Is 1HBH really a weakness in today's (professional) game?

[mental midget]

2hbh is easier, more repeatable, better for returns. statistically, probably the better option. but as some have mentioned, 1hbh has its advantages, particularly for an attacking player--lets you retain more forward momentum and flow off an approach shot among other things. also...way cooler.

 

[initialize]

There's a reason the GOAT chose the one-hander as his backhand

 

[Silverbullet96]

Yes. The balls used in Tennis are getting heavier and heavier, and the instability and lack of control, not to mention the players potentially putting more and more stress on their one hitting arm which will result in things like fatigue and/or injuries, of the OHBH is becoming and will continue to become more apparent. That's what I believe.

Imagine what would happen if the hitters in baseball or cricket try to swing exclusively with one arm, how ineffective would it be ? Obviously the balls (or racket/bat) currently aren't nearly as heavy in Tennis as they're in baseball/cricket, but I hope you get my logic.

For evidence of my heavier balls claim, here's a video of the Doubles GS champ Leander Paes mentioning the exact same thing (the discussion about homogenization/heavier balls starts at 3:00).

 

[Booger]

Yes. The balls used in Tennis are getting heavier and heavier, and the instability and lack of control, not to mention the players potentially putting more and more stress on their one hitting arm which will result in things like fatigue and/or injuries, of the OHBH is becoming and will continue to become more apparent. That's what I believe.

Imagine what would happen if the hitters in baseball or cricket try to swing exclusively with one arm, how ineffective would it be ? Obviously the balls (or racket/bat) currently aren't nearly as heavy in Tennis as they're in baseball/cricket, but I hope you get my logic.

For evidence of my heavier balls claim, here's a video of the Doubles GS champ Leander Paes mentioning the exact same thing (the discussion about homogenization/heavier balls starts at 3:00).

Leander for ATP president. He will end this baseline grinding taking over tennis.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Yes. The balls used in Tennis are getting heavier and heavier, and the instability and lack of control, not to mention the players potentially putting more and more stress on their one hitting arm which will result in things like fatigue and/or injuries, of the OHBH is becoming and will continue to become more apparent. That's what I believe.

Imagine what would happen if the hitters in baseball or cricket try to swing exclusively with one arm, how ineffective would it be ? Obviously the balls (or racket/bat) currently aren't nearly as heavy in Tennis as they're in baseball/cricket, but I hope you get my logic.

For evidence of my heavier balls claim, here's a video of the Doubles GS champ Leander Paes mentioning the exact same thing (the discussion about homogenization/heavier balls starts at 3:00).

That comment about a big server will have big advantage is becoming truer by the day.

Medvedev will soon become number 1 on the serve + return combination. Zverev isn't far off.

 

[BallBasher247]

I think that the 1HBH's biggest weaknesses are clear; it's harder to coach, it's worse for RoS, and it requires more coordination/athleticism. It also limits your potential options for rackets bc it's hard to get the type of racket head speed you need with larger head size/HH/extended rackets (idk how tf Gasquet does it lol ).

Contrary to popular belief, I think the 1HBH works best on slower courts where you have more time to set it up. I see way more clay-courters from South America and Southern Europe with 1HBHs than HC players from America, the UK or anywhere in Northern or Central Europe. Other than Fed and Shapo, the players with the best 1HBHs are strongest on clay. Gasquet, Stan, and Thiem are prime examples of this. Even Tsitsipas, whose BH is his biggest weakness, can spin em back cross court comfortably on clay, where he looks pressed for time on fast hard courts and grass. And I don't think it's a coincidence that the first GenZ breakout star on tour with a 1HBH (Musetti) is a clay-courter either.

IME my 1HBH is way more effective on slower courts where the extra time to set up lets me produce more pace/spin variation. I like to push opponents back with deep, heavy topspin BHs to set up attackable short FHs/BHs. I can't do this as much on super-fast courts, where my BH becomes more inconsistent and more attackable and I have to slice more.

But if your 2HBH is bad/isn't natural, or the 1HBH is more natural, I think it's better to have at least a so-so 1HBH than a bad 2HBH because even though you can try to just shovel 2HBHs back or slice only, that only works up to a certain level/can stagnate your potential unless you're Berrettini, who has literally everything except a good BH. I've seen him hit 1HBHs in practice and the Ultimate Tennis Showdown exhibitions, and I think it's probably a more natural shot for him and if he would've trained it as a JR, it would probably be better than his 2HBH. I know for me personally, I wouldn't have progressed as much as I have if I'd stuck with my 2HBH. Sure, I lost out in the short term a bit (high school) but in the long run the switch paid off.

This is the biggest problem with the 2HBH IMO. It can look technically sound (mine did) yet feel awkward and be garbage if you haven't had the mechanics/technique/cross-dominance* required for an effective 2HBH drilled into you from the time you were a toddler. That last one is important because a 2HBH is a non-dominant FH with your other (bottom/dominant) arm going along for the ride. My 2HBH sucked because I was hitting a left-arm dominant 1HBH w/ my right arm awkwardly limiting my range of motion, and I didn't learn this until well after I switched to a 1HBH.

 

[Arak]

Two handers are more difficult to learn, but one handers are more difficult to master. There is no doubt in my mind that one handers will eventually disappear as an archaic form of tennis. I’m very happy however to see several players with one handers still contending in the top levels.

 

[mtommer]

I will never understand this debate between bh styles. I would bet that every OHBH user on tour right now can hit a 2HBH with ease and vice versa. Yet,....they.....don't.....and won't. The best bh for anyone to use is the one they are most comfortable hitting and that alone trumps any theoretical benefit either style has over the other.

 

[initialize]

I will never understand this debate between bh styles. I would bet that every OHBH user on tour right now can hit a 2HBH with ease and vice versa. Yet,....they.....don't.....and won't. The best bh for anyone to use is the one they are most comfortable hitting and that alone trumps any theoretical benefit either style has over the other.

I don't think most two-handers know how to hit a one-hander well. Too difficult for them

 

[NAS]

I don't think most two-handers know how to hit a one-hander well. Too difficult for them

Actually one hander is natural, may be I use to play badminton along side tennis and cricket but one hand bh was natural for me, I really have to work hard to learn two hand in my childhood days

 

[Tshooter]

Dimitrov has a pretty good looking 2HB:

 

[mike danny]

Actually one hander is natural, may be I use to play badminton along side tennis and cricket but one hand bh was natural for me, I really have to work hard to learn two hand in my childhood days

Really? 2H was the easiest for me to learn as I found it very easy to use my left hand (I'm right-handed) as support.

 

[NAS]

Really? 2H was the easiest for me to learn as I found it very easy to use my left hand (I'm right-handed) as support.

If you start playing badminton first, one hand will come natural to you, most use one hander (Actually I don't know any two hander in badminton).
I started playing tennis late, so my hands coordination was adjusted that way.
Another thing I used to write right handed, bat right hand in cricket but field and bowl left hand, also used to play badminton and tennis using left hand so my both hand used to work so no problem with one hand bh

 

[mike danny]

If you start playing badminton first, one hand will come natural to you, most use one hander (Actually I don't know any two hander in badminton).
I started playing tennis late, so my hands coordination was adjusted that way.
Another thing I used to write right handed, bat right hand in cricket but field and bowl left hand, also used to play badminton and tennis using left hand so my both hand used to work so no problem with one hand bh

IIRC, I used to switch hands at badminton.

I do play it with one hand nowadays and I play table tennis with 1 hand too.

But that's because these instruments and the balls are very light, while a tennis racquet and a tennis ball are both heavier so it's harder to control with one hand.

 

[happyandbob]

It seems to me that in the modern game, a OHBH is a significant weakness because it not only makes handling high, heavy balls harder, it also makes you more susceptible to pace. It puts a much bigger premium on timing and preparation, much in the same way having a long backswing on your forehand does -- and why both Federer and Thiem worked to shorten their forehand backswings.

Musetti and Shapo can be overpowered by some shots to their backhand side with shots that many young two-handers seem to be able to handle.

 

[BGod]

It really does just come down to this: A OHBH can outright win points whereas a two hander has higher statistical chance of winning longer rallies and creating a good return scenario. The OHBH needs to be paired with an overall more aggressive game and preferably either a strong forehand, prime volleying or peak serve if not all of the 3. Now obviously if you have a player who does have the complete package THEN the OHBH is what puts him over pretty well every two hander not named Novak.

And recently we've seen with old man Fed, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Shap all be Top 10 players and contest Slams. Dimitrov too was a mainstay in the Top 10-20.

 

[President]

I think most modern 1HBHs are better on slower courts, which negates their struggles on return. There's a reason Tsitsipas, Thiem, Wawrinka (debatable), Gasquet, Almagro, Kholschreiber, etc are all best on clay and slower hardcourts.

 

[Slicehand]

No, its a two sided weapon

 

[happyandbob]

And recently we've seen with old man Fed, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Shap all be Top 10 players and contest Slams. Dimitrov too was a mainstay in the Top 10-20.

Correlation or causation? I think there is an argument to be made that as successful as all of them were, with each of their physical gifts they might have been more successful with a two-hander. Less aesthetically pleasing perhaps, but possibly more successful.

 

[Notorious_Junkballer]

Guys with 1HB surely get laid more.

 

[NAS]

Guys with 1HB surely get laid more.

Lol this is tennis not soccer

 

[1HBHFTW]

It seems to me that in the modern game, a OHBH is a significant weakness because it not only makes handling high, heavy balls harder, it also makes you more susceptible to pace. It puts a much bigger premium on timing and preparation, much in the same way having a long backswing on your forehand does -- and why both Federer and Thiem worked to shorten their forehand backswings.

Musetti and Shapo can be overpowered by some shots to their backhand side with shots that many young two-handers seem to be able to handle.

Last statement is true, but they can both overpower other people with their backhands too in a way most 2H can't.

To be honest, I would not like to play with a 1H as a lefty like Shapo. You're right that the longer prep is harder for a 1H, so having to constantly go BH crosscourt against your opponent's forehands seems like a disadvantage.

 

[Arak]

Lol this is tennis not soccer

He’s right.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Yes it is a big impairment, unfortunately. I wish the ATP would change that

How would the ATP change that?

 

[Red Rick]

Really? 2H was the easiest for me to learn as I found it very easy to use my left hand (I'm right-handed) as support.

I think it depends on some physical/technical traits. I would drive my 2 hander with my off hand mostly but it was also really slow, so it was always really weak. When I switched to a one hander it forced me to use my dominant side and I could hit a way, way bigger ball instantly. Sadly my footwork is the worst and that's why it never became an actual quality.

 

[mtommer]

I think there is an argument to be made that as successful as all of them were, with each of their physical gifts they might have been more successful with a two-hander.

I don't. Each them could take up a 2HBH this very second. They even show they're willing to adapt and make changes to their game.....yet they don't make this specific change. You can't make any reasonable argument because you have no clue how it feels for them to play with either style. All you see is the end result of what's shown on tv. For all you know, each may very well have toyes with the 2HBH and realized their game went from top 10 to maybe top 100. All you have is purely conjecture with zero basis in fact...unless you're saying you know them, how they train, have spoken to them personally about their BH style. Have you?

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Thiem's backhand is not a good role model and we don't know what his understanding of the stroke is like. His backhand is mostly about mass IMO.

why is it not a good role model?
Why is it mostly mass?

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Maybe the ATP should just ban 2 handers. Basketball banned zone defense because the game was becoming boring. Hockey nerfed their defenses. NFL made it illegal to touch a QB or receiver.

feeling a bit stalinist today aren't we?

 

[cortado]

The only player to win any slams recently aside from Big 4 is Wawrinka with one-hander.
I don't see why 2 hander is better for high balls. How are you supposed to reach up to high balls with 2 hands on the racquet?
When I play, I find that when I go for my one-hander (rather than hesitating and slicing/blocking) I almost always win the point. One-hander drives through the court with lots of spin.

 

[Jaitock1991]

If not for Nadal this probably wouldn't even be a discussion in the first place.

 

[nolefam_2024]

The only player to win any slams recently aside from Big 4 is Wawrinka with one-hander.
I don't see why 2 hander is better for high balls. How are you supposed to reach up to high balls with 2 hands on the racquet?
When I play, I find that when I go for my one-hander (rather than hesitating and slicing/blocking) I almost always win the point. One-hander drives through the court with lots of spin.

Any slams? Medvedev was in AO final and won USO.

 

[happyandbob]

I don't. Each them could take up a 2HBH this very second. They even show they're willing to adapt and make changes to their game.....yet they don't make this specific change. You can't make any reasonable argument because you have no clue how it feels for them to play with either style. All you see is the end result of what's shown on tv. For all you know, each may very well have toyes with the 2HBH and realized their game went from top 10 to maybe top 100. All you have is purely conjecture with zero basis in fact...unless you're saying you know them, how they train, have spoken to them personally about their BH style. Have you?

Ok, well it's ok to agree to disagree. I said "I think there is an argument to be made", hardly seems like I'm pushing anything as definitive and neither should you.

Are you saying that you think it's possible for a professional tennis player to decide to change from a one-hander to a two-hander after having already made it to the pros?

FWIW - I play with a one-hander but have been toying with a two-hander for about 2 months.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

If not for Nadal this probably wouldn't even be a discussion in the first place.

the dude really changed the game.

 

[Blahovic]

The other aspect is that double hander is better for court position as it's easier to take the ball on the rise.

When Djokovic and Federer turn up the heat in rallies you can always see Federer default to the slice on his backhand because he doesn't have time to take a nice fluid swing for the topspin.

The OHBH still has its place though. I'd rather have one. It's inherently superior for generating power and spin, and that's a huge element of the modern game.

 

[Kralingen]

The other aspect is that double hander is better for court position as it's easier to take the ball on the rise.

When Djokovic and Federer turn up the heat in rallies you can always see Federer default to the slice on his backhand because he doesn't have time to take a nice fluid swing for the topspin.

The OHBH still has its place though. I'd rather have one. It's inherently superior for generating power and spin, and that's a huge element of the modern game.

Uh... Federer has probably the quickest 1HBH reflexes ever and won so many matches in his prime by expert timing on the BH side

 

[happyandbob]

When Djokovic and Federer turn up the heat in rallies you can always see Federer default to the slice on his backhand because he doesn't have time to take a nice fluid swing for the topspin.

Uh... Federer has probably the quickest 1HBH reflexes ever and won so many matches in his prime by expert timing on the BH side

I think both of these are true. Federer has/had supernatural timing on one-hander, but in cross court backhand rallies vs Djokovic, he can get later and later on his BH timing until he is forced to switch from a drive to a slice. Many, many times (of course) he changes to slice strategically to change up the rhythm, but sometimes you can see him start to lose the timing war in a contest of BH drives.

 

[Blahovic]

I think both of these are true. Federer has/had supernatural timing on one-hander, but in cross court backhand rallies vs Djokovic it seems to me he gets later and later on his BH timing until he is forced to switch from a drive to a slice. Many, many times he changes to slice strategically to change up the rhythm, but sometimes you can see him start to lose the timing war in a contest of BH drives.

A 2HBH is simply more compact. A OHBH has a bigger takeback than any other groundstroke.

No one is criticising Federer's reflexes. Doesn't matter how good Federer's reflexes are, there's a simple issue of biology and physics. Federer does of course have great wrist flicks and half volleys and slices, but those aren't things you want to consistently rely on in a 10-20 shot rally from the baseline Vs a full, solid topspin backhand drive.

Thiem is remarkably good at hitting his OHBH on the rise on hard courts these days.

 

[McGradey]

Will we ever see a tennis player who often switches from one handed to two handed depending on what's most comfortable or effective for a particular shot?

Karatsev hits a single hander every so often
He’s hit some great one handed flick passing shots this year

 

[BallBasher247]

Last statement is true, but they can both overpower other people with their backhands too in a way most 2H can't.

To be honest, I would not like to play with a 1H as a lefty like Shapo. You're right that the longer prep is harder for a 1H, so having to constantly go BH crosscourt against your opponent's forehands seems like a disadvantage.

True about the overpowering thing. But you gotta remember lefties use different tactics; we often go DTL on BHs to set up our FHs especially when our cross court BHs aren't as strong. For me, my cross-court BH is stronger than my DTL so I usually only go DTL when I'm attacking. Mostly I don't mind rallying with my BH cross court to a righty FH especially when I'm able to give them heavy balls that keep them on the back foot. If they have super flat and fast FHs then this becomes a problem for me. Whether it's a disadvantage or not depends on the player

Being a lefty with a 1HBH can be tough, and most coaches don't think it's worth the frustration of improving/coaching lefty students' 1HBHs because they feel like a so-so 2HBH will be more consistent. I understand this all to well from experience, since this is what all my coaches did. IMO the BH depends on the player; for some people the 2HBH just isn't a good fit, and I happened to be one of those people. Sometimes I practice a 2HBH just to remember what it feels like, and every time I do I'm reminded of why I personally don't use one. I end up resorting to a Kyrgios-style block backhand that I can't do much with other than run around most of the time, since swinging through the ball feels forced for me.

 

[mtommer]

Ok, well it's ok to agree to disagree. I said "I think there is an argument to be made", hardly seems like I'm pushing anything as definitive and neither should you.

Mmmmmmm.....my point is that it is far below definitive to the point that it's not even close to an argument. It's not an argument of any kind because it has no basis in reality as it applies to the pro game (at least from our perspective). The only thing we can really say that is definitive about either BH style in the pro game is that they ARE in the pro game and they HAVE been successfully used to win at the very highest level and continue to do so.

BTW, although I did reply to your post, my initial reply was meant more generally for the most part. Sometimes the threads of discussion here, while acknowledging the irony of my posting in it, are....well, "C'mon, really?"

Are you saying that you think it's possible for a professional tennis player to decide to change from a one-hander to a two-hander after having already made it to the pros?

I suspect it's possible although I don't know how that would affect their ranking nor do I know that it's possible by any means. I do know that top juniors are usually able to do both quite well when they're just playing around or practicing, enough at any rate that they can rally for a bit. That doesn't mean they are confident in each enough to play either in a match. Heck, even not so highly ranked juniors are often able to do so. Considering that top juniors very frequently do turn pro, well, there's a least ten to twenty from the last decade that I know of who can hit both at a minimum of Div 1 college level. I would however never make an argument whether it's possible or not as I'm not them, I've never played pro tennis, and hence I have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what is or isn't possible to play on that level.

FWIW - I play with a one-hander but have been toying with a two-hander for about 2 months.

I play both too. I was mostly a 2HBH until a few years ago when I started trying to master the OHBH. For me, my OHBH is mostly defensive while my 2HBH is my power shot. *shrug*

 

[Dane_is_Finnish_OJ]

Every single player from the '80s and '90s except possibly Edberg would have been better if they had Agassi or Mecir's backhand.

Is this a true statement or not?

Lendl, Becker, Muster, Rafter. They had no problems with their 1HB either.

 

[1HBHFTW]

The only player to win any slams recently aside from Big 4 is Wawrinka with one-hander.
I don't see why 2 hander is better for high balls. How are you supposed to reach up to high balls with 2 hands on the racquet?
When I play, I find that when I go for my one-hander (rather than hesitating and slicing/blocking) I almost always win the point. One-hander drives through the court with lots of spin.

2H is much better for high balls because of the physical restriction of your right shoulder swinging from in to out (for a righty) on a OHBH above shoulder level. There’s no way to generate real power when you’re swinging above your shoulder away from your body with our front arm.

with a 2H you can use your offhand to generate power from above the shoulder since it can move with force in a high to low swing, where a 1H you basically have to just brush it back at that height

 

[Bartelby]

Two-handed is more oriented to open stance, and that aids mobility around the court.

 

[Pumpkin]

I think 1HBH is an advantage for the reasons you stated. Not many use it and yet they've had a lot of success.

Think about it. If you were going to swat a fly would you use one hand or two?

 

[Pumpkin]

I wouldn't be surprised if a player comes along who simply hits forehands off both sides. I think there already has been one but I'm talking about someone who is really good at it.

Because the forehand is a stronger shot than the backhand regardless of whether it is 1h or 2.

 

[NedStark]

Every single player from the '80s and '90s except possibly Edberg would have been better if they had Agassi or Mecir's backhand.

Is this a true statement or not?

Not if they played serve-and-volley. Fast court style old school single-handed BH with weaker grips (unlike Thiem/Wawa BH) actually strengthen BH slices and volleys.

Btw, Becker frequently overpowered most 2HBH baseliners not named Agassi with his 1HBH (his H2Hs against his contemporaries generally support my point).

 

[NAS]

Not if they played serve-and-volley. Fast court style old school single-handed BH with weaker grips (unlike Thiem/Wawa BH) actually strengthen BH slices and volleys.

Btw, Becker frequently overpowered most 2HBH baseliners not named Agassi with his 1HBH (his H2Hs against his contemporaries generally support my point).

Then why did Borg was successful, genuinely asking this

 

[NedStark]

Then why did Borg was successful, genuinely asking this

Good serve, best FH on the tour, his BH was also very strong, superior athleticism and mental strength.

Grass competition not that strong until 1980.

He would have won similar number of Slams with a 1hbh.

 

[NedStark]

Lendl, Becker, Muster, Rafter. They had no problems with their 1HB either.

Stich as well. And of course Edberg

Pete has weaker topspin BH on slow courts, but complimented it with great BH slice. However, fast court tennis went straight into his continental BH's strike zone.

 

[NedStark]

Think anyone who says this is mostly just thinking of Fed, but he’s an outlier.

If you check the list of one-handers until Federer's generation, the majority of the most prominent one-handers were fast courters: Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Stich, Sampras, Krajicek, as well as the weaker ones such as Henman, Phillippoussis, Ljubicic, Srichaphan, Blake.