Is the backhand slice the most complex shot in tennis?

[mcs1970]

Average weekend rec slice is as bad serve.
I'm talking about shots hit with full physical commitment. Not half hearted hacks.
They don't hit a single double fault, but miss lot many slices - long,wide or net.

Even I can hit slices pretty well (as per folks I play), and I don't consider myself anything more than a hack.

You're saying that you're talking about slices with full commitment and then in the same breath you mention that weekend hacks don't double fault? So they are serving with full commitment and not double faulting ?I f they are not hitting a single double fault most likely they're hitting pancake serves. Yet, that's ok, but you want to compare that against slices hit with full commitment?

Looks like you have a problem with slices and are engaging in some wrong comparisons. Back to your original point of the 'window of opportunity'. Look at any match. Even pros don't hit skidding, biting slices that just clear the net most of the time. Their slices have good pace but have good clearance too. They are pros, not superhuman. Anyone hitting low margin shots time and again, will be a very inconsistent player. If pros were masters of hitting low margin shots why do almost all of them not hit their 2nd serve the same way they hit their 1st serve? Why do they suddenly give themselves a much bigger margin for error by taking off some pace and generally having much more clearance?

 

[Dartagnan64]

The weak moonball topspin groundstroke and the floaty slice all have the same thing in common. Hit off the back foot. Every ground stroke is better hit off your front foot especially on the backhand side.

Personally the hardest groundstroke for me to get a handle on has been the FH slice. Getting that to penetrate and bite and not pop up is a challenge for me.

 

[atp2015]

Even I can hit slices pretty well (as per folks I play), and I don't consider myself anything more than a hack.

You're saying that you're talking about slices with full commitment and then in the same breath you mention that weekend hacks don't double fault? So they are serving with full commitment and not double faulting ?I f they are not hitting a single double fault most likely they're hitting pancake serves. Yet, that's ok, but you want to compare that against slices hit with full commitment?

Looks like you have a problem with slices and are engaging in some wrong comparisons. Back to your original point of the 'window of opportunity'. Look at any match. Even pros don't hit skidding, biting slices that just clear the net most of the time. Their slices have good pace but have good clearance too. They are pros, not superhuman. Anyone hitting low margin shots time and again, will be a very inconsistent player. If pros were masters of hitting low margin shots why do almost all of them not hit their 2nd serve the same way they hit their 1st serve? Why do they suddenly give themselves a much bigger margin for error by taking off some pace and generally having much more clearance?

The salient points of my argument-
1 serve and topspin shots are mechanical in nature and you can hit as hard as you can and keep the ball in as long as the technique is maintained.
2 slice is a touch and feel shot and not a 'mechanical' one.

Mechanical I mean a brute force shot without regards to the speed and spin of the incoming ball.
Slice , otoh, requires superior timing and shot power calibration depending on spin, pace and height etc.
I'm not adding anything new , just paraphrasing my earlier points.

 

[atp2015]

The weak moonball topspin groundstroke and the floaty slice all have the same thing in common. Hit off the back foot. Every ground stroke is better hit off your front foot especially on the backhand side.

Personally the hardest groundstroke for me to get a handle on has been the FH slice. Getting that to penetrate and bite and not pop up is a challenge for me.

I agree, good fh slice is hard. But thankfully it's not as useful as backhand slice.

 

[FiReFTW]

The salient points of my argument-
1 serve and topspin shots are mechanical in nature and you can hit as hard as you can and keep the ball in as long as the technique is maintained.

Thats why everyone can hit 115mph serves and place them in corners with 80% 1st serve percentage. LOL

 

[Dartagnan64]

Thats why everyone can hit 115mph serves and place them in corners with 80% 1st serve percentage. LOL

Just as many that hit 90 MPH FH's that explode off the court into the deep corners and diabolical slices that just clear the net and skid 6 inches off the ground.

The top level of every tennis shot is amazingly hard. Most tennis players work hard at serve and FH not because they are the most complicated but excelling at them is most likely to lead to good results.

The thing that does separate serve from slice is the requirement of fast twitch muscle power. That's harder to coach.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Not sure why my serve and fh are my best shots, I work on them the most and they were the easiest to make work. The serve was easiest to make work because it was the first shot that needed work cause it was causing the most frustration so I had the initial drive to fix it. As a beginner I didn't practice a "just get it in serve" I went full on to a technique where I could swing the racquet fully without abandon.
If my slice isn't as far along in development after so much time has passed is that because it's difficult whether it be do to not spending the time or the technique itself. Many would assume its got to be an easily mastered shot "if I put the time into it", but until it's done, I guess it's tbd

 

[FiReFTW]

Just as many that hit 90 MPH FH's that explode off the court into the deep corners and diabolical slices that just clear the net and skid 6 inches off the ground.

The top level of every tennis shot is amazingly hard. Most tennis players work hard at serve and FH not because they are the most complicated but excelling at them is most likely to lead to good results.

The thing that does separate serve from slice is the requirement of fast twitch muscle power. That's harder to coach.

Its not only that, the serve is just technically the most complex shot in tennis.

 

[mcs1970]

Not sure why my serve and fh are my best shots, I work on them the most and they were the easiest to make work. The serve was easiest to make work because it was the first shot that needed work cause it was causing the most frustration so I had the initial drive to fix it. As a beginner I didn't practice a "just get it in serve" I went full on to a technique where I could swing the racquet fully without abandon.
If my slice isn't as far along in development after so much time has passed is that because it's difficult whether it be do to not spending the time or the technique itself. Many would assume its got to be an easily mastered shot "if I put the time into it", but until it's done, I guess it's tbd

It could also be that some strokes come more naturally to some than others. I have played racquetball at a pretty high level for about 20 years before tennis. The slice came very easily to me, and no I'm not talking about just balls that float slowly. My serves OTOH, I have to practice hard to this day. It takes a lot of work for me and just like you I put in the time because I don't want to hit dink serves just to keep the ball in. So if my slices were that way , I'd definitely have worked much more on those too, but for some reason, that's the only stroke that came easy for me.

 

[atp2015]

Thats why everyone can hit 115mph serves and place them in corners with 80% 1st serve percentage. LOL

Thats why everyone can hit 115mph serves and place them in corners with 80% 1st serve percentage. LOL

How does it alter the fact that slice is harder?

 

[atp2015]

Many would assume its got to be an easily mastered shot "if I put the time into it", but until it's done, I guess it's tbd

They are talking about soft slices, not the ones similar to what @IowaGuy hits.
They are very hard with balls at varying speed. No topspin to bail you out of less than ideal timing and spacing.

 

[FiReFTW]

@atp2015 just doesn't want too accept facts.

I even talked to my coach now for feedback and if im right, and it was confirmed that im absolutely right.

Serve is technically and mechanically the most complex shot in tennis.

Backhand slice is actually technically and mechanically one of the easiest and simplest shots in tennis right after the volley, infact... backhand slice is actually almost like a backhand volley, mechanically its extremely similar and not much different at all.


@atp2015 is stubbornly arguing that its the hardest shot in tennis and his proof for this is that not many players can hit extremely penetrating low skiding slices, so that is his proof that its the hardest shot in tennis to learn and the most complex.

But what he fails to accept and admit is, that if he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice and how its hard to learn, then he must take the same standards for other strokes, he can't just say a decent serve or a decent groundstroke is easier to learn, because here he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice, which is not anywhere close to a decent shot, he is talking about an extremely high level shot here.

So take the same standards for other strokes aswell..

How long does it take to learn a high level groundstroke? And by high level I mean very strong powerful stroke with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately in many difficult positions, on the run, against different balls etc...

How long does it take to learn a high level serve? And by high level I mean very strong powerful serve with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately and keep a high % of serves in, and not only 1 serve but all types of serves (slice, spin, kick, flat)

The answer to both these questions is... most likely with a TON of training and practice and drilling and matchplay, it takes probably around 7-10 years.

Now the 2nd important thing here is, how much do pretty much all tennis players train, practice and drill the backhand slice compared to groundstrokes and serve?

If you take anyone who trains and practices alot and plays, they pretty much practice and work on their groundstrokes around 60-70% and the serve around 30-40%, and the slice? I don't think its even 1%, just think about that long and hard, when was the last time you saw someone drill and practice backhand slices?
Even Fed and players like that who have a great slice, they don't practice it anywhere NEAR as much as the serve or groundstrokes, and yet Fed has a wonderful slice aswell as groundstrokes.

So considering it takes 7-10 years to build high level topspin groundstrokes, and pretty much everyone is practicing and drilling them AT LEAST 10 times more than backhand slice (which would then need 70-100 years to reach the same level based on these statistics) and yet some players do have a very good slice, isn't this actually the exact OPPOSITE of what @atp2015 claims, and is actually proof that the slice is infact one of the easiest and simplest shots to learn to hit well?

 

[Hmgraphite1]

@atp2015 just doesn't want too accept facts.

I even talked to my coach now for feedback and if im right, and it was confirmed that im absolutely right.

Serve is technically and mechanically the most complex shot in tennis.

Backhand slice is actually technically and mechanically one of the easiest and simplest shots in tennis right after the volley, infact... backhand slice is actually almost like a backhand volley, mechanically its extremely similar and not much different at all.


@atp2015 is stubbornly arguing that its the hardest shot in tennis and his proof for this is that not many players can hit extremely penetrating low skiding slices, so that is his proof that its the hardest shot in tennis to learn and the most complex.

But what he fails to accept and admit is, that if he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice and how its hard to learn, then he must take the same standards for other strokes, he can't just say a decent serve or a decent groundstroke is easier to learn, because here he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice, which is not anywhere close to a decent shot, he is talking about an extremely high level shot here.

So take the same standards for other strokes aswell..

How long does it take to learn a high level groundstroke? And by high level I mean very strong powerful stroke with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately in many difficult positions, on the run, against different balls etc...

How long does it take to learn a high level serve? And by high level I mean very strong powerful serve with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately and keep a high % of serves in, and not only 1 serve but all types of serves (slice, spin, kick, flat)

The answer to both these questions is... most likely with a TON of training and practice and drilling and matchplay, it takes probably around 7-10 years.

Now the 2nd important thing here is, how much do pretty much all tennis players train, practice and drill the backhand slice compared to groundstrokes and serve?

If you take anyone who trains and practices alot and plays, they pretty much practice and work on their groundstrokes around 60-70% and the serve around 30-40%, and the slice? I don't think its even 1%, just think about that long and hard, when was the last time you saw someone drill and practice backhand slices?
Even Fed and players like that who have a great slice, they don't practice it anywhere NEAR as much as the serve or groundstrokes, and yet Fed has a wonderful slice aswell as groundstrokes.

So considering it takes 7-10 years to build high level topspin groundstrokes, and pretty much everyone is practicing and drilling them AT LEAST 10 times more than backhand slice (which would then need 70-100 years to reach the same level based on these statistics) and yet some players do have a very good slice, isn't this actually the exact OPPOSITE of what @atp2015 claims, and is actually proof that the slice is infact one of the easiest and simplest shots to learn to hit well?

But it does require bird eyes (on the side of your head) to aim it , no?

 

[atp2015]

@atp2015 just doesn't want too accept facts.

I even talked to my coach now for feedback and if im right, and it was confirmed that im absolutely right.

Serve is technically and mechanically the most complex shot in tennis.

Backhand slice is actually technically and mechanically one of the easiest and simplest shots in tennis right after the volley, infact... backhand slice is actually almost like a backhand volley, mechanically its extremely similar and not much different at all.


@atp2015 is stubbornly arguing that its the hardest shot in tennis and his proof for this is that not many players can hit extremely penetrating low skiding slices, so that is his proof that its the hardest shot in tennis to learn and the most complex.

But what he fails to accept and admit is, that if he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice and how its hard to learn, then he must take the same standards for other strokes, he can't just say a decent serve or a decent groundstroke is easier to learn, because here he is talking about a low skiding penetrating slice, which is not anywhere close to a decent shot, he is talking about an extremely high level shot here.

So take the same standards for other strokes aswell..

How long does it take to learn a high level groundstroke? And by high level I mean very strong powerful stroke with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately in many difficult positions, on the run, against different balls etc...

How long does it take to learn a high level serve? And by high level I mean very strong powerful serve with heavy spin, very consistent and able to hit and aim spots accurately and keep a high % of serves in, and not only 1 serve but all types of serves (slice, spin, kick, flat)

The answer to both these questions is... most likely with a TON of training and practice and drilling and matchplay, it takes probably around 7-10 years.

Now the 2nd important thing here is, how much do pretty much all tennis players train, practice and drill the backhand slice compared to groundstrokes and serve?

If you take anyone who trains and practices alot and plays, they pretty much practice and work on their groundstrokes around 60-70% and the serve around 30-40%, and the slice? I don't think its even 1%, just think about that long and hard, when was the last time you saw someone drill and practice backhand slices?
Even Fed and players like that who have a great slice, they don't practice it anywhere NEAR as much as the serve or groundstrokes, and yet Fed has a wonderful slice aswell as groundstrokes.

So considering it takes 7-10 years to build high level topspin groundstrokes, and pretty much everyone is practicing and drilling them AT LEAST 10 times more than backhand slice (which would then need 70-100 years to reach the same level based on these statistics) and yet some players do have a very good slice, isn't this actually the exact OPPOSITE of what @atp2015 claims, and is actually proof that the slice is infact one of the easiest and simplest shots to learn to hit well?

Very well written. I could give this UTR 17 or higher rating if it didn't include abundant criticism of my arguments.

 

[FiReFTW]

Very well written. I could give this UT7 17 or higher rating if it didn't include abundant criticism of my arguments.

haha!

 

[Wise one]

So few use slice, because it's a very hard shot to master and do well with it.
Top spins shots are easy to learn and practice and we don't shank them often.

Everyone can hit a floaty slice with nothing much on it. The biting hard slice requires much superior feel and skill for the shot.
Serve might be hard to learn, but once you learn, it becomes mechanical and can repeat it just about anytime. Slice is a different beast. It's my experience and what I see outside.

All of this is false!

 

[mcs1970]

They are talking about soft slices, not the ones similar to what @IowaGuy hits.
They are very hard with balls at varying speed. No topspin to bail you out of less than ideal timing and spacing.

Why do you assume that people just hit soft slices? I've seen one guy who can hit serves that make others stop and look, while I've seen many rec players with very nice slices.

As I said, I didn't want to hit soft serves just to not double fault, and so I work on it to this day. If my slices were slow floaters similarly, I'd be honest enough to admit it. If other rec folks were consistently hitting terrible slices, I'd not be saying that they slice well. Probably all of our slices do suck in the grand scheme of things when compared to a pro, but overall it is a pretty reliable shot which is what keeps me and other players I've viewed, predominantly in rallies even with really good players. I'm telling you that you're wrong that slices have to be hit in a tight window or have to be dipping with a lot of pace constantly. Even IowaGuy is posting hand feeds. He won't hit with that same ferocity in a real match time and again. No one..not even pros..can hope to be consistent by hitting low margin, high risk shots. You have a lot of window of opportunity on your slices. Watch the older guys play again. They are hitting pretty solid slices. Just because it doesn't match with your expectation that slices have to be biting and dipping while barely skimming the net, it doesn't mean that those slices are weak or that you have to hit slices with a very low margin for error.

 

[IowaGuy]

10,000 reps? 500 per week for 20 weeks...

Yeah, I think 10,000 reps is probably about right to get the muscle memory to start to take hold (not sure as I have never actually counted).

How many reps would you say?

@Curious might have some ideas as he tried something similar with his FH...

 

[Curious]

Yeah, I think 10,000 reps is probably about right to get the muscle memory to start to take hold (not sure as I have never actually counted).

How many reps would you say?

@Curious might have some ideas as he tried something similar with his FH...

15,000! But I have since changed my forehand to Nadal style. So 50,000 more for me!

 

[Hmgraphite1]

15,000! But I have since changed my forehand to Nadal style. So 50,000 more for me!

Each time you change it you need to exponentially increase the reps. Eventually it will be a lifetime of change

 

[mad dog1]

But I have since changed my forehand to Nadal style.

Why?

 

[BAAllen]

I suck at the backhand slice. Every now and again I get a good one, but most of the time I might as well tie a string to the ball and take it to a birthday party because that thing be floatin’ like a balloon!

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I suck at the backhand slice. Every now and again I get a good one, but most of the time I might as well tie a string to the ball and take it to a birthday party because that thing be floatin’ like a balloon!

Most likely your racquet face is too open. Try closing it to the extreme where you're actually hitting the ball into the middle of the net. Then adjust a bit back more towards open.

 

[Curious]

But I have since changed my forehand to Nadal style. So 50,000 more for me!

Why?

Because I love it. I believe he has the most throw-like, loosest forehand. I have studied it quite extensively, trying to understand the crucial elements and I believe I got it. And I have been using it for about a month now and it's work in progress.

 

[mad dog1]

Because I love it. I believe he has the most throw-like, loosest forehand. I have studied it quite extensively, trying to understand the crucial elements and I believe I got it. And I have been using it for about a month now and it's work in progress.

Just curious because my coach said Nadal’s fh is one of the more difficult forehands to copy. But if you are able to do it to great effect, more power to you.

 

[Curious]

Just curious because my coach said Nadal’s fh is one of the more difficult forehands to copy. But if you are able to do it to great effect, more power to you.

It looks a little complicated because it's unique. I found out his very special racket take back is not coincidence or random, it makes racket drop much easier as he sort of pulls the racket head towards his head in the first stages of take back which stretches his forearm which in return pulls the racket head down into the slot during the rest of racket take back, easily, naturally like a stretched rubber band pulling something attached to it. I think that's the reason why his wrist looks so much bent back. The other important element is his grip for a great throw: choking down on the handle, keeping the buttcap inside his palm.

Can you see how close the racket head travels to his head? It's like his off-arm holding the racket throat is pulling the racket head towards himself while the handle of the racket is further away from him.

 

[FiReFTW]

Just curious because my coach said Nadal’s fh is one of the more difficult forehands to copy. But if you are able to do it to great effect, more power to you.

He keeps changing his strokes every 3 months, are you really suprized?

 

[jga111]

But u dont get the point it seems.

99% of WTA players never use the slice as a tool.
They use it at times to get out of trouble, and its suficient good as it is for that, they rather develop other more important strokes in their arsenal that they actually use as tools.

Now you take federer which is a good example or someone similar, they dont use the slice out of necessity to get out of trouble in extreme cases, but they use the slice as a tool, just like their other strokes.
They use it to change rhytm, vary the backspin and depth, use it to chip and charge, use it to chip big serves deep, use the short slice to lure someone to net...etc

So naturaly they need to practice it more, because they use it more and for many more things and different variations of it.

Now if ur arugment is that the majority of players would benefit using the slice as an offensive tool instead of just defending certain rare tough situations...then sure, of course I agree, the more tools and shots and variation you have the better.

But the majority dont agree, they just dont use it or have any desire to use it in such a way and focus on other things.
Now is it the coaching or youth development or something, i dont know, but its just how it is.
Why do you think people say WTA is bland? Because even if u ignore the slice, they just have (majority) way less variation in their game, most of their game is just build around bashing flat balls and outhitting the opponent from the baseline.

I don't think I'm really making any argument here.

Like I said, I am in agreement with you when it comes to what is the most technically difficult shot in tennis.

I was questioning however why the slice in tennis for most players is not a well developed shot. This surprises me on a few levels.

We know that if you have good slice, you have an immediate advantage over the majority of your opponents (who do not).
As a rec player myself, I see the value in a slice and sometimes I dedicate just 10 minutes on hitting low skidding slices working the direction and depth. I use it often in a match in line with TS backhand and my opponents have to adjust to different tempos. Good for me!

You say players hardly practice the slice - this is not a reason, just a symptom of why they are not bothered by it. But why?

Is it a case the means of developing a good slice can be found to be a time consuming difficult task?

Is it because it is another shot in the locker and can further complicate the shot-selection making process which a player may not be able to handle, or just not like?

I think we can all agree a developed slice is a great shot to have - so why DO players choose to ignore it, and in particular the WTA lot as you say? Why do they just settle on a basic unfrequented floater?

 

[FiReFTW]

I don't think I'm really making any argument here.

Like I said, I am in agreement with you when it comes to what is the most technically difficult shot in tennis.

I was questioning however why the slice in tennis for most players is not a well developed shot. This surprises me on a few levels.

We know that if you have good slice, you have an immediate advantage over the majority of your opponents (who do not).
As a rec player myself, I see the value in a slice and sometimes I dedicate just 10 minutes on hitting low skidding slices working the direction and depth. I use it often in a match in line with TS backhand and my opponents have to adjust to different tempos. Good for me!

You say players hardly practice the slice - this is not a reason, just a symptom of why they are not bothered by it. But why?

Is it a case the means of developing a good slice can be found to be a time consuming difficult task?

Is it because it is another shot in the locker and can further complicate the shot-selection making process which a player may not be able to handle, or just not like?

I think we can all agree a developed slice is a great shot to have - so why DO players choose to ignore it, and in particular the WTA lot as you say? Why do they just settle on a basic unfrequented floater?

I think they just rather focus their time and training on further developing other strokes like serve, topspin backhand, topspin forehand, return etc

A slice is a great shot to have mastered but you can live without that, but you can't live without having a serve for example, so I think thats why, at least thats my best guess.

Thats probably why alot of them also don't know how to hit a tweener or a backhand smash, they dont rly practice it because they can live without it and rather focus on other shots and keep drilling those.

And then they are players who want to develop it and want to play variety and all court game.

 

[acintya]

I totally agree. Pretty much anyone can slice their backhand, but not many can do a good job(good height, spin and pace).

this. just want to add, i was never properly learning how to slice with my right - i always find it very hard to pull off a really mean slice.i only know that if you want to have a devastating slice you need to cut it like you would be a serial killer. cut the ball like crazy.now i am learning it with my left hand and soon i will be confident with it - but it will take a lot of work.also i never had better slice ability than with my microgel radical OS!!!! the extra headsize is such a difference that i cannot explain it...

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I was questioning however why the slice in tennis for most players is not a well developed shot.

I think it's because everything is so offense-oriented these days that people [especially rec players watching highlight reels of Del Potro FHs and Djokovic BHs] don't give the slice much consideration. They use it for emergencies but not much else.

This surprises me on a few levels.

We know that if you have good slice, you have an immediate advantage over the majority of your opponents (who do not).
As a rec player myself, I see the value in a slice and sometimes I dedicate just 10 minutes on hitting low skidding slices working the direction and depth. I use it often in a match in line with TS backhand and my opponents have to adjust to different tempos. Good for me!

I'm with you. I use slice a lot [perhaps too much: when I get pulled wide, instead of making the extra effort to drive a 2HBH TS, I use the 1HBH slice because it's a lot easier [and I have further reach]].

But as long as I get it reasonably deep, it's not so easy to attack [some people here imply that if my slice isn't knife-like and barely clears the net then my opponent is going to hit winners all day from 80+' away; sure...if my opponent is an entire level better than me. But a peer? Not in my experience.].

You say players hardly practice the slice - this is not a reason, just a symptom of why they are not bothered by it. But why?

Is it a case the means of developing a good slice can be found to be a time consuming difficult task?

Is it because it is another shot in the locker and can further complicate the shot-selection making process which a player may not be able to handle, or just not like?

I think we can all agree a developed slice is a great shot to have - so why DO players choose to ignore it, and in particular the WTA lot as you say? Why do they just settle on a basic unfrequented floater?

When I practice, I always include slice. It pays off because I always run into match situations where "slice is nice".

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

A slice is a great shot to have mastered but you can live without that, but you can't live without having a serve for example, so I think thats why, at least thats my best guess.

You're comparing apples to oranges, though: mastered slice vs functional serve. If you want to make a valid comparison, it would have to be a mastered slice vs a mastered serve or a functional slice vs a functional serve.

I agree that I could live without even a functional slice but not without a functional serve.

Thats probably why alot of them also don't know how to hit a tweener or a backhand smash, they dont rly practice it because they can live without it and rather focus on other shots and keep drilling those.

But I think the main reason people don't practice tweeners or BH OHs is that the opportunity doesn't arise that often compared to slice. I could go an entire match without a reasonable chance to attempt a tweener but the opportunity for a slice is always presenting itself.

When I hit against the wall, I actually practice tweeners because it's fun.[/QUOTE]

 

[acintya]

i like this thread

 

[FiReFTW]

But I think the main reason people don't practice tweeners or BH OHs is that the opportunity doesn't arise that often compared to slice. I could go an entire match without a reasonable chance to attempt a tweener but the opportunity for a slice is always presenting itself.

When I hit against the wall, I actually practice tweeners because it's fun.

[/QUOTE]

But in 99% of cases when the oppurtunity presents itself you can always just hit a topspin backhand.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

But in 99% of cases when the oppurtunity presents itself you can always just hit a topspin backhand.

I'd quibble with your "99%" figure but assuming it's true, that doesn't mean I'll choose TS. I've already said that I like my slice BH because it seems simpler to hit mechanically and I make very few errors relative to my TS BH.

 

[FiReFTW]

I'd quibble with your "99%" figure but assuming it's true, that doesn't mean I'll choose TS. I've already said that I like my slice BH because it seems simpler to hit mechanically and I make very few errors relative to my TS BH.

And I agree with you and think the slice is great to use in a variety of situations and have a variety of different slices also.
But im saying that most tennis players seem to think its not needed and dont really work on it at all or very little.

Even good juniors here work on the slice like 1% compared to topspin backhand and forehand, thats MINISCULE.

Or course they learned the slice technique and have an ok slice, dont think any high level player or junior has a horrible slice or any other shot for that matter, but most have only an OK one, dont work on it alot or use it alot, so far away from a high level low skid penetrating slice ala federer.

 

[atp2015]

it seems simpler to hit mechanically and I make very few errors relative to my TS BH.

Is it simple for equivalent quality? Are you comparing single handed ts vs slice? I have 2hbh, it's very reliable for a standard rally shot - my slice is neutral or better 20% of the time after starting to hit for about a year now. I changed slice from a chop action to drive slice around 2 months ago - it's a bit better now. But it's way behind all my other shots. For me personally, the equivalent quality slice (equivalent to other shots) has been a lot harder to hit than anything else.
btw, I have not seen anyone with a great slice either - everyone I see at rec level has a slice that they play like a volley. I don't like to hit ground shots with feel and touch, I want to see and swing as fast as I can - and slice does not let me do that.
( I agree learning to hit functional slice is easier than serve and atp fh, but putting slice to practice is a lot harder )

 

[FiReFTW]

Is it simple for equivalent quality? Are you comparing single handed ts vs slice? I have 2hbh, it's very reliable for a standard rally shot - my slice is neutral or better 20% of the time after starting to hit for about a year now. I changed slice from a chop action to drive slice around 2 months ago - it's a bit better now. But it's way behind all my other shots. For me personally, the equivalent quality slice (equivalent to other shots) has been a lot harder to hit than anything else.
btw, I have not seen anyone with a great slice either - everyone I see at rec level has a slice that they play like a volley. I don't like to hit ground shots with feel and touch, I want to see and swing as fast as I can - and slice does not let me do that.
( I agree learning to hit functional slice is easier than serve and atp fh, but putting slice to practice is a lot harder )

Lol rec players are even worse. When does a rec player practice slice? 1 out of 1000 maybe.

Most just play and hit it during matches with horrible form.

If you practice slice for 2hozrs per week for1 year you should develop quite a good slice...assuming ur form and mechanics are correct.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Is it simple for equivalent quality?

I definitely think so. From a purely bio-mechanical standpoint, an overhand throwing motion is considerably more complicated than a waist-high motion.

Are you comparing single handed ts vs slice?

I wasn't thinking specifically about 1H vs 2H TS; I have a 2HBH.

btw, I have not seen anyone with a great slice either - everyone I see at rec level has a slice that they play like a volley.

I'd agree that I've seen more great serves than great slices. But that has to be modified by the fact that the server controls the toss whereas the slicer does not.

I don't like to hit ground shots with feel and touch, I want to see and swing as fast as I can - and slice does not let me do that.

I think that's the crux of your post: your motivation for hitting a shot might be different than others and that's why you interpret the difficulty differently.

I don't want to hit as fast as I can all of the time; I want to hit a shot that's appropriate for the situation, which might involve touch and slice. But that's a personal preference.

 

[atp2015]

If you practice slice for 2hozrs per week for1 year you should develop quite a good slice...assuming ur form and mechanics are correct.

sounds right - that's what I have been trying to say - slice, though looks deceptively simple, requires dedicated practice for months/years. tbh, I was not expecting it to be that hard when I started to hit a year ago- I knew serve and atp fh would take a long time and no surprise there. In fact, atp fh was a lot easier to start hitting - just a few sessions. (but using it in match play regularly took 2+ years because I was going back to old habit)

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

sounds right - that's what I have been trying to say - slice, though looks deceptively simple, requires dedicated practice for months/years.

The slice doesn't appear deceptively simple to me. Every stroke the pros hit can appear simple but I know they are a lot more complicated. You just need to adjust your mental model and stop going on appearances, maybe.

Also, your definition of slice is to hit the ball as fast as you can because that's how you like hitting your TS spots; I think that idea gives rise to the difficulties you're having [you have a much higher threshold of success. Mine is quite a bit lower.]. I don't believe that's how the slice should be approached.

 

[jga111]

sounds right - that's what I have been trying to say - slice, though looks deceptively simple, requires dedicated practice for months/years. tbh, I was not expecting it to be that hard when I started to hit a year ago- I knew serve and atp fh would take a long time and no surprise there. In fact, atp fh was a lot easier to start hitting - just a few sessions. (but using it in match play regularly took 2+ years because I was going back to old habit)

If you get the mechanics of a slice wrong, it can be very unforgiving.

Most rec players can't get the distance right (often too close). Their body shape is wrong. Their follow through is non-existant. It is to be fair, a very difficult shot.

But if you get it right - it's beautiful - the feeling of hitting the ball crisp with effortless motion and follow through, i love it!

And from a functional point of view - the slice does not involve as much shoulder rotation as a TS backhand. So in situations when you are late to the shot, or just feeling late in general on the day, the slice buys you more time.

USELESS FACT

I'll never forget when Gasquet was struggling against Wawrinka (or Kyrgios? Can't remember) at Wimbledon a few years ago. In the end he found a way to beat him - after using a FOREHAND slice regularly from when he was down in the 2/3rd set.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

USELESS FACT

I'll never forget when Gasquet was struggling against Wawrinka (or Kyrgios? Can't remember) at Wimbledon a few years ago. In the end he found a way to beat him - after using a FOREHAND slice regularly from when he was down in the 2/3rd set.

I don't think that's "useless": rec players can learn from things like this: "Adapt and overcome".

 

[JohnYandell]

Well different strokes are more or less difficult for different players. Interestingly in 20 plus years of teaching low level players I found with one handers that they either naturally sliced or naturally hit flat. This was true even when showing them models for the drive. For the guys who naturally sliced it was relatively easy. Those who for whatever reason naturally tended to hit thru, harder. Two handers? Rarely do you find even at higher level a two hander whose slice is a natural as a one-hander.

 

[Keendog]

Me after reading this thread:

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Two handers? Rarely do you find even at higher level a two hander whose slice is a natural as a one-hander.

What do you think of Barty's slice? Forgetting gender for a moment, she looks very comfortable and skilled with it; she reminds me of Dimitrov or even Federer, the way she moves her opponent around.

Then when you add gender it's all the more unusual because very few women use the slice except for extreme defense.

 

[atp2015]

What do you think of Barty's slice? Forgetting gender for a moment, she looks very comfortable and skilled with it; she reminds me of Dimitrov or even Federer, the way she moves her opponent around.

Then when you add gender it's all the more unusual because very few women use the slice except for extreme defense.

It's a "nothing in it" shot. See the highlight below. I counted 8 slices, lost all points with a slice in it. Halep hit 4 winners and drew 1 error straight out of slice. 3 others were week or neutral and eventually lost the point.
Either she is a weak slicer or slice is a very hard shot to do something neutral with it.
4 winners out of 8 slices is a bad number.

I play just 4.0 tennis,( in a very competitive 12 months a year outdoors tennis region) and my slice numbers are as similar.

 

[mcs1970]

It's a "nothing in it" shot. See the highlight below. I counted 8 slices, lost all points with a slice in it. Halep hit 4 winners and drew 1 error straight out of slice. 3 others were week or neutral and eventually lost the point.
Either she is a weak slicer or slice is a very hard shot to do something neutral with it.
4 winners out of 8 slices is a bad number.

A slice is not supposed to be a shot that you hit outright for winners. Even for someone like Rosewall, the slice was something that was a 2-3 step progression to eventually hit a volley to finish off the point. For Steffi. too it was the same, though for her it was a setup for her forehand. The main aim was to get the other player have to lift up the ball to elicit a weaker shot that the player playing the slice could eventually take advantage off. Most of the time with slices, you're hoping your opponent makes a mistake. That's why topspin bh are much more prevalent because those can be hit for clean winners much more. I think again, that you see a few slices that are biting and dipping and hit for clean winners, and are making a generalization that all good slices have to be that way.

Also as Yandell said, for some certain strokes comes much more easily than for others. It's not that there is anything inherently complex about it. Maybe slices come more difficult for you, whereas other strokes that you find easy come more difficult for others. Also maybe your racquet size makes a difference. High level players can execute any shot with any racquet. For me, slices have worked well with mid size or smaller players racquets (heavy/HL such as KPS 88, PS 85,..etc). The racquet I've played the last 2 years is the PB10 mid. Slice hitter's dream.

 

[JohnYandell]

S and V,
Haven't studied it enough to have a valid opinion...

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

S and V,
Haven't studied it enough to have a valid opinion...

When did anyone on this forum let lack of knowledge get in the way of offering an opinion?