I love watching tennis but I don't understand much about the technical parts of the game. They are very pleasing to the eye but why do so many people say the one handed backhand is a weakness? What is it about it? Also,why are most of the players taught to play with a 2 handed backhand but some taught to play a one hander? What did the coaches of those 1 hand backhand players believe would be the advantage of teaching them that way?
The One Handed Backhand
- Thread starter Midaso240
- Start date
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Even Federer, who has one of the best 1 handed backhand ever, now says that if he was to start learning tennis again, he would learn two handed backhand. In this era when equipment has allowed so much power and spin to the players, one handed backhand seems to be somewhat of a disadvantage. I play one handed backhand as a recreational player, but it would be a totally different story for the pros who have to face vicious ground strokes all the time. It just requires a lot more preparation and accuracy to play with one handed backhand, IMHO. Most of the time when 1hbh gets hard shots, you just have to slice it and your opponent will pounce on it.
NameNumber
New User
One hand does have a handful of advantages.
-You get a little bit more reach because a one-hander is usually hit closed-stance and with a straight arm.
-You usually end up developing a better slice because it becomes more practical to use it more often.
-It masks your shot selection better.
-More optimal power and spin, though it's harder to generate it on regular basis.
Traditionally, it's better for an all-court player to learn a one-hander because if you're constantly reaching out wide and having to switch things up, hitting with one hand all the time is useful. Whereas baseliners benefit more from the consistent power and added control of a second hand on the racquet.
-You get a little bit more reach because a one-hander is usually hit closed-stance and with a straight arm.
-You usually end up developing a better slice because it becomes more practical to use it more often.
-It masks your shot selection better.
-More optimal power and spin, though it's harder to generate it on regular basis.
Traditionally, it's better for an all-court player to learn a one-hander because if you're constantly reaching out wide and having to switch things up, hitting with one hand all the time is useful. Whereas baseliners benefit more from the consistent power and added control of a second hand on the racquet.
tennissportsrog
Rookie
Too classic.
Now the slow surface. The increase in the weight of a ball.
also, A racket grows large and its performance also improves.
The One Handed Backhand.. too classic.
Now the slow surface. The increase in the weight of a ball.
also, A racket grows large and its performance also improves.
The One Handed Backhand.. too classic.
tennis_hack
Banned
2hbh advantages;
1). Easier hitting on the rise (easier to do with added stability of 2nd hand)
2). Easier returning serves (ditto reason above)
3). Easier re-directing pace (ditto reason above)
1hbh advantages;
1). Heavier weight of shot/topspin (1hbh is a faster and freer stroke)
2). Greater crosscourt angles (due to more topspin and reach)
3). Greater lateral reach (due to reach not limited by 2nd hand)
I asked my coach if the 1hbh is dying out and he said it never will, it is just going through a phase of low popularity.
Interestingly, if the game is favoring heavier and heavier spin, the 1hbh has an advantage in at least one area over the 2hbh, as topspin is so much easier to create on the 1hbh than the 2hbh. Gasquet's backhand regularly clocks in the same rpm range as Nadal's forehand.
However, the ease of coaching of the 2hbh, combined with the fact that most pro's take up the game when they are around 5 years old (and too weak to hit a backhand with one hand), means the 2hbh will probably always be dominant in terms of popularity.
T
Topslice
Guest
There are more at rec level yes. They hold their own? I would say the two handers tend to dominate, the higher the level you go the two hander is more prominent imo.
I hope to be.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
And backhand volley too. You could almost go as far as saying pretty much every great backhand volley in the open era was by a player with a one handed backhand. The feel you get from hitting a 1hbh translates into the volley to some extent.
jelle v
Hall of Fame
Seriously? Do you have a link to a video or interview where he says this? I would be very interested to read or hear what he says about it.
OTMPut
Hall of Fame
Not true, at my club open championships, for the past 5 years, 3 out of 4 semi finalists had 1hbh. This year all four of them. One of them with just a slice backhand.
Tennis is a lot more than just a collection of strokes.
tennis_hack
Banned
Cool, but Gasquet can hit backhands at 100mph that also have 3500+rpm on them. Wawrinka and Almagro must be up there, and may even be higher than Gasquet as they're both bigger and stronger than him.
I have seen Murray hit 100mph backhands, but they are low, skidding cross-court winners, hit flat as a pancake. They bounce about two foot high, whereas Gasquet's backhands will kick up to head height on bounce.
To achieve that much spin at that speed (i.e. 'heaviness' of shot), takes a lot more racked-head acceleration than to crank out speed with little spin. It's why Nadal swings at his forehand so much faster than Berdych does, yet Berdych's forehand travels through the air just as fast as Nadal's forehand - except with half the spin or less.
What two-handed backhands do you think produce a very heavy shot - i.e. exceptional amount of topspin at very high speeds?
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
I don't have the link but I clearly remember seeing him saying that on a TV interview.
tennis_hack
Banned
Federer doesn't have one of the best 1hbh's ever, but he is the best player ever who had a 1hbh.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
I actually think his one handed backhand is one of the best ever. The reason I first admired him was that he could hit both forehand and backhand so well to any parts of the court. I think it's right up there with other good ones.
I want to see/read this too. I call BS. If not complete BS, then it was probably taken way out of context.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Ask Roger next time on Twitter.
Lukhas
Legend
I personally can't tell you if he did say this. But I know he said in a French newspaper that he's proud to have a one-hander because it's a tougher and more elegant shot to use. And that even if he admits not having the best 1HBH out-there that if he had to create an invincible player, he'd still give him his one-hander. He feels it makes him different from other people.
http://www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/-un-roland-un-peu-plus-cosy/376036
Smasher08
Legend
This. Well . . . and lazy coaching. Backhands are comparatively misunderstood and poorly taught.
So much of teaching juniors is about managing the expectations of parents, some of whom want to see immediate results, as well as not letting the kids get discouraged. Any kid who's played baseball or cricket will be able to intuit a 2-hander . . . but if two hands were truly better than one, everyone would have a 2-handed forehand.
Any adult who's taught a 2-hander is unlikely to make it past NTRP 3.5, and if they learn on a sub-320g racquet, they'll be hard-pressed to make it past 3.0.
Spielgame
Hall of Fame
I remember Federer once said if his kids want to play tennis he wants them to play with two handed backhand.
Yes, Roger Federer has stated he would teach his kids a two-handed backhand because it's generally easier for young players to master, providing more stability and consistency, though he'd also teach them the one-hander if they preferred later, acknowledging it's about character and enjoyment. He believes the double-handed backhand is simpler for kids to get the ball over the net and develop proper technique, even though he's famous for his iconic one-hander, which he admits he couldn't teach them.
Double-handed or one-handed backhand? Roger Federer gives advice to kids - Tennis365
His one-handed backhand is one of his trademark shots, but Roger Federer believes kids should be taught how to play the "simpler" double-handed backhand first.
www.tennis365.com
Last edited:
Smasher08
Legend
2hbh is "easier" because it indulges bad technique in every single aspect of it, from the grips of both hands, to wrists and elbows, to swing path, to contact point, to follow-through. If not learned as a junior, a 2-hander is basically a death-sentence for someone's progress. Fixing 2-handers is the most difficult thing to do as a coach, unless the student plays 4+ days/week. Muscle memory works against the student making significant changes, and too often their BH maxes out ~ NTRP 2.5. It can get a bit extreme: it's not uncommon to see people whose 2HBH is literally half the speed of their 1HFH.
1HBHs are all about grip, swing path & contact point. Once acquired, there's no comparison in terms of physics produced: a well-struck 1HB can produce almost as much force as a 1HFH, for similar reasons of physics & biomechanics. On top of that, one handers basically either work or they don't because they won't indulge bad technique, and if they need fixing there's only one hand, one arm, and one wrist to change.
Your coach is right on the money re cycles of popularity. As courts get slower and the qc of tennis balls gets crappier, one handers will have a significant advantage in terms of being able to generate more force and hit through the ball better. However, teaching a one hander is a bit of a lost art: there are very few coaches who can do it well, let alone do it knowledgably, because very few teach tennis technique like a movement class.
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
The 1HBH is superior if you know how to wield it correctly
