Takeback on one handed BH Slice

[Raul_SJ]

SLICE TAKEBACK

DRIVE TAKEBACK​

Top pic from Tennis Oxygen shows takeback for slice. Racquet face should be perpendicular to court with tip pointing to the side fence (common position with Federer/Wawrinka/Youhzny). Bottom pic shows takeback for flat drive. Is it acceptable to use the bottom pic flat takeback for slice shots as well? Or is it critical to get into that top pic takeback position in order to hit slice?

 

[mxvb]

You want to slice from high to low, so you want your racquet to be high. It's much harder (almost impossible?) to slice if you take back like the second Federer picture..

 

[Raul_SJ]

You want to slice from high to low, so you want your racquet to be high. It's much harder (almost impossible?) to slice if you take back like the second Federer picture..

I am able to slice with the second Federer pic takeback (though I mostly drive the backhand).

 

[Enga]

I personally like to imagine it like this-

With the slice, it is almost the exact same motion as a normal backhand, except that you're slicing the ball as the racket head comes down instead of up. You know how on the tsbh, you kind of go high on the takeback, then low as you swing forward then high again? (For me anyway) When I slice, I just do the exact same thing, start high, then go low, similar motion to my topspin.

I like doing it like this, because I feel it makes the slice go faster and deeper, more like a McEnroe slice. And it has nice disguise.

But thats only assuming I'm not hitting a defensive slice. If its a defensive slice where they have you on the move, all bets are off, I have no clue what the correct technique is for that.

Also, if the ball is shoulder height, I start over the shoulder instead just like in those photos.

 

[Lance L]

I find the Federer high bent elbow backswing on the slice akward. My elbow is pretty close to straight and racquet is layed back a lot. There is nothing wrong with the Federer style, of course, but it is not the only right way to do slice backhand.

 

[mntlblok]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/sets/72157648012949433/

Played around with some freeze frames of slice backhands recently.

 

[Raul_SJ]

I personally like to imagine it like this-

With the slice, it is almost the exact same motion as a normal backhand, except that you're slicing the ball as the racket head comes down instead of up. You know how on the tsbh, you kind of go high on the takeback, then low as you swing forward then high again? (For me anyway) When I slice, I just do the exact same thing, start high, then go low, similar motion to my topspin.

I like doing it like this, because I feel it makes the slice go faster and deeper, more like a McEnroe slice. And it has nice disguise.

With the bottom Federer pic (drive takeback), I think it is possible to slice as well.

Although I drive the backhand over 80% of the time, when I get to the takeback position I am still not sure if I am going to slice it. I usually make my decision at the last instant, during the forward swing. That is why I like the flexibility of using essentially the same takeback for drive or slice -- it gives me both options.

If I use the top Federer pic (slice takeback) if forces me to commit very early to hitting the slice without having the option to drive it.

 

[mntlblok]

With the bottom Federer pic (drive takeback), I think it is possible to slice as well.

Although I drive the backhand over 80% of the time, when I get to the takeback position I am still not sure if I am going to slice it. I usually make my decision at the last instant, during the forward swing. That is why I like the flexibility of using essentially the same takeback for drive or slice -- it gives me both options.

If I use the top Federer pic (slice takeback) if forces me to commit very early to hitting the slice without having the option to drive it.

A fellow I've played a couple of times uses a backhand takeback from which he can do either, and I find it *most* aggravating being unable to tell which he's going to hit. It has frozen me at the net more than once.

 

[Raul_SJ]

A fellow I've played a couple of times uses a backhand takeback from which he can do either, and I find it *most* aggravating being unable to tell which he's going to hit. It has frozen me at the net more than once.

I didn't think about disguise, but that is another advantage I suppose... Does his backhand takeback look similar to the Federer bottom pic?

And why do many (most?) of the ATP pros use that high bent elbow takeback?

Watch how Federer, Haas,Youzhny,Wawrinka and other use the same common threads to hit a backhand slice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=BuqkkWtq-Lk#t=48​

 

[Enga]

I think the high elbow takeback is the only way to slice it higher than waist level without having to retreat. No one has bothered to distinguish the difference between these two slices in the past (at least not that I've read). But they are defintely distinctly different.

Heres an observation, the one with the high elbow takeback actually has a similar motion to a backhand volley.

I see Djokovic do the low takeback often. I suspect its because he never slices unless the ball is already very low.

The high takeback possibly adds more spin because its more of a downward chopping motion. Federer does this when drawing people to the net. He gets a lot of spin and angle from the high takeback, but doesnt place it very deep.

 

[mntlblok]

I didn't think about disguise, but that is another advantage I suppose... Does his backhand takeback look similar to the Federer bottom pic?

And why do many (most?) of the ATP pros use that high bent elbow takeback?

Watch how Federer, Haas,Youzhny,Wawrinka and other use the same common threads to hit a backhand slice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=BuqkkWtq-Lk#t=48​

What throws me off with both Federer and that opponent is that they also seem to use grips for both their topspin and slice that differ very little. Fed's topspin grip doesn't look to me like something that he ought to be able to hit topspin with.

 

[mntlblok]

I think the high elbow takeback is the only way to slice it higher than waist level without having to retreat. No one has bothered to distinguish the difference between these two slices in the past (at least not that I've read). But they are defintely distinctly different.

Heres an observation, the one with the high elbow takeback actually has a similar motion to a backhand volley.

I see Djokovic do the low takeback often. I suspect its because he never slices unless the ball is already very low.

The high takeback possibly adds more spin because its more of a downward chopping motion. Federer does this when drawing people to the net. He gets a lot of spin and angle from the high takeback, but doesnt place it very deep.

A factor to consider is how much topspin is coming at the player who is about to slice. If you *don't* have a steep downward path against a heavily stopspun ball, the slice will float higher than intended. You don't need as steep a path against a slice coming at you. Play with the inputs at http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/trajectory_maker.cgi

 

[mntlblok]

A factor to consider is how much topspin is coming at the player who is about to slice. If you *don't* have a steep downward path against a heavily stopspun ball, the slice will float higher than intended. You don't need as steep a path against a slice coming at you. Play with the inputs at http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/trajectory_maker.cgi

Here's one I just played with:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/17057841829/in/set-72157650697596641

yellow ball contact at 2 feet off the ground with 100 rpm of incoming topspin. red ball 4 feet off the ground at contact and 4000 rpm of incoming topspin. both swings with a 2 degree open racket face and a downward 30 degree swing angle

 

[Raul_SJ]

I think the high elbow takeback is the only way to slice it higher than waist level without having to retreat.

Yes, that's a good point. Pros typically deal with higher bounces...Here Haas uses the high elbow takeback to slice a low ball.
On balls like this, I use an identical takeback and decide on the way forward whether to drive or slice.

 

[mntlblok]

Yes, that's a good point. Pros typically deal with higher bounces...Here Haas uses the high elbow takeback to slice a low ball.
On balls like this, I use an identical takeback and decide on the way forward whether to drive or slice.

Ahh. But what kind of spin was on that low ball that Mr. Haas struck?

 

[Raul_SJ]

Ahh. But what kind of spin was on that low ball that Mr. Haas struck?

Not sure. Looks like the incoming ball was either skidding low or flat. But not much topspin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuqkkWtq-Lk&feature=player_detailpage#t=194

A factor to consider is how much topspin is coming at the player who is about to slice. If you *don't* have a steep downward path against a heavily stopspun ball, the slice will float higher than intended. You don't need as steep a path against a slice coming at you.

Interesting. So if you take two incoming balls struck at exact same waist height, , the incoming topspin ball must be struck with a steeper downward path than an incoming slice ball? Has this been proven?

I would think that since the dwell time is only a few milliseconds, the type of spin on the incoming ball would not be significant enough to necessitate a steeper downward swing path.

 

[mntlblok]

Here's one I just played with:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/17057841829/in/set-72157650697596641

yellow ball contact at 2 feet off the ground with 100 rpm of incoming topspin. red ball 4 feet off the ground at contact and 4000 rpm of incoming topspin. both swings with a 2 degree open racket face and a downward 30 degree swing angle

Opening the racket face angle from 2 degrees open to 13 or 14 degrees open seems to yield a good result even with the 30 degree downward swing path for that yellow ball.

 

[mntlblok]

Here's one I just played with:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/17057841829/in/set-72157650697596641

yellow ball contact at 2 feet off the ground with 100 rpm of incoming topspin. red ball 4 feet off the ground at contact and 4000 rpm of incoming topspin. both swings with a 2 degree open racket face and a downward 30 degree swing angle

Interestingly, if the racket face angle is left at 2 degrees open for the yellow ball, the swing path would have to be changed from 30 degrees downward to at least 23 degrees *upward* in order to even clear the net.

 

[mntlblok]

Superstition

Interesting. So if you take two incoming balls struck at exact same waist height, , the incoming topspin ball must be struck with a steeper downward path than an incoming slice ball? Has this been proven?

I would think that since the dwell time is only a few milliseconds, the type of spin on the incoming ball would not be significant enough to necessitate a steeper downward swing path.

Sorry, missed this part of the post after going to check the video. Whether it's been proven or not, I suppose, depends on whether you think the folks at TW University know what they're talking about. They don't seem to get paid much attention, at least with their fine (and free) "shotmaker" tool. AAMOF, it appears that I may be the *only* one on this forum who consults it.

As I've pointed out here repeatedly, they're the same folks who wrote _Technical Tennis_. If you merely study the fourth (and final) chapter of that small publication, you'll have the knowledge necessary to experiment with balls and rackets in order to make the tennis ball predictably do what you want it to - as long as it falls within what the (simple) laws of physics allow. This ain't rocket science, but apparently it's treated that way within the hobby of tennis. Superstition reigns. Cause science is too hard. And, we're hitting the ball into the net against that pusher because he's put a hex on us or something.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/16633204453/in/set-72157650697596641

 

[Raul_SJ]

If the TWU guys say you need a steeper downward path to slice an incoming topspin ball vs a flat ball, I believe it. They are the gurus.

Remember taking a look at that book years ago, but much of it was over my head. Will try reading again and see it it makes sense...

 

[mntlblok]

If the TWU guys say you need a steeper downward path to slice an incoming topspin ball vs a flat ball, I believe it. They are the gurus.

Remember taking a look at that book years ago, but much of it was over my head. Will try reading again and see it it makes sense...

There are a few things in there that can certainly make one's head hurt - such as which way the *bottom* of the ball is spinning when it's contacting various racket angles and swing paths - but those kinds of things can easily be skipped over. That's the kind of stuff that _The Physics and Technology of Tennis_ is full of. Talk about hurting one's head. But, if you just take the stuff that makes sense from that fourth chapter, and experiment with that shotmaker tool enough to prove to yerself that it actually works in the real world, I'm thinking that most tennis players can take a major roadblock out of their way in working towards better play.

Considering that there is a barrier (the net) in the way of yer shots, and they are not allowed to travel past the baseline, then one needs to come up with ways of making the ball both go high enough to get over the net, but also end up going low enough to not go long. Gravity helps, but spin and trajectory control can be like cheating. It really is worth learning about. And, I really believe that the basics are very learnable - even if too many teaching pros tell me that it's too complex to teach to most players.

 

[mntlblok]

Interesting. So if you take two incoming balls struck at exact same waist height, , the incoming topspin ball must be struck with a steeper downward path than an incoming slice ball? Has this been proven?

Only changes made for the yellow ball input (for the way things are set up at the web site - with 4000rpm of incoming topspin) was a "downward" swing path of 4 degrees and a *closed* racket face angle of 4 degrees. Counterintuitive that a closed racket face can yield underspin? Think that sort of knowledge might be of some value in returning topspin serves??
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mentalblock/16633654173/in/album-72157650697596641/

 

[Tight Lines]

If the TWU guys say you need a steeper downward path to slice an incoming topspin ball vs a flat ball, I believe it. They are the gurus.

Remember taking a look at that book years ago, but much of it was over my head. Will try reading again and see it it makes sense...

This is basically correct. You can also close the racket face a little more. I think it achieves the same thing.

It's like the difference between volleying a top spin ball vs. a heavily sliced ball. If you volley the sliced ball the same way as a top spin ball, 99% of the time, your ball will go right into the net. You have to open up your racket face to get it over the net.

Harry

 

[mntlblok]

This is basically correct. You can also close the racket face a little more. I think it achieves the same thing.

It's like the difference between volleying a top spin ball vs. a heavily sliced ball. If you volley the sliced ball the same way as a top spin ball, 99% of the time, your ball will go right into the net. You have to open up your racket face to get it over the net.

Harry

Yep. And if I use the same stroke to hit a drop volley off a *heavily* topspun ball as I would for a flatter one, it won't even get *to* the net.