The Dying Art of the One-Handed Backhand

[Kalin]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2014/01/tennis-s-one-handed-backhand

A very nice write-up in a somewhat unique style (it's the Economist, after all, not ESPN Page 2)

But worry not, OHBH afficionados.... future King Grigor will return the one-hander to where it belongs- ruling the tennis world!

 

[Legend of Borg]

King Grisho will order the burning of these heretical articles once he ascends to the throne.

 

[roundiesee]

Wow; fantastic read; and agreed- the Economist certainly writes differently cf other "journals",

 

[NadalDramaQueen]

Should players with one-handed backhands be the moral victors even in defeat?

 

[Kalin]

Should players with one-handed backhands be the moral victors even in defeat?

They most definitely already are.

I think whenever a tennis match is played, whoever has more one-handed backhand winners should be declared the winner of that match regardless of other immaterial trivia like games/sets won etc.

 

[BevelDevil]

From the comments:

"Partly in response to all the doom-saying, I'm developing a website that will collect and present videos (from YouTube) with a focus on instructional and player videos of the one-hander. Check it out at onehanders.com. I'm still a few months from launch, but you can sign up to be notified and take a quick 10-question survey about the shot. Thanks."


Damn, that idea was on my life to-do list

 

[tennis_hack]

1hbh is not declining because it is not coached - not because it is not viable. It is viable at the very top of the game, out-rallying two of the best 2hbh's in the game, then beating the guy with the most viscous lefty topspin forehand in the same tournament. After it does that, people still have the nerve to call the 1hbh fragile and inferior to any old 2hbh?

The article is basically trying to say that Wawrinka fluked his Slam.

 

[Kalin]

It is indeed a pity the OHBH is not coached more often. For the (extremely) tiny minority of pupils who will make it to the pro levels the 2HBH might be somewhat better. For amateur or casual play I do believe the OHBH is the better shot since it can be hit off-balance more easily and let's face it, at the amateur level hitting off-balance is the norm rather than the exception. The 2HBH looks awesomely smooth when hit by a Djokovic in a pefectly balanced position. When hit off-balance it can be painfully awkward.

 

[SLD76]

It is indeed a pity the OHBH is not coached more often. For the (extremely) tiny minority of pupils who will make it to the pro levels the 2HBH might be somewhat better. For amateur or casual play I do believe the OHBH is the better shot since it can be hit off-balance more easily and let's face it, at the amateur level hitting off-balance is the norm rather than the exception. The 2HBH looks awesomely smooth when hit by a Djokovic in a pefectly balanced position. When hit off-balance it can be painfully awkward.

as a kid when I first started playing, the ihbh just seemed awkward. The two hander seemed more natural to me

now as I get older, I find myself using the one hander. its amazing how much less effort it takes to generate power with that stroke. not that my 1hbh is anything to write home about, but thats my observation. and of course, ive always had a one handed slice.

 

[reversef]

It is indeed a pity the OHBH is not coached more often. For the (extremely) tiny minority of pupils who will make it to the pro levels the 2HBH might be somewhat better. For amateur or casual play I do believe the OHBH is the better shot since it can be hit off-balance more easily and let's face it, at the amateur level hitting off-balance is the norm rather than the exception. The 2HBH looks awesomely smooth when hit by a Djokovic in a pefectly balanced position. When hit off-balance it can be painfully awkward.

At the amateur level, the OHBH is more comfortable when the player grows older, it's true. But if you learn playing when you are still a child, the 2HBH is the obvious choice for most people. Unless the OHBH comes naturally to the child, he will really enjoy the stability of the 2HBH. Many children (I was one of them) actually progress faster with their backhand for that only reason: the non dominant hand helps them a lot to find some stability and to hit with both strength and security.

 

[SLD76]

At the amateur level, the OHBH is more comfortable when the player grows older, it's true. But if you learn playing when you are still a child, the 2HBH is the obvious choice for most people. Unless the OHBH comes naturally to the child, he will really enjoy the stability of the 2HBH. Many children (I was one of them) actually progress faster with their backhand for that only reason: the non dominant hand helps them a lot to find some stability and to hit with both strength and security.

that must be it, because its only in the last 3-4 years that I have found the one hander more comfortable. but as a kid, the two hander just felt more natural and made more sense.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Should players with one-handed backhands be the moral victors even in defeat?

As long as they don't fake injuries.

I'm sure there are still plenty of juniors learning the 1 hander. Whether they make it to the top of the mens tour will have more to do with their ability to hit all shots under pressure, avoid injuries, etc. - and very little to do with their backhand.

 

[sureshs]

OHBH is an unstable stroke which requires extreme talent and concentration to pull off. Wawrinka beating an injured Nadal proves nothing.

 

[tennis_hack]

OHBH is an unstable stroke which requires extreme talent and concentration to pull off. Wawrinka beating an injured Nadal proves nothing.

What about Wawrinka's overpowering of Djokovic's GOAT 2hbh and Berdych's extremely good 2hbh with his 1hbh? Or handling Robredo's nasty inside out forehand that he loves to try to kick up on 1hbh's?

I suppose you think Wawrinka only played one match to win a Slam?

Need I remind you that Nadal was beaten comprehensively in the first set, and his 'going to the well' approach of looping forehands into the backhand was plain not working?

Need I also remind you that Nadal hits a forehand into the backhand corner of righty players?

If you're going to argue that 1hbh is inferior to 2hbh, why not compare 1hbh to 2hbh, not 1hbh to forehand. If Nadal was right handed and played backhand to backhand rallies with Wawrinka - do you really think Wawrinka would be totally overwhelmed by Nadal's two-handed backhand?

I will never understand why 1hbh bashers for some reason use Nadal's forehand as the sole indicator of a backhand's worth, and all of them also forget that Nadal will comprehensively dismantle the huge majority of 2hbh's as well - pretty much all of them but Djokovic's. And Djokovic has his own problems on the backhand side dealing with generating pace when faced against a good slice.

 

[bjsnider]

1hbh is not declining because it is not coached - not because it is not viable. It is viable at the very top of the game, out-rallying two of the best 2hbh's in the game, then beating the guy with the most viscous lefty topspin forehand in the same tournament. After it does that, people still have the nerve to call the 1hbh fragile and inferior to any old 2hbh?

The article is basically trying to say that Wawrinka fluked his Slam.

The second-last paragraph doesn't say anything of the kind. It says Dirty Stan beat Nadal fair and square:

Yet critics of the one-hander should remember that Mr Wawrinka thoroughly outplayed his opponent for much of the match. He did this by making a virtue of his weakness. Instead of trying to outlast his rival, he played aggressively and looked to take the initiative early in the point. It helps that the one-handed backhand demands early ball contact; if executed well, this hurries one’s opponent. Mr Wawrinka was equally aggressive with the rest of his game. He served 19 aces (versus just one for Mr Nadal), and hit 53 winners (versus 19), even surviving a mid-match dip in form as he struggled to finish off his stricken opponent.

I'm not sure the technique is really the point anymore, since the equipment can be tweaked in favour of whatever style the player likes to use. I think physical strength is the most important thing on the court now. Two of the strongest players on the tour played in the AO final, and who would argue the point that Serena is the strongest player on the women's side? Murray is maybe the strongest player on the tour, Djokovic is very strong too. The weaker guys just don't seem to be able to hang with the stronger ones. Obviously, ball-striking talent and speed are also very important, and I don't mean to say they aren't, but strength was never an issue in the past. Laver was a very small guy, and McEnroe, Connors, et al. Agassi's late-career surge was partly because he became the strongest on the tour (according to Gil Reyes). That's something Dimitrov's team needs to think about. The artistry of the game has taken a backseat. Ball skills alone don't git 'er done anymore.

 

[Kalin]

Great point about physicality becoming paramount. It's the same in virtually all sports these days. Decades ago a sublime technician could rule masterfully over the soccer pitch without ever having to break a sweat. Those days are long gone; even the finest ballhandlers nowadays have to be able to run (and even tackle!) for 90 minutes or they have no place on the pitch.

Suresh, what do you mean by 'unstable'? The OHBH is a difficult shot but there is nothing inherently unstable about it. I have read a kinesiological study years ago which argued that the OHBH is a more natural shot than the forehand since the human body is much more suited to throwing the arm away from the torso than pulling it across the chest.

It is true, of course, that the 2HBH is easier for the kids. I remember learning to hit one-handed backhands with a 15+ oz wooden racquet as a very skinny kid (nobody hit a 2HBH then). One learns a mean slice quickly.... since driving through the ball is virtually impossible

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

I posted this in another thread, but it's relevant here too, so I'll just repost it:

Another writer writing just for the sake of writing something. The journalist talks about "inherent limitations" of the 1hander, oh please. Name me one stroke that doesn't have "inherent limitations". What, like the 2hander doesn't have inherent limitations in the form of reach?

Please, there's nothing wrong with the stroke. It's true that it's not taught as widely because the true of the matter is, it's harder for kids to pick up the stroke because of the lack of strength. But once the stroke is developed, there's nothing wrong with it. Also, some players are just more natural with a 1hander and vice versa.

This is also as bad as the crap written on bleacherreport.com

 

[tennis_hack]

OHBH is an unstable stroke which requires extreme talent and concentration to pull off. Wawrinka beating an injured Nadal proves nothing.

Btw a double handed forehand is more stable than a single handed forehand, and riding a tricycle is more stable than riding a motorbike. Just goes to show that perhaps you might be sacrificing in other areas to gain that increased stability, and not everyone wants to make that sacrifice.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Anyone else play with 1 hand? I find it really hard to try to hit a 2 hander, it's just so unnatural to me.

 

[Vcore89]

Women plays more 2HBHs than Men.

 

[Kalin]

In Europe and Asia the majority of 30+ yrs olds play one-handers as far as I can see. And that includes guys who have made it to the summit of the Tour if not to the top tier.

 

[SLD76]

Suresh is an unstable bloke which requires extreme patience and concentration to put up with . Wawrinka beating an injured Nadal proves nothing.

fixed it for him.

 

[Smasher08]

Please, there's nothing wrong with the stroke. It's true that it's not taught as widely because the true of the matter is, it's harder for kids to pick up the stroke because of the lack of strength. But once the stroke is developed, there's nothing wrong with it. Also, some players are just more natural with a 1hander and vice versa.

Yep, speaking from experience here, a 2-hander is much easier to teach a beginner, largely because they lack strength, timing, and control. Once someone develops a proficient 2-hander, then they can transition with ease.

 

[tennis_hack]

Yep, speaking from experience here, a 2-hander is much easier to teach a beginner, largely because they lack strength, timing, and control. Once someone develops a proficient 2-hander, then they can transition with ease.

Transition with ease to what? A topspin 1hbh?

It does beg the question - why would they ever bother to switch once they've mastered the 2hbh?

 

[droliver]

Most of the men are physically strong enough, possess the timing, and produce the torque to let it rip with 1H if they felt like from a power perspective.
The biggest weakness at the men's pro tour level of the OBH is the weaker stability and offensive potential on the return of serve, probably the second most important shot in tennis (after the serve) in separating players at that level. Pointing to trouble with high ball is mostly just an allusion to the Nadal FH which everyone struggles with an us highly atypical.

On the women's side, it's more of a strength issue.

 

[Kalin]

I agree that the one time I wish I had a 2HBH is when I face someone who consistently pounds the serve to the backhand side.

Some of the best serve returns I've hit have been reflex 2-handed blocks when a hard serve has jammed me. The ball rockets back like the devil... very hard (i.e. pretty impossible) to do with a OHBH unless your name is Federer.

 

[tennis_hack]

I agree that the one time I wish I had a 2HBH is when I face someone who consistently pounds the serve to the backhand side.

Some of the best serve returns I've hit have been reflex 2-handed blocks when a hard serve has jammed me. The ball rockets back like the devil... very hard (i.e. pretty impossible) to do with a OHBH unless your name is Federer.

Not Federer - he chips too often. Haas is the 1hbh return master.

 

[tennispro492]

I've never understood why more 1hbh players dont just use the 2hbh for return only, and the one hander for all groundstrokes. This way they get the best of both worlds.

 

[Kalin]

TH, yes, even Fed struggles.... which proves even further that the OHBH isn't the best for receiving serve. I need to watch some vids of Tommy presto!

Tennispro, I've tried that but it isn't as simple as just grabbing the racquet with two hands and swinging away. The contact point is suddenly much closer to the body so you will whiff a lot It takes, I would guess, some determined and specialized practice... not really something that can be easily adopted unless one is wiling to lose quite a few matches

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

I've never understood why more 1hbh players dont just use the 2hbh for return only, and the one hander for all groundstrokes. This way they get the best of both worlds.

Because you can get a lot of corner serves bombers back with the extra reach of the 1 handed backhand.

A good one hander can block a lot of stuff back deep.

 

[kOaMaster]

I just realised this: Almost all the players I did sympathise with the last 25 years played with a one-handed backhand, men and women.
Didn't think of that before.

 

[thejuniorpro]

Juniors can hit it too

Everyday im at my club during a lesson, match, or just hitting im told to hit a 2hb, but its soooo unnatural that it seems frustrating to hit it. Now ive been told that y two hander is great, but i honestly use a 1hb. I can out angle, out power, out maneuver, and out spin every 2 hander ive come across on the other side of the net. Yet, they still say i cant hit one, except for 2, who are like pro level good. Juniors dont have to hit 2 handers, when i was 6 i was tought to hit with a one handed backhand and did fine. Never going to switch.

 

[thejuniorpro]

*Been told my 2 hander is great*

 

[Vensai]

The OHB is a classic. I doubt it'll ever be truly gone.

 

[Kalin]

At the rec level I agree that it will be around forever. But it does feel (and look) better when a top player has a OHBH

 

[rossi46]

Anyone else play with 1 hand? I find it really hard to try to hit a 2 hander, it's just so unnatural to me.

You are right, the 2 hander is indeed unnatural, although in terms of the pros Nalbandian's 2 hander was the most natural looking 2 hander followed by Safin and Rios but that's about it.

 

[Flint]

This one hander looks very powerful when I see it.

 

[10sGrinder]

All this talk about one-handed backhands just begs the question - are we talking topspin or slice? I hit a ohbh, but it's 95% of the time a slice. Takes very little effort and is much less error-prone than any other shot out there. And accurate enough to be used as a passing shot, even though it doesn't have quite the velocity of a topspin ohbh. So, from my point of view, a topspin ohbh is almost an entirely different shot than a slice backhand, and should be recognized in the discussion.

Hitting over the ball is elusive - I bet there's a lot of older players would agree, though they continue to pursue it as if it were the holy grail!

 

[Service Ace]

Anyone else play with 1 hand? I find it really hard to try to hit a 2 hander, it's just so unnatural to me.

This.

Always played with a 1hander, never had any trouble with high balls or ROS or any of that other bs 2handers like to prop up as the technical limitations of the 1hander. It's simply a superior stroke when you know how to hit and have confidence in using it (aesthetic superiority notwithstanding). The 2handed is unnatural and I'm glad I was never forced to use it growing up.

 

[LeeD]

At my current courts, out of 25 odd players in the weekday mornings, NONE, NONE use 2hbh. Most slice their 1hbh's.
Even the two little girls, one 12, the other 15, uses 1hbh.
On the weekends, in 4.0 doubles play, of the 20 odd I see regularly, maybe 4 girls and 4 guys, 8 total, use 2hbh.
Weekend afternoons, 4.5 mostly, about 60/40 in favor of 1hbh, but all the 2hbh guys slice 1 handed at least 1/4 of the time.
Studies and articles are worth very little. Look at what goes on in the courts YOU play.

 

[tennis_hack]

This.

Always played with a 1hander, never had any trouble with high balls or ROS or any of that other bs 2handers like to prop up as the technical limitations of the 1hander. It's simply a superior stroke when you know how to hit and have confidence in using it (aesthetic superiority notwithstanding). The 2handed is unnatural and I'm glad I was never forced to use it growing up.

Yeah, tbh, I dunno what people are on about when they're always claiming this. I switched to 1hbh from 2hbh because I couldn't hit high balls with the 2hbh. I couldn't even reach as high with two hands on the racket as I can reach with one hand, and if I can't reach the ball, I'm not going to hit any sort of good shot. With 1hbh, you can reach and drive balls that rise above your shoulder with heavy topspin.

 

[Kalin]

Well, I can drive the ball very well with a OHBH and can hit decent topspin when the ball is in my wheelhouse. I do have a bit of a problem driving high balls. A heavier racquet helps a lot in that but yes, it is possible albeit by no means easy.

Having said that, I wonder how many lower level 2HBH players can really drive through a high ball. Just because Djokovic and Nadal can do it doesn't mean everyone can.

 

[captainbryce]

Top 3 one-handed backhands!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDSRqoRL9fA

 

[Fastpace Ace]

Dominic Thiem. Remember the name. Future top 10'er with a killer one-hander.

 

[THE FIGHTER]

He seems driven and seems to take the grind of the tour as well as he takes bug matches. Good sign.