Tennis balla harps on that in that he says not many coaches can actually teach the 1 hander
Tennis balla harps on that in that he says not many coaches can actually teach the 1 hander
Yeah its horses for courses. But I dont think Sampras or Edberg would have been as good as they were had they not switched to the one hander.I said it before in some other thread. For coaches getting paid by impatient parents, a 2 HBH is much easier and quicker to get consistent hitting results from than the 1 HBH, so it makes sense. I do not believe that inherently, when executed at the same levels of play, that either is across the boards superior.
Yeah its horses for courses. But I dont think Sampras or Edberg would have been as good as they were had they not switched to the one hander.
Have you seen feds bh lately?? Give me his bh anyday over the 2 you mentioned. He is a way more complete player than either of those guys on the bh sideNo way. The OHBH is a beautiful shot and versatile, sure. But you only have to compare the backhands of Nadal and Djoker to Fed and the difference is obvious. When done correctly it is essentially another forehand. And it clearly doesn't preclude one from hitting a slice backhand when needed/wanted.
Fed's BH is light years better than Nadal's.No way. The OHBH is a beautiful shot and versatile, sure. But you only have to compare the backhands of Nadal and Djoker to Fed and the difference is obvious. When done correctly it is essentially another forehand. And it clearly doesn't preclude one from hitting a slice backhand when needed/wanted.
No way. The OHBH is a beautiful shot and versatile, sure. But you only have to compare the backhands of Nadal and Djoker to Fed and the difference is obvious. When done correctly it is essentially another forehand. And it clearly doesn't preclude one from hitting a slice backhand when needed/wanted.
2hbh has that jump high backhand. Really nice. Just want that shot. Everything else can be handled by 1h.
High ball backhand from baseline is not possible with power with 1h. I am talking about the kind of power to blast the ball with whole body weight. Roger can do it on ros. But that is a counter punch.Fed already does that when he's stepping into balls to hit the backhand. He has even done a kind of mule kick 1BH this time, only once or twice, but I did notice it. Mauresmo used to do the mule kick too. But it's tougher to time without both hands on the racquet.
High ball backhand from baseline is not possible with power with 1h. I am talking about the kind of power to blast the ball with whole body weight. Roger can do it on ros. But that is a counter punch.
Why do you say that? Lots of clay courter one handers can hit high balls great. At 4’ every ball Henin hit was a high ball...High ball backhand from baseline is not possible with power with 1h. I am talking about the kind of power to blast the ball with whole body weight. Roger can do it on ros. But that is a counter punch.
Why do you say that? Lots of clay courter one handers can hit high balls great. At 4’ every ball Henin hit was a high ball...
Ok. You know you can jump on a one hander right?? Dont make me post that coach mauro vid.Jump 2-handed backhand + high ball + power. Not that 1hbh can't do high balls great.
At 1:20. But this guy is not very good.
Of course Fed has a good backhand. He's the GOAT he can do everything. However it is still his "weak" side. But when you have the best forehand ever it makes it very difficult for players to relentlessly attack one side of the court. Nadal could but he's like maybe the second GOAT?
I still say if you think Feds BH is better than Djoker or even Nadal then you're crazy.
Ok. You know you can jump on a one hander right?? Dont make me post that coach mauro vid.
You're mostly right. I seem to remember Nadal making outrageous defensive BHs all the time. But you're right about his tactics re BH. He doesn't do much with it but it's also very hard to attack. I think that is the key. The OHBH is I think more vulnerable to being broken down by power or high looping shots. Being a lefty and being Nadal that gave him an opening against Fed that other players didn't have. Everyone knows you attack the backhand but that's easier said than done. Really only Nadal could do it with any consistency.Not better than or even as good as Djoker but nothing controversial about it being as good as or better than Nadal's because Nadal doesn't use it very much as an offensive weapon. I dare say had he done so, he could have turned around some of his recent losses to Fed. Part of it is his stubborn insistence on the same old run around inside out forehand play but partly also that it has its limitations. I remember seeing some analysis comparing Nadal's BH to Djoko's and what exactly makes the latter a superior shot. Djokovic's backhand is at least on par with that of Safin/Nalbandian/Davydenko. I never feel that way about Nadal's BH, that he could do whatever he wanted to with it. If anything, it's improved this year and he has come up with great cross court winners which we haven't seen much of before from him.
You're mostly right. I seem to remember Nadal making outrageous defensive BHs all the time. But you're right about his tactics re BH. He doesn't do much with it but it's also very hard to attack. I think that is the key. The OHBH is I think more vulnerable to being broken down by power or high looping shots. Being a lefty and being Nadal that gave him an opening against Fed that other players didn't have. Everyone knows you attack the backhand but that's easier said than done. Really only Nadal could do it with any consistency.
I would have agreed with this until this year. I saw Fed neutralising high balls to his backhand very well. Thing is earlier when he hit a loopy high BH, it was too short and Nadal, among others, could jump on it. Now he's able to get a lot of depth on that shot so it's much harder to attack. Also, at IW, I saw him jump on a high BH and hit a screaming DTL.
ToStroking a one hander down the line is the best feeling in tennis. Why would you deprive yourself of that?
But you don't see people do jump 1hbh often. Because you don't gain lots more power that way, unlike a jump 2hbh that you really can hit much harder. For 1h, the risk of committing errors outweighs the slight gain of power. Occasionally someone does it because they get caught in an odd position, which made that shot from Mauresmo so unusual.
Just another tool in the Swiss Army Racquet, innit?what are people's thoughts on mixing the two, particularly the two handed for ROS?
Djoker and Fed is a good comparison where I may still give the edge to Djoker because he has a really heavy DTL BH (one that troubled Nadal a lot in 2011/12 and again in 2015). But Nadal uses the backhand mainly to stay in the point. Sometimes, he does unleash great winners off it but they are few and far between. Esp this year, Fed's confidence on the backhand has been almost Wawrinka-esque, maybe better in short passages of play (like 5th set of AO or the IW match against Nadal). I have never seen Nadal look so imperious on the backhand. Yes, it's a solid shot that makes it difficult for opponents to attack him on that wing (should they get past his run around forehand).
Stroking a one hander down the line is the best feeling in tennis. Why would you deprive yourself of that?
I like to think that Djoker doesn't need different strokes because he seems to have sooo many options with his backhand. He can be on the full run, and while most players you would only expect them to hit it cross court, Djokovic can seem to put it anywhere at any time. Thats what I feel like makes his backhand so dangerous, because when he wants to, he simply puts the ball anywhere on the court without needing too much preparation time. Even Nadal usually pulls it crosscourt, never really surprises his opponent about where he puts it, unless he rips it so sharply crosscourt that it's a winner.I think if you got to pick your pro career bh, to me you pick Fed, Djokovic or Wawrinka. If you are picking solely on winning percentage ... Fed or Djoker. The reason I include Wawrinka is he is the only one I have seen that can take the match out of the other players hands (when he is on). Murray is very close to the list ... but just don't see how you put him ahead of Djoker. Murray has more variety, but Djoker never seems to need it.
Sorry for my ignorance, what is ROS?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This thread is about being manly. Consistency and stability are womenly virtues...Tobelieve I wouldwin about 0.02% more 3.5-or-lower level matches and brag about it as if I was the next Djokovic because none of these outstanding results would be achieveable without the two-hander's supreme consistency and stability, of course.
This thread is about being manly. Consistency and stability are womenly virtues...
Well on the everyday things its true. Women doing the trash it gets done more consistently. Same with cleaning the tub, dishes, etcObviously you hang out with different women