Federer will be the last player to win a Grand Slam with a one-handed backhand?

[passive_aggressive]

*Note this would not include if 'social one-handed-backhanders' such as Tsonga manage to win a slam (lol at the thought of THAT happening).

I'm asking if a NEW slam champion such as Gasquet or Almagro, or in about 40 years, someone completely new who no-one has ever heard of (and probably hasn't been born yet) will ever emerge?

I think no.

In the whole history of tennis from now on until the end of time, Federer will be the last player to ever win a slam with a one-handed backhand. Heck, I'm pretty sure in 5 years, pro's will be using forehands off both wings.

The one-handed backhand cannot be used by weak juniors (which is important because to be a pro you need to practice 10 hours a day from the age of 2) and does not offer a single advantage compared to 2 hands on the backhand.

2-handed backhand is better at high, low and wide balls.
2-handed take-back to drop shot/slice offers more deception.
2-handed backhand offers more spin and/or drive depending on which one you like.
2-handed backhand offers more stability and directional control.
2-handed backhand is infinitely better at returning fast serves and kick serves.
2-handed backhand offers more natural transition to net for volleying. But who the heck wants to volley today anyway?

 

[TheOneHander]

2-handed backhand is better at high, low and wide balls.
2-handed take-back to drop shot/slice offers more deception.
2-handed backhand offers more spin and/or drive depending on which one you like.
2-handed backhand offers more stability and directional control.
2-handed backhand is infinitely better at returning fast serves and kick serves.
2-handed backhand offers more natural transition to net for volleying. But who the heck wants to volley today anyway?

Reading the bolded material nearly made me have an aneurysm.

Back to the cave with you...

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

One star for this thread, just because I can. And it's you.

 

[tusharlovesrafa]

*Note this would not include if 'social one-handed-backhanders' such as Tsonga manage to win a slam (lol at the thought of THAT happening).

I'm asking if a NEW slam champion such as Gasquet or Almagro, or in about 40 years, someone completely new who no-one has ever heard of (and probably hasn't been born yet) will ever emerge?

I think no.

In the whole history of tennis from now on until the end of time, Federer will be the last player to ever win a slam with a one-handed backhand. Heck, I'm pretty sure in 5 years, pro's will be using forehands off both wings.

The one-handed backhand cannot be used by weak juniors (which is important because to be a pro you need to practice 10 hours a day from the age of 2) and does not offer a single advantage compared to 2 hands on the backhand.

2-handed backhand is better at high, low and wide balls.
2-handed take-back to drop shot/slice offers more deception.
2-handed backhand offers more spin and/or drive depending on which one you like.
2-handed backhand offers more stability and directional control.
2-handed backhand is infinitely better at returning fast serves and kick serves.
2-handed backhand offers more natural transition to net for volleying. But who the heck wants to volley today anyway?

This might sound stupid ...<EVEN REMOTELY> but when fed retires,then One Handed Backhand will go into an exile for 14 years and then during that transitional period we will see players as such DOnald Young,Raonic,Tomic,Nadal junior,Fed lil girls,SunNy Deol and SUNny Leone ruling the roost by winning every slam.

 

[Rusty669]

How can a 2 handed backhand be better than a single handed backhand at wide balls???It is common sense that you have a far better reach with a one handed backhand than with a double handed backhand.
And forehands off both wings, in 5 years??
Seriously man, you shot yourself in the foot with this pathetic thread.

 

[ollinger]

The OP's point is self-evident since teaching pros hardly ever teach kids the 1HBH any longer, so the pool of prospective champions who use it will be miniscule. But that in no way indicates that one CAN'T win a slam with a 1HBH, there simply won't be enough players using it to test the hypothesis. It's a little like saying there won't be any more GS champions using wood racquets -- obviously not, since nobody's using them, but does this suggest it can't be done?

 

[passive_aggressive]

OK, I was being facetious with the 2-hander offering better transition to the net - but really, it offers merely equal transition to the net to the 1hbh, and who cares when you'd be stupid to volley int he modern game anyway?

 

[Sentinel]

Facetious thread.

 

[ben123]

when do you guys get that this guy is an attention seeking troll lol.

btw passive aggressive to your thread:

 

[Mac_Attack]

*Note this would not include if 'social one-handed-backhanders' such as Tsonga manage to win a slam (lol at the thought of THAT happening).

I'm asking if a NEW slam champion such as Gasquet or Almagro, or in about 40 years, someone completely new who no-one has ever heard of (and probably hasn't been born yet) will ever emerge?

I think no.

In the whole history of tennis from now on until the end of time, Federer will be the last player to ever win a slam with a one-handed backhand. Heck, I'm pretty sure in 5 years, pro's will be using forehands off both wings.

You're full of it. Back when I was coming up the two hander was only for women and old people!

A lot of "two hander's" are now beginning to employ a one handed slice and I think it far more likely that the one handed backhand will enjoy a resurgence in the coming years.

 

[Roddick85]

I agree that the pool of future player will pretty much be only 2hbh as it's pretty much the only bh taught to kids nowadays so the odds of 1hbh winning a slam is very limited if not null. However I strongly disagree with the 2hbh being a superior shot to the 1hbh, both have they're advantages/disadvantages. It's not because the 2hbh is taught more to kids now that it's necessarly a better shot.

2-handed backhand is better at high, low and wide balls.
For high balls, yeah OK. For low balls it's just as hard and for wide balls I completely disagree. The 1hbh has a far longer reach for balls.

2-handed take-back to drop shot/slice offers more deception. Again I disagree, with the 1bh, it's a lot easier to disguise your shot and have the opponent have to guess if your going for a slice/drop shot or a top spin shot.

2-handed backhand offers more spin and/or drive depending on which one you like.
Highly debattable. I know some 1hbh players and that includes myself that have just as much power & spin on the bh side than on the fh.

2-handed backhand offers more stability and directional control. That I can agree on as you have 2 hands on the racquet as opposed to 1, so the stability will be enhanced.

2-handed backhand is infinitely better at returning fast serves and kick serves.
For high kick serves yes, for fast serves I disagree.

2-handed backhand offers more natural transition to net for volleying.
They're both equal.

But who the heck wants to volley today anyway?
Strongly disagree with this. Just look at Federer who uses a 1hbh, he's pretty good at volley's vs Djokovich 2hbh, he hardly ever comes to the net and when he does, results aren't all that great. I think volleying is a neglected aspect of today's game.

 

[Mac_Attack]

OK, I was being facetious with the 2-hander offering better transition to the net - but really, it offers merely equal transition to the net to the 1hbh, and who cares when you'd be stupid to volley int he modern game anyway?

Wrong again. I still serve and volley, chip and charge and come forward on everything short. I have a top ten ranking in my section in the 40 singles
and routinely beat guys half my age who are out there trying to play like Rafa and Novak.

 

[kishnabe]

Reading the bolded material nearly made me have an aneurism.

Back to the cave with you...

I don't think he is trolling....he simply doesn't understand tennis. Plus 5 years from now....forehands on both sides. Not a smart idea...since it takes a second extra to switch hands.

I believe that the one handed backhand will exist...even if comes to extintion like the volley. Out of the next 30 new slam champions...I would say at least 1 to 2 would be one handers.

One handers have a different advantages to the 2 hander. Vice-versa....depending on one's style I dont see why one can win with a one hander.

 

[ben123]

I don't think he is trolling....he simply doesn't understand tennis. Plus 5 years from now....forehands on both sides. Not a smart idea...since it takes a second extra to switch hands.

I believe that the one handed backhand will exist...even if comes to extintion like the volley. Out of the next 30 new slam champions...I would say at least 1 to 2 would be one handers.

One handers have a different advantages to the 2 hander. Vice-versa....depending on one's style I dont see why one can win with a one hander.

no .... hes a troll. every single of his posts are meant to cause some upsets to get attention or something i guess he can laugh about that ^^

he has made very ridiculous posts much worser than this one if you cant see that hes a troll then im sorry for you

 

[kishnabe]

no .... hes a troll. every single of his posts are meant to cause some upsets to get attention or something i guess he can laugh about that ^^

he has made very ridiculous posts much worser than this one if you cant see that hes a troll then im sorry for you

It much worse to be an idiot...than a troll. I see him as an idiot, much less a troll. He will get banned eventually.

 

[tacou]

assuming tennis does not disappear from the sports world, how can anyone say there will never be another 1handed champ? sure, it's become a much rarer shot, but there will always be a few one handers around, and eventually one of them will pick up some serious hardware.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Reading the bolded material nearly made me have an aneurysm.

Back to the cave with you...

OP made me laugh - and that's always a good thing. And now I know he never picked up a racquet in his life.

Definitely no.

PS - Dimitrov could make the poster eat his words in less than 3 yrs.

 

[decades]

doesn't jan silva have a one hander?

 

[bigmatt]

At a recent junior tournament in Florida, I couldn't believe the number of 12-year-old boys hitting (good) one-handed backhands. The Fed influence is there, and will continue to be felt.

 

[Doubles]

...Has no one pointed out the fact that he thinks volleying is useless? Have you ever seen pro doubles?

 

[passive_aggressive]

OP made me laugh - and that's always a good thing. And now I know he never picked up a racquet in his life.

Definitely no.

PS - Dimitrov could make the poster eat his words in less than 3 yrs.

LOL. No.

And this thread refers to a SINGLES Grand Slam champ.

Obviously in doubles where players with technical insufficiency (such as those using 1 hand on the backhand) are given a buffer, there may be one-handers (such as the Bryan Bro's) lurking about.

 

[West Coast Ace]

I doubt you'll last long enough to eat your words. Plenty of people who cover tennis for a living think Dimitrov has all the tools.

 

[Geology_Rocks!]

I doubt you'll last long enough to eat your words. Plenty of people who cover tennis for a living think Dimitrov has all the tools.

He does have the tools, saw some videos of his match vs Murray at Bangkok and to my surprise he improved a lot. His forehand is getting scary.

 

[BevelDevil]

I'm assuming there are fed clones in the pipeline, and to a lesser extent, henin and schiavonne clones.

Is the 1hbh more popular in Europe?


Finally, people tend to assume all 1hbhs are the same, but this is false. The Extreme Eastern 1hbh is a beast and therein lies its future.

I expect short european women with extreme 1hbhs to take some majors in the future. On the men's side, even an eastern 1hbh is viable if the rest of the player's game is good enough. And extreme 1hbhs can go toe-to-toe with a 2hbh.

 

[West Coast Ace]

He does have the tools, saw some videos of his match vs Murray at Bangkok and to my surprise he improved a lot. His forehand is getting scary.

I had heard the hype but wasn't until I was in Shanghai for the Masters 1000 that I saw him - he beat Ilhan then gave Roddick a very tight match. +1, all the tools - just a matter of the mental/emotional.

 

[svijk]

This might sound stupid ...<EVEN REMOTELY> but when fed retires,then One Handed Backhand will go into an exile for 14 years and then during that transitional period we will see players as such DOnald Young,Raonic,Tomic,Nadal junior,Fed lil girls,SunNy Deol and SUNny Leone ruling the roost by winning every slam.

Huh? what?

 

[passive_aggressive]

I'm assuming there are fed clones in the pipeline, and to a lesser extent, henin and schiavonne clones.

Is the 1hbh more popular in Europe?


Finally, people tend to assume all 1hbhs are the same, but this is false. The Extreme Eastern 1hbh is a beast and therein lies its future.

I expect short european women with extreme 1hbhs to take some majors in the future. On the men's side, even an eastern 1hbh is viable if the rest of the player's game is good enough. And extreme 1hbhs can go toe-to-toe with a 2hbh.

What, so you seem to think the more extreme your backhand grip is, the better the backhand you must have?

Almagro and Wawrinka have standard eastern grips, and some people even said Dimitrov had a conservative eastern (index knuckle over ridge between bevels 1 and 2).

 

[Disgruntled Worker]

*Note this would not include if 'social one-handed-backhanders' such as Tsonga manage to win a slam (lol at the thought of THAT happening).

I'm asking if a NEW slam champion such as Gasquet or Almagro, or in about 40 years, someone completely new who no-one has ever heard of (and probably hasn't been born yet) will ever emerge?

I think no.

In the whole history of tennis from now on until the end of time, Federer will be the last player to ever win a slam with a one-handed backhand. Heck, I'm pretty sure in 5 years, pro's will be using forehands off both wings.

The one-handed backhand cannot be used by weak juniors (which is important because to be a pro you need to practice 10 hours a day from the age of 2) and does not offer a single advantage compared to 2 hands on the backhand.

2-handed backhand is better at high, low and wide balls.
2-handed take-back to drop shot/slice offers more deception.
2-handed backhand offers more spin and/or drive depending on which one you like.
2-handed backhand offers more stability and directional control.
2-handed backhand is infinitely better at returning fast serves and kick serves.
2-handed backhand offers more natural transition to net for volleying. But who the heck wants to volley today anyway?

God! Shut up already...

 

[BevelDevil]

What, so you seem to think the more extreme your backhand grip is, the better the backhand you must have?

On the contrary, there are limits. I think the SW backhand (bevel 8) is too extreme for most players.

Almagro and Wawrinka have standard eastern grips, and some people even said Dimitrov had a conservative eastern (index knuckle over ridge between bevels 1 and 2).

And people say federer has an eastern forehand grip. Yet it is clear that the standard modern forehand grip has become the SW.

Similarly, there are people who can hit well with an eastern 1hbh. Good for them, but they are exceptions. I'm sure there are plenty of E1hbh'ers who failed to make pro because of a weak backhand.

So why aren't there more extreme 1hbhs on the men's tour? My theory is that kids who try the 1hbh start off with the eastern grip. If it doesn't work out for them, rather than trying an extreme grip they just go to the 2hbh.

If the default grip were Extreme eastern I think there would be much fewer defections to the 2hbh and, as a consequence, there'd be more EE 1hbhs around.

Definitely on this forum I hear of many people who abandoned the E1hbh for the 2hbh without trying the EE 1hbh. (Or they try it but incorrectly use bevel 8 instead of 1/8.)

Lastly, an observation: Many 1hbh proponents seem averse to the Extreme Eastern as well as the 2hbh. I suspect many of these people cling to the standard eastern because they view it as more "elegant"; they think it supports a more all-court game; and/or because they have some kind of nostalgia for "old school" tennis. I am suspicious of these motives.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Federer did not win a Grand Slam. Don't know, if he is going to. As for the rest - I am a strong believer, that 1hbh will continue to exist on the highest tennis level. The shot has its pros (which, in my opinion, are more than its cons). There will always be coaches, who will be eager to put an effort into developing their pupils' 1hbh technique and execution, regardless of the (relatively speaking) late results.

 

[passive_aggressive]

On the contrary, there are limits. I think the SW backhand (bevel 8) is too extreme for most players.



And people say federer has an eastern forehand grip. Yet it is clear that the standard modern forehand grip has become the SW.

Similarly, there are people who can hit well with an eastern 1hbh. Good for them, but they are exceptions. I'm sure there are plenty of E1hbh'ers who failed to make pro because of a weak backhand.

So why aren't there more extreme 1hbhs on the men's tour? My theory is that kids who try the 1hbh start off with the eastern grip. If it doesn't work out for them, rather than trying an extreme grip they just go to the 2hbh.

If the default grip were Extreme eastern I think there would be much fewer defections to the 2hbh and, as a consequence, there'd be more EE 1hbhs around.

Definitely on this forum I hear of many people who abandoned the E1hbh for the 2hbh without trying the EE 1hbh. (Or they try it but incorrectly use bevel 8 instead of 1/8.)

Lastly, an observation: Many 1hbh proponents seem averse to the Extreme Eastern as well as the 2hbh. I suspect many of these people cling to the standard eastern because they view it as more "elegant"; they think it supports a more all-court game; and/or because they have some kind of nostalgia for "old school" tennis. I am suspicious of these motives.

But does any pro use it?

Didn't Kuerten? Or was he just a boring Extreme-Eastern as well?

 

[BevelDevil]

But does any pro use it?

Didn't Kuerten? Or was he just a boring Extreme-Eastern as well?

I do not know of any pro that uses a SW (bevel 8 ) 1hbh. The prevalence of this grip seems to be a myth that, if anything, deters people from the 1hbh.

Kuerten did NOT use a SW, and the best picture I could find looks like it's an Extreme Eastern (bevels 1/8 ):


http://observatoriodavida1.blogspot.com/2010/08/guga-x-kafelnikov-lembrancas.html

By the way, the prevailing backhand grip terminology is incredibly ambiguous: Guga's wiki page says he uses a "western" grip.

 

[edberg505]

Doh..............

 

[souledge]

Does the 1HBH longer reach for counter-topspin replies trump the 2HBH open stance hit for counter-topspin replies?

Slice, it's the same on both since it's all done via one hand.

 

[souledge]

I started 2HBH, moved to SWFH 1HBH and now am back to 2HBH.

I could give great replies when someone pressure by backhand wing with space, but with slow balls, it was hard to drive them with much spin. Too much spin, and it would be a loopy dribbler, not enough spin, and I'd nail it out and my wrist would be bent way too much. I also had a very hard time going down the line as most of my backhands were pulled crosscourt.

I'd also have a tendency to windmill it when I didn't have enough time to set up.

I think it could be done, and it's nice to be able to take a cut at a high ball that normally troubles a 1HBH player, but it's not the easiest grip to master.

 

[Chico]

Wawrinka won AO this year. That is after all Feds slams. So the thread is a failure.

 

[underground]

He will be. Because Federer isn't done winning yet.

 

[Laurie]

It's always funny to see threads like this revived out of nowhere.

I don't recall this thread in 2012 but it's good Warwinka won the Aussie Open this year. I think the one hander in the mens game will be around for a long time to come. We can also say that Dimitrov has the potential to win a slam and add to the list.

I am not an expert on backhands like others here when it comes to what grip people use but I can say is I think Dimitrov's backhand is not his best shot like it is for Warwinka. I see Dimitrov going down the Sampras, Federer route where his forehand is the shot that does the major damage and the backhand is a good back up for the return, rallying and passing shots. Dimitrov really needs to improve his backhand return in my opinion, by sticking to plans, it often appears indecisive, not sure what type of return to go for during the course of matches.

I think the real shame is on the womens side. After the success of Henin and Mauresmo and the great athletic matches they played against each other, coaches seem to have no intention of encouraging girls to play with a one hander, to hell with individuality in the womens game - literally.

 

[Chico]

He will be. Because Federer isn't done winning yet.

Oh yes he is.

 

[Flint]

erm..........Wavrinka?

 

[Laurie]

erm..........Wavrinka?

The thread was started in 2012.

 

[tennisbuck]

Ok time for the OP to start over with a new account name

 

[ollinger]

The guy hasn't posted in nearly three years. Is that passive aggressive behavior? Or was he hit in the head by a 1HBH follow-thorugh in a moment of sublime irony?

 

[ThomasGB]

One word; Dimitrov.

 

[stringertom]

One word; Dimitrov.

Second word: Thiem!

 

[GhostOfNKDM]

Is this question relevant again?

 

[mike danny]

No lies detected.

 

[StrongRule]

Second word: Thiem!

That was a comment from 2014? Impressive prediction.

 

[ibbi]

Prediction was not wrong.

Who could have foreseen Djokovic getting defaulted for hitting someone ? This and Zverev choking enabled Thiem to win that slam.

What about Wawrinka?

 

[DSH]

One word; Dimitrov.