Is the One-Handed Backhand effective in today's tennis

[Smecz]

Few players from Atp and Wta use one handed backhand,
and its users usually have a problem with a strong serve and a sharp top spin.
Two-handed players have recently gained a large advantage over one-handed players.
more victories in atp and grand slam tournaments are recorded by holders of a two-handed backhand.

One-handed requires more technique, footwork and it is often the case that people who use it sometimes have to block plays with two hands.

It takes a lot of effort and intuition to block a service bomb with a one-handed backhand, and when playing hard top spin games, playing from the cage, you have to wave pretty well.

Coaches are now emphasizing learning two-handed backhand, and there are fewer and fewer coaches who want to teach traditional tennis.

The disappearance of one-handed players can be seen among women, less and less women play one-handed, I do not remember that such a player won the tournament, let alone the grand slam.


Are we seeing the beginning of the end of the one-handed backhand now?

 

[Mark-Touch]

If you search the forums here you should find many threads on this very topic!

 

[Dragy]

Few players from Atp and Wta use one handed backhand,
and its users usually have a problem with a strong serve and a sharp top spin.
Two-handed players have recently gained a large advantage over one-handed players.
more victories in atp and grand slam tournaments are recorded by holders of a two-handed backhand.

One-handed requires more technique, footwork and it is often the case that people who use it sometimes have to block plays with two hands.

It takes a lot of effort and intuition to block a service bomb with a one-handed backhand, and when playing hard top spin games, playing from the cage, you have to wave pretty well.

Coaches are now emphasizing learning two-handed backhand, and there are fewer and fewer coaches who want to teach traditional tennis.

The disappearance of one-handed players can be seen among women, less and less women play one-handed, I do not remember that such a player won the tournament, let alone the grand slam.


Are we seeing the beginning of the end of the one-handed backhand now?

Are you from 2005? Have been stasis-sleeping?

 

[Shroud]

Few players from Atp and Wta use one handed backhand,
and its users usually have a problem with a strong serve and a sharp top spin.
Two-handed players have recently gained a large advantage over one-handed players.
more victories in atp and grand slam tournaments are recorded by holders of a two-handed backhand.

One-handed requires more technique, footwork and it is often the case that people who use it sometimes have to block plays with two hands.

It takes a lot of effort and intuition to block a service bomb with a one-handed backhand, and when playing hard top spin games, playing from the cage, you have to wave pretty well.

Coaches are now emphasizing learning two-handed backhand, and there are fewer and fewer coaches who want to teach traditional tennis.

The disappearance of one-handed players can be seen among women, less and less women play one-handed, I do not remember that such a player won the tournament, let alone the grand slam.


Are we seeing the beginning of the end of the one-handed backhand now?

horses for courses. There was a time where this was totally reversed. One handers dominated and 2 handers were rare....

 

[Chas Tennis]

The Death of the One-Handed Backhand (Published 2014)

One of the most beautiful strokes in tennis is in danger of disappearing entirely.

www.nytimes.com

All one hand backhand techniques are not alike.

This is what the best ATP 1HBH players and Justine Henin used for their 1HBH technique. (excepting Federer)

One Hand Backhand - Waht Force to Start Forward Swing?

One Hand Backhand - What Force to Start Forward Swing? I have just been watching great one-hand backhands at the Madrid Open. Including excellent slow motion that can be replayed in even slower motion or single frame with my DVR. Often when I try to swing forward for a one hand backhand...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

If you are wondering what to believe about tennis strokes, start looking carefully at high speed videos. Check out what I've posted.

 

[Rosstour]

Requires less footwork imo

 

[Jonesy]

10% of the atp tour more of less has a one hander. Considering it was dying more than 10 years ago i'd say it won't change much anymore.

One handed backhands in the top 100?

I wanted to know the ratio of one handed backhands in the top 100 compared to two handed. ATP: Tsitsipas Musetti Shapo Dimitrov Evans Gasquet Altmaier O'Connell Cecchinato Lajovic Thiem WTA: Golubic Maria Are there any others in the top 100 right now?

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

It will continue to be a minority but it won't die. Why? Because in the hands of those with a natural inclination for the one hander generated of genetic predispositions it is a better BH than many 2handers.

That being said, the number of coaches that never learned how a one hander works are indeed increasing, and that might affect the occurrence of forced teaching of 2handed BH technique on those who are better fit for the one hander.

Perhaps in Europe because of tradition coaches still have the one hander teachings alive.

 

[Dragy]

10% of the atp tour more of less has a one hander. Considering it was dying more than 10 years ago i'd say it won't change much anymore.

And half of the guys who are in top 100 are within top 30 (5 namely)

At some point there were 3 or 4 in top ten. So speculating of course, but it was like relative to overall distribution among pro players, OHBH players have been more successful to reach top elite levels

 

[Jonesy]

And half of the guys who are in top 100 are within top 30 (5 namely)

At some point there were 3 or 4 in top ten. So speculating of course, but it was like relative to overall distribution among pro players, OHBH players have been more successful to reach top elite levels

Yeah, the OHBH in the right hands can indeed be better than a 2HBH. That is why i believe it won't die.

 

[Smecz]

Tennis Abstract: ATP One-Hand Backhand Rankings

 

[PRS]

As others have been saying, you're late to the game OP. People thought the one-hander was dying 10-ish years ago, but it never did, and it even bounced back a little. I think it'll always be in the minority, but I doubt it'll ever die. There will always be some people with a natural propensity for the one-hander over two, and they each have their own pros and cons. Many people when say that, as a whole, the two-hander is superior, but that doesn't mean someone can't have a great one-hander that is better than most two-handers, and it doesn't mean someone can't succeed despite having a slightly weaker backhand.

 

[Smecz]

Justine Henin explains why the one-handed backhand is a dying art in women's tennis

Justine Henins beautiful backhand gained notoriety for vanquishing many an opponent during her dominance of the womens game; the Belgians eloquent single-hander can only be compared to the likes of Richard Gasquet, Stan Wawrinka and Roger Federer in the mens game

www.skysports.com

 

[Jay_The_Nomad]

One HBH will probably die eventually. It has been dying a slow death, kept alive thanks to Fed and to a lesser extent Gasquet and Thiem.
You now have Shapovalov and Tsitsipas carrying the torch and how they perform in terms of grandslam wins will determine the popularity of the 1hbh being taught to juniors.

But as it stands, coaches generally lean towards teaching the 2hbh. Even 20 years ago when I was learning the sport as a child that was the case. I started with a 1hbh because my first coach was an old school coach. But when I started training with the more “modern” coaches running the junior squads, I was soon switched to a 2hbh.

These days it’ll be even more difficult to learn the 1hbh as most of the young coaches all learnt the 2hbh. They can teach the 1 hander and can even hit it, but most played the sport at a high level using only the 2hbh.

 

[ballmachineguy]

Top players started when they were just out of diapers. Two-hander is easier then. By the time a human is back in diapers the two-hander is the only way to get it over the net. So what is my point? Hitting with two hands is embarrassing.

 

[user92626]

Top players started when they were just out of diapers. Two-hander is easier then. By the time a human is back in diapers the two-hander is the only way to get it over the net. So what is my point? Hitting with two hands is embarrassing.

I don't know what your mumbo jumbo about diapers is all about, but losing is real embarrasing. Like near decade younger Tsisipast lost to old man two handed Djokovic in straight sets.

 

[ballmachineguy]

I don't know what your mumbo jumbo about diapers is all about, but losing is real embarrasing. Like near decade younger Tsisipast lost to old man two handed Djokovic in straight sets.

You must have a two-hand backhand. If you are ok with cheating, knock yourself out.

 

[Watchman]

I play with older tennis players (because I'm one myself), and am one of the very few with a 2 handed backhand. I thought that was because that is what they were taught back in the day. But that's untrue - many have taken tennis up later, and almost all prefer and have one handed backhands.

I think it's because a two handed backhand requires trunk mobility (think a golf swing), which is lost over time. The shoulder mobility required for a one hander isn't lost as quickly. So while two hander backhands may be prevalent at competitive levels (eg better ability to deal with high backhand returns off kick serves), I think one handed backhands will always be a part of the game at least for the mobility challenged

 

[user92626]

You must have a two-hand backhand. If you are ok with cheating, knock yourself out.

I busted out laughing. Thank you for the post

 

[StringSnapper]

The Death of the One-Handed Backhand (Published 2014)

One of the most beautiful strokes in tennis is in danger of disappearing entirely.

www.nytimes.com

All one hand backhand techniques are not alike.

This is what the best ATP 1HBH players and Justine Henin used for their 1HBH technique. (excepting Federer)

One Hand Backhand - Waht Force to Start Forward Swing?

One Hand Backhand - What Force to Start Forward Swing? I have just been watching great one-hand backhands at the Madrid Open. Including excellent slow motion that can be replayed in even slower motion or single frame with my DVR. Often when I try to swing forward for a one hand backhand...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

If you are wondering what to believe about tennis strokes, start looking carefully at high speed videos. Check out what I've posted.

i love how the title is still 'waht'

 

[socallefty]

I play with older tennis players (because I'm one myself), and am one of the very few with a 2 handed backhand. I thought that was because that is what they were taught back in the day. But that's untrue - many have taken tennis up later, and almost all prefer and have one handed backhands.

I think it's because a two handed backhand requires trunk mobility (think a golf swing), which is lost over time. The shoulder mobility required for a one hander isn't lost as quickly. So while two hander backhands may be prevalent at competitive levels (eg better ability to deal with high backhand returns off kick serves), I think one handed backhands will always be a part of the game at least for the mobility challenged

I don’t think that is why many rec players who learned tennis as adults have 1HBHs. The 2HBH is not a natural shot for a beginner to learn on his own. Almost every 2HBH player has been coached to learn that shot while most 1HBH players below the age of 60 are self-taught. For those over 60, they grew up as kids during the days of wooden racquets when 1HBHs and slice BHs were predominant.

Even for adults who learn tennis, most learn it before the age of 50 - I don‘t think I’ve met too many adults who decided to pick up tennis for the first time after the age of 50. So, I don’t think the loss of trunk mobility is the reason they use 1HBHs. Very few adults with zero coaching will decide the best way to hit a BH is with two hands.

 

[LuckyR]

Chris Evert brought about the demise of the 1HBH on the Tour.

 

[ppma]

And half of the guys who are in top 100 are within top 30 (5 namely)

At some point there were 3 or 4 in top ten. So speculating of course, but it was like relative to overall distribution among pro players, OHBH players have been more successful to reach top elite levels

At least one persona understood my argument in the thread about "Tsitsipas losing a final agansit Djoko therefore 1HBH dying". You made me happy today.

I play with older tennis players (because I'm one myself), and am one of the very few with a 2 handed backhand. I thought that was because that is what they were taught back in the day. But that's untrue - many have taken tennis up later, and almost all prefer and have one handed backhands.

I think it's because a two handed backhand requires trunk mobility (think a golf swing), which is lost over time. The shoulder mobility required for a one hander isn't lost as quickly. So while two hander backhands may be prevalent at competitive levels (eg better ability to deal with high backhand returns off kick serves), I think one handed backhands will always be a part of the game at least for the mobility challenged

I believe there is another reason to add. Kids learning tennis at age <10 will handle a racquet with two hands to swing it. This is something that I have witnessed and that happens naturally. If these kids are coached at this age, then teaching them a 2HBH is alright as it's sometihng they are doing already as a first choice just to swing a racquet. But with grown ups it does not matter. They can hold a racquet with their dominant hand and swing it from both sides, so there is no need to coordinate two hands, even if in the short term it's an easier stroke to learn.

 

[Dragy]

2HBH more easily engages leg power, particularly from open stances. Just like FH. With grown speed of today's game it's just complementing low and explosive movement, counterpunching exchanges. And it's among other just mentally easier game, particularly for juniors, compared to taking responsibility for "in-control" tennis. You can play the latter with 2HBH of course, like Djokovic or Nadal do. Tennis is very deep game, but overall technical and tactical solutions work much better in synergy rather than individually.
I think OHBH is generally easier to use with variety, where you are neutral/in control a lot, and you want to find keys to decompose your opponent, and go for higher topspin, sharper andles, or faster drives. Most 2HBHs are less versatile, more one-dimensional. However, if you can rely on your one-dimensional shot 100%, it's just so secure, just play it and seek your opportunities for either go with tempo off the BH, or finding opening for the FH.

 

[optic yellow]

2HBH more easily engages leg power, particularly from open stances. Just like FH. With grown speed of today's game it's just complementing low and explosive movement, counterpunching exchanges. And it's among other just mentally easier game, particularly for juniors, compared to taking responsibility for "in-control" tennis. You can play the latter with 2HBH of course, like Djokovic or Nadal do. Tennis is very deep game, but overall technical and tactical solutions work much better in synergy rather than individually.
I think OHBH is generally easier to use with variety, where you are neutral/in control a lot, and you want to find keys to decompose your opponent, and go for higher topspin, sharper andles, or faster drives. Most 2HBHs are less versatile, more one-dimensional. However, if you can rely on your one-dimensional shot 100%, it's just so secure, just play it and seek your opportunities for either go with tempo off the BH, or finding opening for the FH.

this is p much why I'm fully committed to using both

 

[Dragy]

this is p much why I'm fully committed to using both

That's fun. I want to learn 2HBH, I goof around with it at times, hit it against the wall. I also sometimes use 2H BH volleys, but my left hand is around the throat... It allows to poach hard shots and smack them hard and down into the court, pure joy

 

[Smecz]

2HBH more easily engages leg power, particularly from open stances. Just like FH. With grown speed of today's game it's just complementing low and explosive movement, counterpunching exchanges. And it's among other just mentally easier game, particularly for juniors, compared to taking responsibility for "in-control" tennis. You can play the latter with 2HBH of course, like Djokovic or Nadal do. Tennis is very deep game, but overall technical and tactical solutions work much better in synergy rather than individually.
I think OHBH is generally easier to use with variety, where you are neutral/in control a lot, and you want to find keys to decompose your opponent, and go for higher topspin, sharper andles, or faster drives. Most 2HBHs are less versatile, more one-dimensional. However, if you can rely on your one-dimensional shot 100%, it's just so secure, just play it and seek your opportunities for either go with tempo off the BH, or finding opening for the FH.

You have a right,One-handed backhand more versatile,one hand give more possibilities.
However I can't imagine Djokovic or Nadal with one handed backhand,they wouldn't have won so many slams,and the other way Federer without one-backhanded wouldn't so many grand slams.

Naturally one-handed backhand suited his game,a two handed-backhand would block it.

Now I see that today's exchanges are more intense and it's not easy to raise so much with a one-handed backhand and finish the ball.

I associate the one-handed backhand with an attack, not with a long hit of the ball.

Federer will probably be the last person to win so many grand slams playing with one hand.

It's hard to imagine Tsitsipas, Thiem, or any other player who would do it.

The intensity of the game, topspin play and long rallies can make this very difficult.
Więcej

 

[Xen]

Professionals mostly use 2HBH because coaches generally teach kids and juniors 2HBH when they don't yet have the muscles and build needed to execute a 1HBH and almost all high level professionals learn tennis starting as a kid. It takes a lot of work to unlearn and relearn that muscle memory of transitioning from 2H->1H and most professionals don't want to waste a half a year of their short career doing so.

It's not necessarily that one's better than the other. There's trade-offs to each. For example, IMO, 2H is better at redirecting pace (e.g. return of serve, fast rallies) while 1H is better at adding pace (e.g. attacking a weaker ball). In an ideal world, people would probably want to use both, or play ambidextrous (two forehands), but that takes way more effort to learn and isn't worth the time it takes.

 

[sureshs]

Chatsonic:

Is the One-Handed Backhand efffective in today's tennis?

Yes, the one-handed backhand is still an effective shot in today's tennis. The shot is often used by professional players who are looking for an advantage in points. It allows for a player to generate power and spin on the ball and hit it with precision and accuracy. The one-handed backhand also provides a great defensive option for players, as it can be used to hit balls that are difficult to reach with other shots. As long as a player has the technique and timing to make a successful one-handed backhand, it can be a great tool in any tennis player's arsenal.

 

[Smecz]

Professionals mostly use 2HBH because coaches generally teach kids and juniors 2HBH when they don't yet have the muscles and build needed to execute a 1HBH and almost all high level professionals learn tennis starting as a kid. It takes a lot of work to unlearn and relearn that muscle memory of transitioning from 2H->1H and most professionals don't want to waste a half a year of their short career doing so.

It's not necessarily that one's better than the other. There's trade-offs to each. For example, IMO, 2H is better at redirecting pace (e.g. return of serve, fast rallies) while 1H is better at adding pace (e.g. attacking a weaker ball). In an ideal world, people would probably want to use both, or play ambidextrous (two forehands), but that takes way more effort to learn and isn't worth the time it takes.

 

[Smecz]

Chatsonic:

Is the One-Handed Backhand efffective in today's tennis?

Yes, the one-handed backhand is still an effective shot in today's tennis. The shot is often used by professional players who are looking for an advantage in points. It allows for a player to generate power and spin on the ball and hit it with precision and accuracy. The one-handed backhand also provides a great defensive option for players, as it can be used to hit balls that are difficult to reach with other shots. As long as a player has the technique and timing to make a successful one-handed backhand, it can be a great tool in any tennis player's arsenal.

Yes,but it's about tournaments result of atp,tennis players with one-handed backhand rarely win tournaments.
Probably better for amateurs,but it's who professionals have to use it,so that the young people still want to play like that.

 

[PRS]

Yes,but it's about tournaments result of atp,tennis players with one-handed backhand rarely win tournaments.
Probably better for amateurs,but it's who professionals have to use it,so that the young people still want to play like that.

Wawrinka won multiple slams with a one-hander. Theim won the US open. Tsitsipas just made it to the finals of Australia and has won the ATP Finals. Dimitrov won the ATP Finals as well. That's not even counting Federer or and Masters 1000 titles.

Yeah, it's likely to always play second fiddle to the two-hander, but anybody who doesn't think it's an effective shot or you can't win ATP titles with a one-hander is clearly wrong.

Most coaches nowadays use two, so they're better at teaching it than the one. Two is also the easier shot (for most), particularly when you're first starting out or you're really young, and it's very hard to change once you're used to hitting one or the other. So of course the two-hander is going to be more prevalent, but that's completely different than saying the two-hander isn't effective and can't win.

And even if there is a period where none of the top players use a one-hander, that doesn't mean that it'll disappear from the game entirely. It will always stick around and be effective, even if it becomes less popular.

 

[Smecz]

Wawrinka won multiple slams with a one-hander. Theim won the US open. Tsitsipas just made it to the finals of Australia and has won the ATP Finals. Dimitrov won the ATP Finals as well. That's not even counting Federer or and Masters 1000 titles.

Yeah, it's likely to always play second fiddle to the two-hander, but anybody who doesn't think it's an effective shot or you can't win ATP titles with a one-hander is clearly wrong.

Most coaches nowadays use two, so they're better at teaching it than the one. Two is also the easier shot (for most), particularly when you're first starting out or you're really young, and it's very hard to change once you're used to hitting one or the other. So of course the two-hander is going to be more prevalent, but that's completely different than saying the two-hander isn't effective and can't win.

And even if there is a period where none of the top players use a one-hander, that doesn't mean that it'll disappear from the game entirely. It will always stick around and be effective, even if it becomes less popular.

I know them and I know results,I'm talking about current tennis,Federer is retired,Tsitsipas lost two finals with Djokovic, Dimitrov play a average now,Thiem has a big crisis,Wawrinka can't come back.
Only Gasquet won in The Auckland Tournament.

I love One handed backhand, but I have to objectively assess that one-handers in atp tour may have a problem with achieving good results and winning tournaments.

Wta is the worst,there one handed backhand disappears, but Women usually have a harder time playing with only one hand.

I wish the one-handed backhand would come back, but the players need to start getting results again!.

 

[PRS]

I know them and I know results,I'm talking about current tennis,Federer is retired,Tsitsipas lost two finals with Djokovic, Dimitrov play a average now,Thiem has a big crisis,Wawrinka can't come back.
Only Gasquet won in The Auckland Tournament.

I love One handed backhand, but I have to objectively assess that one-handers in atp tour may have a problem with achieving good results and winning tournaments.

Wta is the worst,there one handed backhand disappears, but Women usually have a harder time playing with only one hand.

I wish the one-handed backhand would come back, but the players need to start getting results again!.

Tsitsipas losing to arguably the best tennis player in history does not mean he can't win titles. The fact that he beat so many two-handers to make it to the finals to play against one of the best of all time proves the exact opposite actually, that it is still effective and can still be used to win.

And yeah, Wawrinka, Federer, Dimitrov, Thiem, etc are no longer playing/winning big tournaments, but they still won in the current, modern era with the same racquet and string technology and on the same courts and with the same balls that are being used today. It's not like I'm looking back to the likes of Sampras, McEnroe, or even earlier when the game was completely different.

 

[Xen]

If you factor in the proportionate representation, I could construct the argument that 1HBH has better mean/median performance results. (Some small sample bias.)

i.e. I could say that even though only 11% of the current ATP top-100 and 4.8% of the ATP top-1000 use 1HBH (source: http://tennisabstract.com/reports/oneHandBackhandRankings.html), players with 1HBH have won 20% of the last 10 years of slams (40 slams, 4 fed, 3 wawrinka, 1 thiem http://www.espn.com/tennis/history).

I'd argue that 1HBH is superior, but harder to learn, and therefore less people use it.

 

[PRS]

If you factor in the proportionate representation, I could construct the argument that 1HBH has better mean/median performance results. (Some small sample bias.)

i.e. I could say that even though only 11% of the current ATP top-100 and 4.8% of the ATP top-1000 use 1HBH (source: http://tennisabstract.com/reports/oneHandBackhandRankings.html), players with 1HBH have won 20% of the last 10 years of slams (40 slams, 4 fed, 3 wawrinka, 1 thiem http://www.espn.com/tennis/history).

I'd argue that 1HBH is superior, but harder to learn, and therefore less people use it.

Or even just the first part of what you said, that only 4.8% of the top 1000 use it, but 11% of the top 100 uses it. That also implies that the one-hander is superior.

 

[Bill Lobsalot]

Even two handers go to one hand on hard to reach balls, slices, and volleys. One handed will always be part of the game.

 

[socallefty]

The biggest challenges for 1HBHs are that young kids find 2HBHs easier to learn because of their limited strength and there are less coaches who have personal knowledge of hitting a 1HBH these days and therefore they will be less comfortable teaching it for topspin drives. It seems like the textbook teaching method has become 2HBHs for topspin drives, 1HBHs for slice and volleys.

Each shot has its own pros and cons, but there is no reason to think that a superior 1HBH cannot do well at the pro level especially on slower surfaces where the BH topspin shot doesn’t have to be as compact to play good defense and for returns. I am generally a 1HBH player but because I also learned a 2HBH initially as a kid, I still use it for returns when I get jammed with body serves especially on inside-BHs and even occasionally at the baseline if I’m jammed by a deep shot close to my body where I don’t have time to get out of the way. I keep waiting for some pro to play like that, but haven’t seen any.

 

[Smecz]

Tsitsipas losing to arguably the best tennis player in history does not mean he can't win titles. The fact that he beat so many two-handers to make it to the finals to play against one of the best of all time proves the exact opposite actually, that it is still effective and can still be used to win.

And yeah, Wawrinka, Federer, Dimitrov, Thiem, etc are no longer playing/winning big tournaments, but they still won in the current, modern era with the same racquet and string technology and on the same courts and with the same balls that are being used today. It's not like I'm looking back to the likes of Sampras, McEnroe, or even earlier when the game was completely different.

I was sad when Tsitsipas lost,but that day he played poorly from the backhand.Ok,Tsitsipas defeated players with two handed backhand,his backhand is competive,but
it seems to me that the finals where there is stress, he has a problem with playing 1HB.

You know, playing under pressure with one hand you have to prove yourself.It's hard to defend,block and apply pressure by playing the cross.

When guys serve like Raonic,Karlovic,Isner,is very hard to return ball,in two handed backhand left hand helps.

We know that Djokovic is king of return,it would be hard for him to return with one hand.
one of the hardest thing is to return service bombs from 1BH.

It's easier to play such a move, because the left hand can help you choose the direction, where with one-handed you need to use the wrist, and when the ball runs away.. heh

That's Federer used a lot of slides,it was a some solution, practically his game was mainly based forehand.

However his backhand could to be good weapon.I think that long matches 3 hours or 5 hours could be very difficult for 1HB,and player may be more tired/exploited.

Playing top spins and defending them is easier 2BH, generally the more rallies the worse for 1BH.

1BH is the best for attacking player,defender can be in big troubles.
It seems to me that in order to play 1BH, you need to be able to play solidly from the forehand and have a strong serve. The more we gain advantage with the forehand and serve, the easier it will be to win with one-handed, for example: because you can use it less.

it is also easier to win when finishing the ball with a backhand,cause forehand did more work.

A strong serve and forehand can save you if your backhand is either weak or will fail.
Alternatively, you can also slide instead of playing 1BH.

Yes, there are players who have a better 1BH than the forehand, but the game is mostly based on the forehand.

If 1BH is to survive at atp, their One handed backhand must be competitive.

 

[Xen]

I am generally a 1HBH player but because I also learned a 2HBH initially as a kid, I still use it for returns when I get jammed with body serves especially on inside-BHs and even occasionally at the baseline if I’m jammed by a deep shot close to my body where I don’t have time to get out of the way. I keep waiting for some pro to play like that, but haven’t seen any.

I also play like this. I learned as an adult, so I main a 1HBH, but use 2HBH when I get jammed and for on-the-rise shots. It's a far more compact swing, so it's easier to time. I'll slice backhand returns if it's too fast for my 1HBH.

All the pros who can do a 1HBH can move better than we can so they don't need to resort to an emergency 2HBH, and can space themselves enough to slice instead.

 

[optic yellow]

Professionals mostly use 2HBH because coaches generally teach kids and juniors 2HBH when they don't yet have the muscles and build needed to execute a 1HBH and almost all high level professionals learn tennis starting as a kid. It takes a lot of work to unlearn and relearn that muscle memory of transitioning from 2H->1H and most professionals don't want to waste a half a year of their short career doing so.

It's not necessarily that one's better than the other. There's trade-offs to each. For example, IMO, 2H is better at redirecting pace (e.g. return of serve, fast rallies) while 1H is better at adding pace (e.g. attacking a weaker ball). In an ideal world, people would probably want to use both, or play ambidextrous (two forehands), but that takes way more effort to learn and isn't worth the time it takes.

It's not really too much effort to learn both. Also there are some situations where the 1H is actually better than the 2H at redirecting. Low balls for example, the 2H is better for scooping something but the 1H makes getting the face angle right for a block or sharp quick stroke easier. It doesn't change the concept of there being trade-offs of course.

 

[optic yellow]

That's fun. I want to learn 2HBH, I goof around with it at times, hit it against the wall. I also sometimes use 2H BH volleys, but my left hand is around the throat... It allows to poach hard shots and smack them hard and down into the court, pure joy

I will need to try the 2H volley the next time I play. Shadow swings alone produced that powerful visceral joy. It is like how ice hockey players hold their stick.

 

[Xen]

It's not really too much effort to learn both. Also there are some situations where the 1H is actually better than the 2H at redirecting.

It's not very hard to learn it at the rec-level, but it would still take basically twice the practice to learn the two strokes. The set up and muscle memory is very different. For the strokes to be good enough for the pro circuit, they would need to take however many thousands of hours they've spent practicing their current backhand and do it all over again.

Low balls for example, the 2H is better for scooping something but the 1H makes getting the face angle right for a block or sharp quick stroke easier. It doesn't change the concept of there being trade-offs of course.

At that point, it's more of a backspin shot than topspin, which pros with 2HBH already use. (Defensive 1H slice/chop)

 

[Quad Fault]

.

 

[Chas Tennis]

Justine Henin one hand backhand.

 

[Chas Tennis]

i love how the title is still 'waht'

You can't edit a title. Probably "waht" makes the thread easier to Google.

 

[optic yellow]

It's not very hard to learn it at the rec-level, but it would still take basically twice the practice to learn the two strokes. The set up and muscle memory is very different. For the strokes to be good enough for the pro circuit, they would need to take however many thousands of hours they've spent practicing their current backhand and do it all over again.

There is a set of commonalities to all strokes that once you get down ease the process of learning any individual one. You say the 1H and 2H are very different in set up and muscle memory, but think about all the ways in which they are roughly the same. I agree it is more difficult for professionals to get both to where they need to be because the level of play is so much higher, which is possibly why we haven't seen it yet, but this is not the case for the recreational player.

At that point, it's more of a backspin shot than topspin, which pros with 2HBH already use. (Defensive 1H slice/chop)

The whole point of using 2H in that situation is to scoop with topspin. You let the lefty forehand component dominate and flip out a shot similar to what you could with your actual forehand. Novak Djokovic will do this for winners when he's running up to get a shorter ball on that wing like after his opponent hits a mediocre drop shot attempt. I can think of an exact example of this from the AO but unfortunately don't remember which match to point you to it. The 1H block can also get some topspin if you make sure to draw the racquet up through contact. In both of these cases remember the racquet face is oriented more vertically than horizontally.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Coaches are now emphasizing learning two-handed backhand, and there are fewer and fewer coaches who want to teach traditional tennis.

I've posted about this for years and it has less to do with effectiveness and more to do with the pressure on a coach to produce quick results for parents. The 2hbh is just easier to teach. It allows for quicker results in timing, racket face alignment, stability, and control, where a 1hbh takes longer to coordinate those check points. And as mentioned above, most coaches like to replicate their own strokes and never took the time to learn a 1hbh themselves, so teaching it only allows them talking points over experience and being able to demo/model the stroke for clients.

Reminds me of ye 'ol Betamax vs. VHS story, and how/why VHS won out.

 

[Chas Tennis]

It's not very hard to learn it at the rec-level, but it would still take basically twice the practice to learn the two strokes. The set up and muscle memory is very different. For the strokes to be good enough for the pro circuit, they would need to take however many thousands of hours they've spent practicing their current backhand and do it all over again.

At that point, it's more of a backspin shot than topspin, which pros with 2HBH already use. (Defensive 1H slice/chop)

"...however many thousands of hours......" ?
365 days per year x 8 hours per day = 2920 hours

The 'thousands of hours' estimate (myth?) to learn a tennis stroke is often repeated on the forum. There must be some scientific publications on this important subject. Why not post links to a few of those publications.

Some sub-motions are very quick to learn and others strangely difficult. ? There is always the difficult issue of knowing clearly what you wish to train or finding an instructor that knows. I've practiced only to look at a video later and saw that I did not do what I had gone to practice. For example, I wanted to turn the 2 shoulders line back about 90 degrees more or less but was only doing 60 degrees.. Practicing the wrong sub-motions can also waste a lot of time and require retraining.

 

[heninfan99]

I know them and I know results,I'm talking about current tennis,Federer is retired,Tsitsipas lost two finals with Djokovic, Dimitrov play a average now,Thiem has a big crisis,Wawrinka can't come back.
Only Gasquet won in The Auckland Tournament.

Incorrect Musetti also defeated Alcaraz in the Hamburg Clay Court final.

There is a crisis but you've missed it. The crisis was the big three tennis freaks and that very few two handers or one handers could defeat them. The big three stopped almost everyone from reaching slam glory.

Perhaps not that many young girls like the one hander or are allowed to stay with it. Perhaps it's a lack of shoulder strength at seven years old and likely the same reason why many women do not learn a great kick serve(Stosur notwithstanding); or a lack of boldness to defy crazy tennis parents.

This idea that the one hander is dead is made every now and again and then a one hander wins a slam and you creeps recede back into the dark alleyways of tennis without admitting you were wrong. I already know.

 

[PRS]

I was sad when Tsitsipas lost,but that day he played poorly from the backhand.Ok,Tsitsipas defeated players with two handed backhand,his backhand is competive,but
it seems to me that the finals where there is stress, he has a problem with playing 1HB.

You know, playing under pressure with one hand you have to prove yourself.It's hard to defend,block and apply pressure by playing the cross.

When guys serve like Raonic,Karlovic,Isner,is very hard to return ball,in two handed backhand left hand helps.

We know that Djokovic is king of return,it would be hard for him to return with one hand.
one of the hardest thing is to return service bombs from 1BH.

It's easier to play such a move, because the left hand can help you choose the direction, where with one-handed you need to use the wrist, and when the ball runs away.. heh

That's Federer used a lot of slides,it was a some solution, practically his game was mainly based forehand.

However his backhand could to be good weapon.I think that long matches 3 hours or 5 hours could be very difficult for 1HB,and player may be more tired/exploited.

Playing top spins and defending them is easier 2BH, generally the more rallies the worse for 1BH.

1BH is the best for attacking player,defender can be in big troubles.
It seems to me that in order to play 1BH, you need to be able to play solidly from the forehand and have a strong serve. The more we gain advantage with the forehand and serve, the easier it will be to win with one-handed, for example: because you can use it less.

it is also easier to win when finishing the ball with a backhand,cause forehand did more work.

A strong serve and forehand can save you if your backhand is either weak or will fail.
Alternatively, you can also slide instead of playing 1BH.

Yes, there are players who have a better 1BH than the forehand, but the game is mostly based on the forehand.

If 1BH is to survive at atp, their One handed backhand must be competitive.

Serve and forehand are dominant and very important for the games of 99% of players regardless of if they use a one or two handed backhand. Anybody's backhand can be off one day or struggle in a long match and cause a loss, that isn't unique to one-handers.

And I don't know about you, but it's the big serves that I don't have that much trouble with when it comes to the one hander, it's very easy to block/redirect and even roll over the top a little. The harder part is a really good kick serve, and that is where I will occasionally put two hands on the racquet. Besides, again, even players with two handers struggle against big servers like Raonic, Karlovic, and Isner. These struggles are not unique to one-handers, and they don't suffer special adversity against them.

The one area they do really struggle is when you have a player like Nadal who puts insane topspin and you're playing him on clay and he's a lefty so his crosscourt forehand goes into your backhand. But in those scenarios, there's not a person on this planet that can win consistently, even if they have the best two-handed backhand in the game, so it's still hard to blame the one-hander, even if it is noticeably weaker in that one scenario.