Gilbert predicts hybrid one and two handed backhand

[bjk]

"Gilbert, the sport’s great iconoclastic thinker, says it could resurface as a possible hybrid stroke. “I could see a player using a two-hander on returns and then driving the ball with a one-hander during rallies,” he says."

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/81192656/tennis-one-handed-back-hand-roger-federer

Gilbert has a good point. Two handed backhand has advantages (return of serve, stability in ordinary rally shots) and one handed has advantages (drive, slice, on the run shots). But I think the article is right, one handed has too many disadvantages to survive on its own. (Doesn't Thiem hit a two handed return? I saw him playing Vesely this morning and I could swear I saw him hit a two handed return of serve).

 

[President]

It could be possible, the two handers real advantage is obviously on the return of serve. In rallies, the modern one hander (personified by Gasquet, Almagro, and Wawrinka) offers a more powerful, heavy ball than any two handed backhand. They all suck on the return of serve though, which is why Djokovic and Murray are still considered to have better backhands than them, despite being considerably less lethal in rallies.

 

[idono1301]

I've been trying to pick up a 2HBH for only returns. It just sounds so useful. Unfortunately it is definitely not a natural movement for me

 

[TennisCJC]

Not sure I agree that Gasquet, Almagro and Wawrinka have better BHs than Djoko and Murray. Gasquet plays way back in order to get time for his big 1 hbh stroke which is beautiful to see but not as effective as Murray or Djoko who both take the ball much closer to the baseline. Almagro does not have the consistency of Murray or Djoko. Almag can hit some beautiful thunderous one handers but he can also spray a few out of the court. Maybe Warinka has a better BH than Djoko and Murray when you exclude the ROS but with ROS factored in, I would have to give a slight advantage to Murray and Djoko.

So, my bottom line is maybe Warinka has a slight advantage over Murray and Djoko but maybe not if you factor ROS into the equation. I think Gas and Almag both have beautiful strokes but in totality, Djoko and Murray have better BHs.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I disagree that the one handed backhand has an advantage in rallies. Even if we forget completely about return of serve, I find the 2 handed backhand far superior in dealing with high balls, and obviously topspin.

See Fed's struggles vs. Nadal, and it might be a poor time to mention this after Wawrinka beating Nadal in the AO final lol, but it's a major component of Wawa's intense struggles against Nadal and why Djokovic has relative success.

The one hander does have a slightly superior range of motion and can be cracked harder with relative more spin itself. But the two hander seems much more stable in rallies, both in returning heavy/hard shots and not breaking down over long rallies.

Due to this, I think the 2 handed backhand will continue to be the majority/future unless the surfaces speed up again. You could argue the 1 handed backhand is superior on truly fast surfaces.

 

[President]

I disagree that the one handed backhand has an advantage in rallies. Even if we forget completely about return of serve, I find the 2 handed backhand far superior in dealing with high balls, and obviously topspin.

See Fed's struggles vs. Nadal, and it might be a poor time to mention this after Wawrinka beating Nadal in the AO final lol, but it's a major component of Wawa's intense struggles against Nadal and why Djokovic has relative success.

The one hander does have a slightly superior range of motion and can be cracked harder with relative more spin itself. But the two hander seems much more stable in rallies, both in returning heavy/hard shots and not breaking down over long rallies.

Due to this, I think the 2 handed backhand will continue to be the majority/future unless the surfaces speed up again. You could argue the 1 handed backhand is superior on truly fast surfaces.

Nadal is a unique player, and he is one out of thousands of professional players. Yes, he obviously troubles one handers but I don't think there is any evidence for any other player in the top 100 having such a complete advantage over them. Djokovic is also uniquely good at handling Nadal's topspin, much better than any other two hander (including Murray, whose backhand repeatedly gets pummeled in most of his losses to Nadal). Basically, I'm saying that looking at one player who happens to abuse one handers isn't revealing of a general trend. In rallies, Gasquet and Almagro (I don't need to mention Wawrinka) can definitely create more problems for their opponents off the backhand side than Djokovic, Murray, Nishikori, Paire, or any other great two hander IMO. Their ROS is so weak though that it completely blunts their advantage, it is a massive weakness at the top level.

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

There can be one handers with lethal returns ala Edberg again. Guga's one handed returns seemed pretty good as well. It is a question of attitude when one develops their stokes.

For example a player with a semiwestern forehand doesnt need to change their grip if they have a full/extreme eastern BH (which is a VERY stablegrip, even on high kickers). It definitely helps.

I dont know why Wawrinka isnt a better returner but from time to time he can be a dangerous returner.

 

[Cup8489]

Read the title, thought this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX779GJIdPg

I am disappointed.

 

[JW10S]

"Gilbert, the sport’s great iconoclastic thinker, says it could resurface as a possible hybrid stroke. “I could see a player using a two-hander on returns and then driving the ball with a one-hander during rallies,” he says."

This is nothing new, I heard Stan Smith say the same thing back in the 1980's.

 

[MasturB]

I think we'll see a player hit with a forehand on both wings (left handed forehand and right handed forehand) before we see that.

 

[Andres]

Daniele Bracciali was already doing that: returning hard serves to the backhand with two hands, and playing one handed the rest of the point.

 

[President]

Daniele Bracciali was already doing that: returning hard serves to the backhand with two hands, and playing one handed the rest of the point.

It makes a lot of sense, taking advantage of the natural advantages of both types of backhands. I think Youzhny also already does something like this, I see him sometimes using something close to a true two handed backhand when he is facing really fast shots, or is rushed for time. Possibly some other players do it as well?

 

[DRII]

I disagree that the one handed backhand has an advantage in rallies. Even if we forget completely about return of serve, I find the 2 handed backhand far superior in dealing with high balls, and obviously topspin.

See Fed's struggles vs. Nadal, and it might be a poor time to mention this after Wawrinka beating Nadal in the AO final lol, but it's a major component of Wawa's intense struggles against Nadal and why Djokovic has relative success.

The one hander does have a slightly superior range of motion and can be cracked harder with relative more spin itself. But the two hander seems much more stable in rallies, both in returning heavy/hard shots and not breaking down over long rallies.

Due to this, I think the 2 handed backhand will continue to be the majority/future unless the surfaces speed up again. You could argue the 1 handed backhand is superior on truly fast surfaces.

perhaps you missed that Nadal was injured in the AO final this year.

also, one handed BHs do not have an inherent advantage on faster surfaces. its the slower surfaces where one handers can more comfortably utilize their superior and longer range of motion to produce more penetrating and damaging top spin shots.

the main adv on the two handed BH is efficiency brought about by the added stability of the 'off' hand being used.

 

[BevelDevil]

If this were viable, I think we would have seen more of it by now. It's certainly been talked about. I think the problem is that it takes up too much practice time to learn and maintain both strokes.

I hope I'm wrong though, because I'd like to see it.

Due to this, I think the 2 handed backhand will continue to be the majority/future unless the surfaces speed up again. You could argue the 1 handed backhand is superior on truly fast surfaces.

I'm not sure. There are a lot of 1-handers out there whose best surface is clay or slow hard. This includes the big guns of Wawrinka, Almagro and Gasquet.

If anything, seeing all the Latin 1-handers, I think clay is what will keep the 1hbh alive. I suspect one of the reasons is that you can stand further back and take the ball on the way down without being punished as much as on fasters surfactes. Also because clay courters like to hit with tons of spin, and the 1hbh allows that.

 

[BevelDevil]

Also, the article says, "Neither of us could not think of a single Russian professional with a one-hander."

They forgot Youzhny.

 

[THE FIGHTER]

perhaps you missed that Nadal was injured in the AO final this year.

also, one handed BHs do not have an inherent advantage on faster surfaces. its the slower surfaces where one handers can more comfortably utilize their superior and longer range of motion to produce more penetrating and damaging top spin shots.

the main adv on the two handed BH is efficiency brought about by the added stability of the 'off' hand being used.

i think you're forgetting that onehanded backhands can benefit from the speed of the court as well. not all onehanders take forever to set up, not all twohanders have compact strokes.

 

[Bobby Jr]

Is he still trying to sell the Wrist Assist?

 

[Russeljones]

Also, the article says, "Neither of us could not think of a single Russian professional with a one-hander."

They forgot Youzhny.

He is not the sharpest tool in the shed, agreed.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Nadal is a unique player, and he is one out of thousands of professional players. Yes, he obviously troubles one handers but I don't think there is any evidence for any other player in the top 100 having such a complete advantage over them. Djokovic is also uniquely good at handling Nadal's topspin, much better than any other two hander (including Murray, whose backhand repeatedly gets pummeled in most of his losses to Nadal). Basically, I'm saying that looking at one player who happens to abuse one handers isn't revealing of a general trend. In rallies, Gasquet and Almagro (I don't need to mention Wawrinka) can definitely create more problems for their opponents off the backhand side than Djokovic, Murray, Nishikori, Paire, or any other great two hander IMO. Their ROS is so weak though that it completely blunts their advantage, it is a massive weakness at the top level.

Depends how you define that. One handed backhand is an inherently more offensive shot, I agree. That's why I say in general it is better suited to faster sufaces. But the two hander is less likely to break down, not only in ROS, but in rallies.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

perhaps you missed that Nadal was injured in the AO final this year.

also, one handed BHs do not have an inherent advantage on faster surfaces. its the slower surfaces where one handers can more comfortably utilize their superior and longer range of motion to produce more penetrating and damaging top spin shots.

the main adv on the two handed BH is efficiency brought about by the added stability of the 'off' hand being used.

I'm a huge Nadal fan, he's my favorite player since 2005, but to be fair to Stan he won the first set playing fantastically, no way to know how injured Rafa was in warm up or if he would have won if he didn't tweak it early in the 2nd. Anyway my overall point was that Rafa usually dominate Stan anyway.

BevelDevil makes the same point as you about the surfaces and many Latin players who use it, but I still think the general consensus is two handed is better for stability and defending in longer rallies.

One handed is better for attacking/touch and slice etc. and suit fast hard court and grass more. This is a very general rule of course and guys don't necessarily cater playing styles to this (see Latin players referenced here) But I do think it matters.

I think it's sort of like how in general tall ball bashers prefer faster surfaces and small "pushers" prefer slower, but you occasionally get the Soderling who does great on clay because the height/taking ball early to nullify spin and more time to setup powerful shots or a Hewitt who does better on fast courts, deftly redirecting pace and using speed of the court. So there are exceptions to any rule

In general it seems to me the 2 hander is more stable, efficient, and less likely to break down at the expense of power and penetration, which in a broad sense is more suited to the modern athletic, absorbing power based game showcased on slower courts.

 

[AngieB]

In order to have to consistent control of either stroke, it takes years of practice. I think it is improbable, if not impossible, for any player to master both and be able to employ either at-will during any time during a match.

Brad Gilbert reminds me of a seasoned, used-car salesman. The ESPN gig has completely went to his head.

AngieB

 

[bjk]

Also, the article says, "Neither of us could not think of a single Russian professional with a one-hander."

They forgot Youzhny.

That is embarrassing . . .

 

[bjk]

There's the danger of being neither/nor, not that great at either stroke. But once one person does it, you could see a whole flood of players doing it. The idea that it's too hard to master two strokes doesn't make sense. Players have no trouble mastering one handed slice and two handed backhand, if you watch pros in practice they regularly hit with different strokes. Serena Williams will sometimes hit one handers in the warm up, Courier has gone all one handed on some shots.

I don't buy the practice time argument. I would argue that players would probably benefit from learning a new stroke, the same way a basketball player benefits from learning to use off hand or tennis players benefit from playing soccer. Grooving the same strokes over and over may have diminishing returns.

 

[President]

Depends how you define that. One handed backhand is an inherently more offensive shot, I agree. That's why I say in general it is better suited to faster sufaces. But the two hander is less likely to break down, not only in ROS, but in rallies.

The modern one hander has a lot more topspin and potential for angles than a two hander. These attributes are better suited for a slow court. Two handers are better at the ROS and taking the ball on the rise, as well as hitting it flat. These attributes are obviously more suited to medium-fast courts. There is a reason that nearly all of the best one handed backhand players these days have their best surface as clay (Almagro, Gasquet, Wawrinka, Kohlschreiber, Robredo, etc). The one hander being best on fast surfaces is a very 90's thing, I don't think it is true at all anymore. All the evidence points to the opposite being true these days, because most of these guys are now using more extreme grips and swing paths on their one handed backhands.

 

[Netspirit]

The 2-hander is better for all things defense. And defense rules the modern tennis, with its slow surfaces and spinny shots.

 

[bjsnider]

I think it's more likely that Wawrinka's mechanical evolution on the 1hbh catches on with more young players, and the classic style dies out.

 

[jelle v]

I disagree.. the potential in all areas is imo bigger for the 2hbh.. Best backhands i have ever seen are those from Nalbandian followed by Safin, those are 2 handed backhands. The power those two could generate with their backhand was at least equal to that of a powerful one handed backhand (recent example Wawrinka).

Only disadvantage would be reach, but I think that is compensated for by all the other advantages, such as control (not only on serve), easier to hit high balls, easier to hit angles, more consistent..

Funny thing is, recently I have resorted to hitting one handed backhands, because of a injury to my left wrist.. I really like the reach of the one hander, but playing on clay, I really don't like all the high balls on the backhand. Of course.. I am far from a top player, but it's just my personal experience.

 

[President]

I disagree.. the potential in all areas is imo bigger for the 2hbh.. Best backhands i have ever seen are those from Nalbandian followed by Safin, those are 2 handed backhands. The power those two could generate with their backhand was at least equal to that of a powerful one handed backhand (recent example Wawrinka).

Only disadvantage would be reach, but I think that is compensated for by all the other advantages, such as control (not only on serve), easier to hit high balls, easier to hit angles, more consistent..

Funny thing is, recently I have resorted to hitting one handed backhands, because of a injury to my left wrist.. I really like the reach of the one hander, but playing on clay, I really don't like all the high balls on the backhand. Of course.. I am far from a top player, but it's just my personal experience.

Try hitting with an Eastern or even Semi Western backhand grip and hit more up and across the ball. I think you'll see the benefit of the one hander on slow surfaces then .

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

Try hitting with an Eastern or even Semi Western backhand grip and hit more up and across the ball. I think you'll see the benefit of the one hander on slow surfaces then .

Truth. 10 char

 

[BevelDevil]

There's the danger of being neither/nor, not that great at either stroke. But once one person does it, you could see a whole flood of players doing it. The idea that it's too hard to master two strokes doesn't make sense. Players have no trouble mastering one handed slice and two handed backhand, if you watch pros in practice they regularly hit with different strokes. Serena Williams will sometimes hit one handers in the warm up, Courier has gone all one handed on some shots.

I don't buy the practice time argument. I would argue that players would probably benefit from learning a new stroke, the same way a basketball player benefits from learning to use off hand or tennis players benefit from playing soccer. Grooving the same strokes over and over may have diminishing returns.

I hope you're right, but I think there some big of caveats that have to be made.

- it's relatively easy to learn and execute a servicable slice. That's why so many rec players rely on it. The same isn't the case for the 2hbh.

- most 2hbh players do have slices, but not great slices. But they don't need to be great slices since it is used primarily as a defensive stroke. Contrast that to using a 2hbh for ROS. It better be a good ROS, otherwise you've defeated the purpose and wasted your time.

- While a 2-hander only needs to learn 2 strokes on that side (2hbh and slice), a 1-hander would have to learn three strokes: 1hbh drive, 2hbh and slice.

- It makes sense for Courier to use a 1hbh. His 2hbh is basically a 1hbh in terms of: Grip, straight right arm, arm/wrist angle, contact point. So shifting to a 1hbh should be very easy for him. Furthermore, his 2hbh was considered relatively weak, so he's not giving up much.

- I've heard some posters say it's easier for a 2-hander to learn the 1hbh than it is for a 1-hander to learn the 2hbh. I'm not sure if this is true, but it's worth of consideration.

I disagree.. the potential in all areas is imo bigger for the 2hbh.. Best backhands i have ever seen are those from Nalbandian followed by Safin, those are 2 handed backhands. The power those two could generate with their backhand was at least equal to that of a powerful one handed backhand (recent example Wawrinka).
.

One thing that should be kept in mind is that Safin is 6'4" and strong, and Nalbandian has a ridiculously broad and bulky chest. He makes Stan look thin by comparison. I'm sure those factors have contributed significantly to their backhands. Gasquet, by comparison, has an unexceptional body, yet can still crush the ball.

Many ATP players who have powerful 2hbhs are tall and/or on the strong side.

 

[70後]

Mats Wilander already did that in 1988.

 

[Tennis_Maestro]

Brad thinks Almagro and Gasquet have better backhands than Murray and Djokovic?

Seriously. Anyone that thinks this guy is an expert, has a screw loose.

 

[President]

Mats Wilander already did that in 1988.

That was just a backhand slice, right? By that logic, pretty much every two handed backhand male player does it too. We are talking about hitting a topspin one handed backhand.

 

[KYHacker]

2hbh is a better offensive shot all the way around. You can hit low, medium, and high balls and you can execute with topspin, flat, or even slice. Plus, there is the ability to "hold" the shot and change direction of the ball. This is much, much easier with 2hbh. Taking the ball on the rise is much easier with 2hbh-- hence it's advantage on return of serve.

The only real advantages of 1hbh is defensive slice. Wilander demonstrated that first. Use of of the offhand in 2hbh sealed it as the better stroke as the angles, strength, stability, and consistency greatly outweigh 1hbh. Aesthetically and stylistically 2hbh is a dog. The ladies will always prefer the flair of a 1hbh. That will be enough of a reason for it to have its place in the game if for no other reason.

 

[bjk]

I don't think most players would have any problem learning 1hbh slice/drive. It's acknowledged that the 2hbh is the stronger stroke for the typical player. That's why more players use it. The 1hbh would be an addition on top of the basic 2hbh stroke. It would be used in situations where an additional hand on the racket isn't necessary/advantageous.

 

[Oh Definitely]

Let's think about "real court" situations…

All 1HBH players have felt the ability to bunt a ROS when rushed. The ability to control a heavy serve return is multiplied considering most rec' players wrist strength.

Extrapolate this practical example and combine it with some of the games greatest returners (read Agassi et al).

I don't think any player above 3.5 level needs to "learn" a 2HBH ROS… if that's what you want to do, it should just come naturally on the ROS, as it's a static point with a repetitive outcome in that sense.

I think, in real terms, any backhand that (at any point in time) is being played in the minority will always have the advantage… just as the lefty serve is seen as an advantage due to most players experienced with RH'ers…

There was a time when the 2HBH was in the minority.

 

[bjk]

tsonga just hit 1hbh crosscourt winner vs dmitrov

 

[bjk]

tsonga flicks dtl otr 1h past dmitrov.

 

[jersey34tennis]

throwing myself out there for a beatdown but i've got a hybrid of one and two handed backhand. i would rate myself but that's pointles. i'd be more than willing to hit with people if schedule align and they want to videotape it and post it. i'd safely rate above 3.5 but no number above because i'm a junkballer