Henin's extreme Eastern (SW) grip, you do see her torso open up a bit more than Federer and others do. However, she still limits/stops her torso rotation during the forward swing to contact much/most of the time. You will sometimes see her torso rotate again well after the contact -- near the end of her follow thru. However, her torso has usually stopped (or slowed considerably) prior to contact,during the forward swing. Her post-contact rotation is often her extreme front shoulder action pulling her torso around. This action also serves to get her back to a recovery/ready position.

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqBEErW0vTA&t=2m

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdDwMj3_WMA&t=52s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqBEErW0vTA&t=1m

Thanks, ok, but rotating the torso through to just before contact contact, then stopping it rotating just before contact and letting the arm swing through, then continuing to rotate it after contact seems to me to be WAY too much to think about, and I don't even see how it would be possible without having a very jerky-looking swing.

I think people just have to swing naturally by rotating their torso through the shot (so they can at least use the whole body and not just the arm in their shots) and just hope that all this stuff is happening?

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ It's not something that you really need to think about at all. And furthermore, the torso does not stop rotating just before contact. It stops a bit earlier in forward swing.

All you really need to do is practice the upper body halt during the forward swing (in order to facilitate the complete kinetic transfer that I talked about). If the torso resumes its rotation on a vigorous follow-thru, that is fine. If it does not resume its rotation, that is fine as well. No conscious complex thought processes required to execute the stroke.

I suggest you study the videos provided if you want to master the technique.
.

 

[enishi1357]

you don't hit with topspin, do you?

 

[OldFedIsOld]

you don't hit with topspin, do you?

Technically every shot(excluding slices) has topspin on it, some more than others. Though when I flatten out the backhand I still extend my non-dominant hand.

Spread your wings like an eagle and you will hit a really good backhand.