Do you think the single handed backhand will die out?

Gadz

Semi-Pro
Hi,

I'm just wondering in 20 years time are we going to see any professionals use a single handed backhand? I know Dimitrov uses one but alot of young modern players are adopting the two handed backhand. I read somewhere that aggasi old coach believed that if Federer switched to a two handed backhand early enough that his backhand would be even better than it is now. However, I find that hard to believe... Thoughts?
 

anubis

Hall of Fame
Hi,

I'm just wondering in 20 years time are we going to see any professionals use a single handed backhand? I know Dimitrov uses one but alot of young modern players are adopting the two handed backhand. I read somewhere that aggasi old coach believed that if Federer switched to a two handed backhand early enough that his backhand would be even better than it is now. However, I find that hard to believe... Thoughts?

No, never. The 1HBH will never die off. There's too much beauty in it. And, there's nothing wrong with it, really. Don't listen to TV commentators saying how the 2HBH is 'superior', it is not. They are just two different methods and they both have their own strengths and weaknesses.
 

gut wax

Hall of Fame
From time to time, SBH won't be used by any of top 5, yet other times a majority will. It will be a thing of beauty if the majority are all the top 3.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
No but I predict the trend is to be great at both. It will take a while but Tsonga is already implementing both as I do on a hacker level.

Of course talented two handers already have the one handed slice so they are close.
 
At the top it won't die out. Even nowadays, the top 50 of ATP has much higher percentage of 1HBHs than the lower ranks. But in the juniors, in the women's game and at the rec level the 1HBH will become marginal.
 

TennisCJC

Legend
16 of top 20 ATP are 2HBH. I think 1HBH will stick around but don't expect it to increase above say 20% of ATP in the future. More likely that percentage will go down rather than up in the future. WTA is well over 90% 2HBH and I don't expect 1 HBH to come back there either.

In past, the great attackers like Sampras, Becker, Rafter and Edberg used 1 HBH as I still think it is the better shot for transitioning to net on "fast" courts. But, with poly strings and slower courts giving more advantage to the counter punchers and baseliners, we are far less likely to see more 1 HBH at top of ATP.
 

GoudX

Professional
The 1HBH will probably stay where it is at. It offers a better weapon for dictating, but the cost is a less effective forehand. More modern technique like Gasquet and Wawrinka employ will probably push out old school technique, like Federer uses.

If this happens, then it will probably become more prominent again on clay, where return of serve is less important and topspin from far behind the court is more important.
 

ultradr

Legend
1HBH has distinct characteristics and thus it will be around because of that.

One day, the true all court tennis will come back to ATP and 1HBH will become
more popular with it for sure.
 

GuyClinch

Legend
Nah.. It won't die out - we still see pros winning with it today.. That means another group of kids who look up to Warinka or Fed..
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Maybe it will stick around due to old folkes still playing tennis.
I know at least 40 old folkes who play tennis, skills varying from 3.0 to 4.5, and ALL use 1hbh, even if they used 2hbh in their playing days 30 years previously.
 

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
What will survive - and emerge - is the ''modern'' 1-hander topspin, a-la-Wawrinka and Gasquet (to a lesser degree).

The one hander is the one shot that is really late in becoming ''modern''. The ''classic'' one-hander (staying sideways, holding your finish, using your left arm for balance, etc.) is still being taught pretty much everywhere. When coaches start to teach backhands like Wawrinka, Gasquet or Guga Kuerten, with extreme grips, body rotation, and loads of topspin, it will pick up and become fashionable again.
 
Last edited:

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
Simon's a really good player, but his lefty forehand looks kind of shaky and IMO is no better than a regular backhand.

Come on TS. Thats just baby with the bath water stuff.

I am book marking this. When you are 65 playing in Pandemonium 7 with some ripe upstart sporting 2 forehands and getting slaughtered remember this post my friend.

Actually some local players have this 2 forehand thing and I have to say that their offhand FHs are easily better than my bh which is my best groundie.

I would think the increase in reach would be worth it even if it was no better than a normal bh.

And there will be (already has) some doc who will talk about what tennis does to ones frame and how all tennis players frames are out of balance due to muscle imbalances. One has used Fed as a model.
 

Anton

Legend
At the top it won't die out. Even nowadays, the top 50 of ATP has much higher percentage of 1HBHs than the lower ranks. But in the juniors, in the women's game and at the rec level the 1HBH will become marginal.


Of course today's juniors are tomorrow's ATP players and
current ATP crop were juniors 10-20 years ago ;)
 

Avles

Hall of Fame
At the top it won't die out. Even nowadays, the top 50 of ATP has much higher percentage of 1HBHs than the lower ranks. But in the juniors, in the women's game and at the rec level the 1HBH will become marginal.

I disagree about the rec level-- I think there will always be plenty of rec players who gravitate to the 1hbh, especially those picking up the game as adults. People who have played other racquet sports, people who are strongly r (or l) hand dominant, people who favor the slice, etc.
 

BeastVolley

New User
Lol, very interesting question in its one way. No, I don't believe that the 1 BH will ever die. There will always be at least one pro player using it and then a amateur to idol that pro and end up playing just like him/her

Just like Roger Federer to Pete Sampras, Sampras was Roger's idol. Now it's Grigor Dimitrov, which he models after Federer

Tennis Player@
Tennismatchmaker.net
 

thomasferrett

Hall of Fame
The 1HBH will probably stay where it is at. It offers a better weapon for dictating, but the cost is a less effective forehand. More modern technique like Gasquet and Wawrinka employ will probably push out old school technique, like Federer uses.

If this happens, then it will probably become more prominent again on clay, where return of serve is less important and topspin from far behind the court is more important.

Federer really doesn't have a very 'old-school' backhand.

If you look at lots of his backhands they use a very Gasquet-like windshield-wiper flourish at the end, which is modern;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQjNK04BYcY#t=76

I think the weakness of Federer's backhand is that he tries to do this with a significantly less extreme grip than Gasquet has, so his wrist runs out of range-of-motion when he has to hit higher balls, typically. This results in a weaker, shorter, more attackable ball.
 

boramiNYC

Hall of Fame
Agree Fed's 1hbh is a very modern one. But Gasquet doesn't use an extreme grip. Internet has sources saying both but I'm not convinced his grip is anything other than E bh grip. His handle is modified with huge buttcap and that may contribute to his uniqueness but all the shots he makes are possible w E grip.
 

thomasferrett

Hall of Fame
Agree Fed's 1hbh is a very modern one. But Gasquet doesn't use an extreme grip. Internet has sources saying both but I'm not convinced his grip is anything other than E bh grip. His handle is modified with huge buttcap and that may contribute to his uniqueness but all the shots he makes are possible w E grip.

They are possible with an eastern grip, yes, but they are not consistently comfortable to execute with an eastern grip. I believe this is why Federer drops the ball shorter and weaker. Gasquet very often drops the ball short as well, in fact, but his backhand is similar to Nadal's forehand in that it has so much topspin it will kick forwards and upwards to compensate for the lack of depth. Federer's backhand does not have as much spin because his wrist just isn't in quite a strong enough position to snap over the ball as well as Gasqeet's is, so when it drops shorter, it is attackable.

Gasquet has a strong eastern grip with the oversize butt-cap (to further make it more extreme). Fed has a weak eastern grip. Sounds trivial, but makes a big difference to how the shot feels (small changes in backhand grip seemingly make a bigger impact on the feel of a shot than on the forehand side).
 

ultradr

Legend
Have we watched same Gasquet ?

I have NOT seen anything like Gasquest's 1 handed backhand in 25 years or so.
Gasquet OWNS all the variety of shots you can hit with single handed backhand.
I have never seen anyone who does it better.
 
Last edited:

thomasferrett

Hall of Fame
Have we watched same Gasquet ?

I have NOT seen anything like Gasquest's 1 handed backhand in 25 years or so.
Gasquet OWNS all the variety of shots you can hit with single handed backhand.
I have never seen anyone who does it better.

I think Gasquet's backhand is a bit overrated.

Complicated, circular swing path that turns into a loopy mess against high balls whereas Almagro swings directly up and forward, and can hit high balls back with pace - not only spin.

Mechanically, Wawrinka's backhand is the most unique I have ever seen. Truly like a modern forehand in reverse from the sweeping windshield-wiper supination through contact, the ability to hit in an open stance, the relatively flat swing path (that still generates a lot of topspin), and the forwards-thinking torso uncoiling (usually we are coached to PREVENT the torso from uncoiling through contact on the 1hbh whereas Wawrinka turns it into an extra power source). I hope youngsters cotton onto this style of backhand - and I think Thiem already has. I see many similarities between Wawrinka's backhand and his, and Thiem actually hits more often from an open stance.

But don't get me wrong, I think Gasquet's backhand is currently unparalleled for sheer topspin production. He uses his backhand like Nadal uses his forehand, so his bounce and angle game are ahead of any of the 1hbh'ers. Overall, I would not pick his topspin backhand as the best though. I would tie Almagro and Wawrinka in front, and him a close second.
 

Ferbious

Banned
Im 17 and i played with a 1hbh but i switched to a 2hbh becasue of the issue defending my returns and the high topspin that came from kids imitating nadal,

the 1hbh is too hard to hit above the shoulder thats the only reason it wont be as popular
 

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
the 1hbh is too hard to hit above the shoulder thats the only reason it wont be as popular

It's only too hard if you use the wrong grip (closer to continental), or if you're really small I guess. Otherwise, it's even easier than with two hands, at least from my experience.
 
Last edited:

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
Im 17 and i played with a 1hbh but i switched to a 2hbh becasue of the issue defending my returns and the high topspin that came from kids imitating nadal,

I actually prefer facing topspin players rather than hard, flat hitters who keep the ball low on my 1H-backhand.

I also return with two hands most of the time, and I don't see why there isn't more people doing this. I see absolutely no downsides to it.
 

thomasferrett

Hall of Fame
I actually prefer facing topspin players rather than hard, flat hitters who keep the ball low on my 1H-backhand.

I also return with two hands most of the time, and I don't see why there isn't more people doing this. I see absolutely no downsides to it.

Ditto, I would much rather someone try to topspin moonball my backhand rather than hitting pacey flat shots to it.

On the flip side I have seen a lot of people with 2hbh struggle to hit attacking or even deep and neutral shots when forced to hit backhands at a contact point above their heads.
 

rkelley

Hall of Fame
for the 4.0 and below, no difference between 1h and 2h... people just poke and hope.

Don't agree, at least not from 25 years ago when I played some 3.5 and 4.0 tournaments. One of my bigger strengths could be my 2hbh, which was less common back then. Opponents who served to my bh a lot, especially who tried to kick up balls high to my bh, and tried to approach on my bh got an unpleasant surprise when I could rip balls back with pace. The strategies my opponents were trying were great strategies for 3.5 and 4.0 players with 1hbhs. I used them myself against my opponents, but they didn't work too well on me.

Interestingly, where I was weak on the bh side is with players who could hit a few half decent rally balls to that side. I'd often dump one of those balls into the net.
 

rkelley

Hall of Fame
Ditto, I would much rather someone try to topspin moonball my backhand rather than hitting pacey flat shots to it.

On the flip side I have seen a lot of people with 2hbh struggle to hit attacking or even deep and neutral shots when forced to hit backhands at a contact point above their heads.

Hitting a high contact point with a 2hbh is hard for me. I like to move in and take those balls on the rise at about shoulder level and not let them get too high. You can also let them drop, but that can put you so far back in the court that you open up a lot of offensive options for your opponent.
 

Fuji

Legend
Probably not, but coaches need to start teaching a modern age single hander for it to be feasible. Definitely once coaches figure out to make the 1HBH a "winning" shot in junior tennis it will carry over better.

-Fuji
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
I certainly hope not. I highly doubt it. It is too good looking, and for some people it just feels right, while the double handed feels so foreign...
 

thomasferrett

Hall of Fame
I certainly hope not. I highly doubt it. It is too good looking, and for some people it just feels right, while the double handed feels so foreign...

I hope it won't die out (and don't think it will) - but that has nothing to do with the aesthetics of the shot.

I think the 1hbh offers more peak pace, more peak topspin (and thus more peak power), more acute potential angles and more vertical reach at the expense of accuracy, return and ability to hit on the rise.

As long as not all tennis players are the same and are allowed to express some semblance of individuality, then some, in theory, would always be more willing to accept the trade-offs of the 1hbh in order to utilize its advantages over the 2hbh.

However, if the 'tennis academies' have their way and completely dominate tennis coaching to churn out identikit players with the same technique, tactics, strengths and weaknesses as each other then, yes, the 1hbh will die out (and I'll stop watching tennis)...
 

Easy Rider

Professional
It seems like coaches are really trying to kill it but it refuses to die.

few coaches know how to teach 1HBH. Fact.
2HBH > 1HBH ... ?!
Parents want results. Fact.
Parents are not patient. Fact.
------------------------------
Lets teach the player 2HBH



(not so brutal, but you got the idea)
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
Well, I was sifting through the Macci vids and didn't see any one hander tips which is sad cause he's a quality coach. Then I watched Gasquet as a child hit perfect one handers and felt better. :)

few coaches know how to teach 1HBH. Fact.
2HBH > 1HBH ... ?!
Parents want results. Fact.
Parents are not patient. Fact.
------------------------------
Lets teach the player 2HBH



(not so brutal, but you got the idea)
 

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
This summer I went to see a top junior's tournament near where I live, and I was surprised to see at least 5-6 guys using one handers on practice courts.

Also, among the semifinalists there were two great one-handers, Tim Van Rijthoven and Akira Santillan. And the latter won the tournament.
 

GuyClinch

Legend
I think its good that we are seeing less of it. There are two many people out there in my age group with dreadful ugly one handers that would have been better off with a two hander.

For every pretty one hander there are at least a 100 guys with some ugly hack/push shot..
 
Top