One handed backhand low take back vs. high take back

#1
I am an amateur player probably around 4 nrtp rating. I always had a decent slice but a terrible one hander top spin stroke. Obviously I tried to replicate the best one handers of today, Wawrinka etc. but I never really got it. I had trouble timing the ball and was very inconsistent.

Then it struck me when I watched Lendl's backhand. He had a low simple take back and then just smacked the ball emphasizing on the follow through so I thought if it was good enough for Lendl it is good enough for me. Why make things more complicated than they are?

I am sure there are some benefits to the high modern takeback with the bigger swing but it's much harder to master that and my main goal on the backhand is mainly to just stay in the point and keep it neutral until I get an oppurtunity with my forehand that is a real weapon.

Also I want to add that Borg even if he had a two hander also had a very simple takeback. When did the higher takeback become fashionable and what are the benefits of that?
 
#2
I guess at some level it can be preference, but for me having a higher take-back helps me pull the should back, get proper rotation and be better prep'd for the ball bounce (either drop it down or keep it high). It also allows me to have a better flow (C loop) for power and not a more abrupt back and forward motion, which is something I have noticed on many folks who take the racquet back lower.

Do you have a picture or video? Would love to see your prep and such.
 
#7
For the most part, it's not much more complicated than the fact that takebacks have gotten higher as incoming bounces have gotten higher.
Wouldn't it be easier to handle a big bounce with a shorter takeback, not longer?

I'm not sure BH takebacks have gotten bigger. What I am sure about is if you are a top pro and hit a one-hander, you better be able to crush it. It has to be somewhat an offensive weapon or they will kill you with inside out FHs. The two hander is so much better as a defensive stroke, the only reason to hit a one hander is because you can crush it. To do that, you get bigger backswings. See, Tiem.
 
#8
I am an amateur player probably around 4 nrtp rating. I always had a decent slice but a terrible one hander top spin stroke. Obviously I tried to replicate the best one handers of today, Wawrinka etc. but I never really got it. I had trouble timing the ball and was very inconsistent.

Then it struck me when I watched Lendl's backhand. He had a low simple take back and then just smacked the ball emphasizing on the follow through so I thought if it was good enough for Lendl it is good enough for me. Why make things more complicated than they are?

I am sure there are some benefits to the high modern takeback with the bigger swing but it's much harder to master that and my main goal on the backhand is mainly to just stay in the point and keep it neutral until I get an oppurtunity with my forehand that is a real weapon.

Also I want to add that Borg even if he had a two hander also had a very simple takeback. When did the higher takeback become fashionable and what are the benefits of that?
I made the switch and for me the benefits of the higher take back are as follows:

1. More elbow friendly. Shoulder is the hinge not the elbow and its easier to remember that
2. More fluid and less arming
3. Forces you to prepare better
4. Tt police are happy

You can judge for yourself:

 
Top