THIS TIME IT'S OFFICIAL: The 1HBH is dead

[Serve&Bash]

I think it's a copycat sport. There was a time when almost everyone taught the one handed backhand and the result was that you had a tour full of mediocre one handed backhands and a few elite ones that everyone remembers. Tennis in those days was more offense-oriented and the one handed backhand certainly helped with that. For all the crap people talk about Sampras' "weak" one hander there is a lot of footage of him blasting clean winners on Agassi from the baseline and on the returns (Sampras 2nd serve return on backhands is seriously underrated). As the years went on with changes with court speed, tennis balls and players growing up using poly strings I think we naturally saw more two hander's having success and this resulted in players being taught mostly two handed backhands. The two handed backhand is no renaissance shot; most players with it are only adept with shoveling the ball back and forth and getting into soul-sucking CC rallies. The amount of guys who actually create offense and defend at an elite level with the shot are few and far between.

People are correct to point out Tsitsipas' one hander breaking down in rallies, but they should also pay attention to all the janky two handers nowadays that cough up sitters anytime they face heavy shots or depth. Heck, even the elite two handers of today do this because in my opinion the two handed backhand does not generate a heavy ball. Alcaraz and Sinner immediately take over the point from Medvedev when they decide they are done rallying backhand-to-backhand and run around it to slam a forehand. Last week in Shanghai, Machac's gameplan against Sinner was to go hard into Sinner's backhand in order to generate a ball that he can actually bash. All this is to just say that I don't think the two handed backhand tips the scale of victory in your favor unless it's truly an elite stroke (just like a one hander), and even then it might not because despite all the changes in tennis the serve and forehand remain the shots that actually wins players matches.

 

[Vincent-C]

Anecdotal evidence is a poor way to approach this issue. This is a systematic question. Which technique is likely to produce the best results for the most players in the most playing conditions over the long term? I think we can see how both players and coaches have been answering those questions in recent decades. And from a player's point of view, "It worked for Stan Wawrinka so it'll work for me!" would be a dubious strategy.

 

[Rosstour]

If you utilize two different backhands it means you don't have a good backhand.

Not at all

There are some shots that can only be hit with 1H

 

[vex]

As time goes on, seeing what Federer achieved, in spite of a totally archaic stroke from a bygone era will only prove more impressive.

Truth. Would have been cool to see his ceiling if he hadn’t been burdened by an inferior technique.

 

[Vincent-C]

Another McEnroe / Edberg / Sampras / Rafter / Federer / Wawrinka will show up. Give it a little time.

Truth. Would have been cool to see his ceiling if he hadn’t been burdened by an inferior technique.

That's interesting framing. Thank you.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Not at all

There are some shots that can only be hit with 1H

And those do not matter anymore.

I know there will be always defenders of 1hbh but it's ridiculous in 2024.

1hbh is clear weakness.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

And those do not matter anymore.

I know there will be always defenders of 1hbh but it's ridiculous in 2024.

1hbh is clear weakness.

Some people just don't know how to hit a 2-hander (including me), so let them hit a one-hander if it suits their game. I don't think any of the pros hitting a one-hander would benefit from changing, because it wouldn't suit their game.

 

[Rosstour]

And those do not matter anymore.

I know there will be always defenders of 1hbh but it's ridiculous in 2024.

1hbh is clear weakness.

Slice and overheads don't matter? K.

Alcaraz is taking a step towards creating the player who uses all three backhands. Korda has a nice 1H he deploys on the run as well.

 

[heninfan99]

So some time before the US Open Gill Gross reported that ZERO girls(female juniors) used a one handed backhand. I thought well....maybe it's true, maybe the haters finally killed it off. Then something interesting happened. I never watch girls(juniors) tennis but for random curiosity I clicked on a match banner via ESPN+ and featured before my eyes was the glorious one handed backhand of Luna Maria Cinalli. I quickly realized the haters still have no idea what they are talking about.

Do coaches no longer know how to teach it? Yes. Do tennnis parents not understand it? Yes.
Is it dead? A big No.

 

[heavyD]

Not at all

There are some shots that can only be hit with 1H

What shot is this outside of the slice? The slice doesn't count because it's a defensive or approach shot that all players use on forehand or backhand when necessary but is not a primary means of hitting (unless you are a club pusher). When discussing the two type of backhand we are discussing the one hander or the two hander which can be primarily flat or topspin.

 

[Rosstour]

What shot is this outside of the slice? The slice doesn't count because it's a defensive or approach shot that all players use on forehand or backhand when necessarily but is not a primary means of hitting (unless you are a club pusher). When discussing the two type of backhand we are discussing the one hander or the two hander which can be primarily flat or heavy topspin.

The smash, for one

Hitting a ball that's already behind you, secondly

Thirdly, low shots on the run

The 1H has far more RHS and better reach. Maybe I'm just a crap player but more RHS and better reach sound like things I sometimes need in a match

 

[Rosstour]

OK another example of "this shot can only be played with one hand"

If I'm at net or approaching, and he hits a good ball that dips to my BH and I have to hit it off the bounce at my feet, 1H is best there. Much easier to change the RF angle with a quick "wrist flick" and lift the ball rather than trying to slice it, and doing that with 2H is too cumbersome and time-consuming from that position

Basically once I'm inside the service box, my 2HBH disappears unless I'm trying to hit forward through a slow, shoulder-height ball. 1H has better reach, better recovery, better touch.

 

[heavyD]

I think some off you are straying off the intention of this thread discussing overhead shots and volleying. We all realize that certain shots can only be played with one hand but this thread is about the death of the one handed backhand.

 

[JMR]

So some time before the US Open Gill Gross reported that ZERO girls(female juniors) used a one handed backhand. I thought well....maybe it's true, maybe the haters finally killed it off. Then something interesting happened. I never watch girls(juniors) tennis but for random curiosity I clicked on a match banner via ESPN+ and featured before my eyes was the glorious one handed backhand of Luna Maria Cinalli. I quickly realized the haters still have no idea what they are talking about.

What's with the silly use of "haters" in that lament? Although this thread has focused mostly on the backhands of professional male players, the on-court reality is even more undeniable on the women's tour. I think the last woman with a one-handed backhand to win a slam was Schiavone, 14.5 years ago! Players and coaches employ specific techniques and tactics because they work. Sure, some things can go in and out of fashion, but that's a weak, secondary factor. The disappearance of the one-handed backhand has been an evolutionary process, not an emotional one.

 

[vex]

Another McEnroe / Edberg / Sampras / Rafter / Federer / Wawrinka will show up. Give it a little time.

That's interesting framing. Thank you.

You’re welcome, I thought it might frame the albatross-level relic that is the OHBH appropriately lest any younger readers on this forum accidentally waste years learning bad technique.

 

[Rosstour]

I think some off you are straying off the intention of this thread discussing overhead shots and volleying. We all realize that certain shots can only be played with one hand but this thread is about the death of the one handed backhand.

It isn't going to die. It will be subsumed into the next evolutionary step of tennis, where every top player returns with two hands but can go to 1H when the situation calls for it

 

[ey039524]

I take ohbh to mean the topspin baseline groundstroke. Most male pros have a 2hbh topspin groundie and use one hand for slices, volleys, overheads, etc.

 

[Rosstour]

I take ohbh to mean the topspin baseline groundstroke. Most male pros have a 2hbh topspin groundie and use one hand for slices, volleys, overheads, etc.

There are a lot of shots between the full on topspin drive and the classics you mentioned.

And depending on what you want the ball to do and how you want to use your body, the 1H can do more with less effort (depending on position/situation)

I find lots of uses for it in positions/situations where I don't need a big backswing. The stroke supplies natural power by itself, far more than a 2H...so you can shorten the backswing and use that to take time away. The 1H will bunt/poke balls over that a 2H would hit into the net with the same swing speed

For donkey kick drive shots off the right/front foot the 2H is easier but if I'm jumping off the back/left foot the 1H is easier. Just much easier to generate power in that case with 1H than 2H.

 

[tennis24x7]

What to you mean by Stan's "strength"? Do you mean his physical strength, or strong skills?

As I said though, limitations for a guy like Dimitrov seem to be between his ears. When he is on, he can use his 1HBH to hit some incredible angles and spins that a 2HBH simply couldn't produce.

So at the end of the day, as long as there are shots that are only possible with a 1HBH, it will always have a place in the game (it will just need someone that is good enough to make use of it).


See above. There are indeed some scenarios, however, where a 1HBH can hit shots that a 2HBH cannot.


Who won?


Yep, the 1HBH is such a limitation... but a 39 year old just used it to beat an in form player 10+ years younger.

Physical strength.

 

[robyrolfo]

Look, Stan just beat Rublev today. Ok, it's just one match, and the stakes aren't particularly high, but let me ask everyone a genuine question: Would Stan even be able to play at tour level right now, age 39 with decreased movement, if he had a 2HBH? I honestly think the 1HBH is what is extending Stan's career. So how can anyone say with a straight face that it's a limiting factor at this level?

The two handed backhand is no renaissance shot; most players with it are only adept with shoveling the ball back and forth and getting into soul-sucking CC rallies. The amount of guys who actually create offense and defend at an elite level with the shot are few and far between.

This! People are making it out to be some sort of light-saber super stroke, but it's not. The way most guys hit a 2HBH to simply produce a serviceable rally ball, a good 1HBH player can hit an effective slice that prolongs the really, or even makes their opponent that much more uncomfortable.

And those do not matter anymore.
I know there will be always defenders of 1hbh but it's ridiculous in 2024.
1hbh is clear weakness.

You are losing all credibility with this. Having access to a greater variety of shots and angles doesn't matter anymore? What?

So some time before the US Open Gill Gross reported that ZERO girls(female juniors) used a one handed backhand. I thought well....maybe it's true, maybe the haters finally killed it off. Then something interesting happened. I never watch girls(juniors) tennis but for random curiosity I clicked on a match banner via ESPN+ and featured before my eyes was the glorious one handed backhand of Luna Maria Cinalli. I quickly realized the haters still have no idea what they are talking about.
Do coaches no longer know how to teach it? Yes. Do tennnis parents not understand it? Yes.

This. And more on the reasons why this is the case, below...

What shot is this outside of the slice? The slice doesn't count because it's a defensive or approach shot that all players use on forehand or backhand when necessary but is not a primary means of hitting (unless you are a club pusher). When discussing the two type of backhand we are discussing the one hander or the two hander which can be primarily flat or topspin.

Oh, right, because Graf was a "club pusher," right?

Check out these highlights. Check out the winner at 3:01 in, which is a shot you can ONLY hit with a 1HBH. (Even the point at 1:35 is one that you are only constructing if you have a good 1HBH).

HIGHLIGHTS: G. Dimitrov def. J. Thompson; Brisbane SF | Tennis.com

Grigor Dimitrov (BGR) defeats Jordan Thompson (AUS) in the 2024 Brisbane semifinals match highlights.

www.tennis.com

<iframe src="//cdn.jwplayer.com/players/fj5X4iem-rXb5vCPh.html" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto"></iframe>

Players and coaches employ specific techniques and tactics because they work. Sure, some things can go in and out of fashion, but that's a weak, secondary factor. The disappearance of the one-handed backhand has been an evolutionary process, not an emotional one.

This has been discussed before, but coaches especially (and players as well) are largely going with the 2HBH because they are short-sightedly risk adverse. The 2HBH is the safe choice. For a coach, it gives them the best chance of getting a player up to a good level, perhaps at the expense of a possibly great level, and that is the safe bet. They are there to make a living, and if some clueless parent thinks a coach encouraging a 1HBH is going to give their child a smaller chance to succeed, they are going to change coaches.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Look, Stan just beat Rublev today. Ok, it's just one match, and the stakes aren't particularly high, but let me ask everyone a genuine question: Would Stan even be able to play at tour level right now, age 39 with decreased movement, if he had a 2HBH? I honestly think the 1HBH is what is extending Stan's career. So how can anyone say with a straight face that it's a limiting factor at this level?


This! People are making it out to be some sort of light-saber super stroke, but it's not. The way most guys hit a 2HBH to simply produce a serviceable rally ball, a good 1HBH player can hit an effective slice that prolongs the really, or even makes their opponent that much more uncomfortable.


You are losing all credibility with this. Having access to a greater variety of shots and angles doesn't matter anymore? What?


This. And more on the reasons why this is the case, below...


Oh, right, because Graf was a "club pusher," right?

Check out these highlights. Check out the winner at 3:01 in, which is a shot you can ONLY hit with a 1HBH. (Even the point at 1:35 is one that you are only constructing if you have a good 1HBH).

HIGHLIGHTS: G. Dimitrov def. J. Thompson; Brisbane SF | Tennis.com

Grigor Dimitrov (BGR) defeats Jordan Thompson (AUS) in the 2024 Brisbane semifinals match highlights.

www.tennis.com

<iframe src="//cdn.jwplayer.com/players/fj5X4iem-rXb5vCPh.html" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto"></iframe>



This has been discussed before, but coaches especially (and players as well) are largely going with the 2HBH because they are short-sightedly risk adverse. The 2HBH is the safe choice. For a coach, it gives them the best chance of getting a player up to a good level, perhaps at the expense of a possibly great level, and that is the safe bet. They are there to make a living, and if some clueless parent thinks a coach encouraging a 1HBH is going to give their child a smaller chance to succeed, they are going to change coaches.

Yes

Variety is overrated. Who says you need variety to dominate.

 

[JMR]

Look, Stan just beat Rublev today. Ok, it's just one match, and the stakes aren't particularly high, but let me ask everyone a genuine question: Would Stan even be able to play at tour level right now, age 39 with decreased movement, if he had a 2HBH? I honestly think the 1HBH is what is extending Stan's career. So how can anyone say with a straight face that it's a limiting factor at this level?

On the other hand (pun intended), Jimmy Connors made a U.S. Open semifinal at age 39 because of his two-handed backhand. I can honestly say that the last five years or so of Jimbo's career would not have been possible if he had used a one-handed backhand. And I came to that conclusion at that time. It was very clear from his matches that the extra power and well-honed control of the two-hander were what enabled him to stay in rallies with guys 10 or 15 years younger, who otherwise would have been able to outhit him with ease.

 

[nolefam_2024]

On the other hand (pun intended), Jimmy Connors made a U.S. Open semifinal at age 39 because of his two-handed backhand. I can honestly say that the last five years or so of Jimbo's career would not have been possible if he had used a one-handed backhand. And I came to that conclusion at that time. It was very clear from his matches that the extra power and well-honed control of the two-hander were what enabled him to stay in rallies with guys 10 or 15 years younger, who otherwise would have been able to outhit him with ease.

Sinner would be able to overpower the one handers with ease in this decade. Even more than Djokovic and Nadal did in the last. They have no hope.

 

[Rosstour]

On the other hand (pun intended), Jimmy Connors made a U.S. Open semifinal at age 39 because of his two-handed backhand. I can honestly say that the last five years or so of Jimbo's career would not have been possible if he had used a one-handed backhand. And I came to that conclusion at that time. It was very clear from his matches that the extra power and well-honed control of the two-hander were what enabled him to stay in rallies with guys 10 or 15 years younger, who otherwise would have been able to outhit him with ease.

What "extra power" sir

Also, Connors like Borg used a tweener BH, where his off hand would come off the handle during followthrough

The 1H is an absolute liability on return unless you are Federer, that is the big weakness

 

[JMR]

Also, Connors like Borg used a tweener BH, where his off hand would come off the handle during followthrough

This reminds me of debates from 20 years ago. "Did Borg really have a two-handed backhand?" I don't think there is such a thing as a "tweener" backhand. What counts is whether or not the player has two hands gripping the racket handle when the ball strikes the strings. That's the crux of the stroke. Preparation and follow-through are more variable and dependent on player preferences.

 

[Rosstour]

This reminds me of debates from 20 years ago. "Did Borg really have a two-handed backhand?" I don't think there is such a thing as a "tweener" backhand. What counts is whether or not the player has two hands gripping the racket handle when the ball strikes the strings. That's the crux of the stroke. Preparation and follow-through are more variable and dependent on player preferences.

Right, the rest of the stroke is irrelevant. Brilliant insight sir

 

[JMR]

Right, the rest of the stroke is irrelevant. Brilliant insight sir

Typical online forum straw man argument. sigh. The rest of the stroke is indeed irrelevant to the issue of classifying the stroke as a one- or two-handed backhand. All that counts in that regard is how you are holding the racket when you actually hit the ball. Sorry, but that's how it works. Of course, the preparation and follow-through are relevant to other matters, such as the consistency, accuracy, and strength of the shot -- but that's not the topic here.

 

[robyrolfo]

Variety is overrated. Who says you need variety to dominate.

Um, Darren Cahill, who encourages Sinner to get to the net more, and mix things up. Alcaraz has some variety as well. And you know who lacks it? Guys like Zverev and Rublev, and look where it has gotten them.

On the other hand (pun intended), Jimmy Connors made a U.S. Open semifinal at age 39 because of his two-handed backhand. I can honestly say that the last five years or so of Jimbo's career would not have been possible if he had used a one-handed backhand. And I came to that conclusion at that time. It was very clear from his matches that the extra power and well-honed control of the two-hander were what enabled him to stay in rallies with guys 10 or 15 years younger, who otherwise would have been able to outhit him with ease.

But that's because it suited him in particular. And Connors also played in a very particular time period (like McEnroe) where the shift in racquet tech was truly insane. The fact that both were even able to stay on tour in the latter stages of their careers is just a testament to how good they were overall. But for Connors, the 2HBH was just a better fit, like the 1HBH is a better fit for Stan.

That said, it isn't a liability for Stan. It's not holding him back. The thesis that the 1HBH is a detriment to any player that uses it is ridiculous.

And some people seem to forget that just a few years ago Dominic Thiem was playing very modern, very powerful, very everything tennis with a 1HBH. So, for the umpteenth time, it's the player, not the stroke.

 

[Aabye5]

What's with the silly use of "haters" in that lament? Although this thread has focused mostly on the backhands of professional male players, the on-court reality is even more undeniable on the women's tour. I think the last woman with a one-handed backhand to win a slam was Schiavone, 14.5 years ago! Players and coaches employ specific techniques and tactics because they work. Sure, some things can go in and out of fashion, but that's a weak, secondary factor. The disappearance of the one-handed backhand has been an evolutionary process, not an emotional one.

But it's not really an evolution. It's like the "death" of serve-&-volley.

It's amazing how many players are relatively lackluster at net these days. But Alcaraz and Sinner have shown that a solid net game is a great tool to have in the bag. Did coaches stop teaching great net skills because it wasn't important, or because it didn't produce easy wins in the juniors?

 

[Rosstour]

Um, Darren Cahill, who encourages Sinner to get to the net more, and mix things up. Alcaraz has some variety as well. And you know who lacks it? Guys like Zverev and Rublev, and look where it has gotten them.

But that's because it suited him in particular. And Connors also played in a very particular time period (like McEnroe) where the shift in racquet tech was truly insane. The fact that both were even able to stay on tour in the latter stages of their careers is just a testament to how good they were overall. But for Connors, the 2HBH was just a better fit, like the 1HBH is a better fit for Stan.

That said, it isn't a liability for Stan. It's not holding him back. The thesis that the 1HBH is a detriment to any player that uses it is ridiculous.

And some people seem to forget that just a few years ago Dominic Thiem was playing very modern, very powerful, very everything tennis with a 1HBH. So, for the umpteenth time, it's the player, not the stroke.

Agreed. However, I would argue that Stan's BH holds him back as he has to chip his FH returns. That seems....suboptimal in today's game

 

[Rosstour]

Typical online forum straw man argument. sigh. The rest of the stroke is indeed irrelevant to the issue of classifying the stroke as a one- or two-handed backhand. All that counts in that regard is how you are holding the racket when you actually hit the ball. Sorry, but that's how it works. Of course, the preparation and follow-through are relevant to other matters, such as the consistency, accuracy, and strength of the shot -- but that's not the topic here.

And your view is typical of the black/white binary thinking so typical in forums. Jimbo and Borg used a hybrid backhand and it's too limiting to focus on one discrete thing as the criteria that defines the shot as one of two things.

 

[robyrolfo]

But it's not really an evolution. It's like the "death" of serve-&-volley.

It's amazing how many players are relatively lackluster at net these days. But Alcaraz and Sinner have shown that a solid net game is a great tool to have in the bag. Did coaches stop teaching great net skills because it wasn't important, or because it didn't produce easy wins in the juniors?

I've watched some juniors play while waiting for courts/warming up or whatever, and they basically seem allergic to the net!

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Right, the rest of the stroke is irrelevant. Brilliant insight sir

Both those backhands, Borg's and Connors', are pure two-handers. They have both hands on impact – and the dominant, guiding hand is the left for Borg and the right for Connors. The rest of the stroke actually IS irrelevant. A hybrid would be a stroke where (for a right-hander), the right hand would be the dominant one, whereas the left would merely guide the racket. Something like Berasategui's backhand, if you remember him. Most likely, the reason for letting go is the the weight of those old rackets. Wilander let go too, but his is not a hybrid either – because the upper hand is dominant.
You're just wrong, so don't lash out at others with your "black/binary thinking" argument.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Agreed. However, I would argue that Stan's BH holds him back as he has to chip his FH returns. That seems....suboptimal in today's game

What does his backhand have to do with him sometimes chipping his forehand return?

 

[JMR]

What does his backhand have to do with him sometimes chipping his forehand return?

I think it's a grip problem. If you wait to receive serve with your backhand grip, which for many 1HBH players is essential, you might not have time to change to your forehand grip if a hard serve comes to your forehand. This might leave a weak forehand stroke as your only return option.

 

[Rosstour]

What does his backhand have to do with him sometimes chipping his forehand return?

Kinda surprised you would ask this. But yes, @JMR answered it. You can see Musetti do it sometimes too

The real beauty of the 2HBH is how easily you can change the RF angle; almost infinite options and that's why it's so useful to set up on returns with a 2H.

 

[chjtennis]

Someone may feel like being a little different and bring back OHBH in the future with lots of success, who knows? Hopefully there will be someone like Federer in the near future, or even Stan. Whatever the case, OHBH in professional tennis will surely be rarities, for sure.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Kinda surprised you would ask this. But yes, @JMR answered it. You can see Musetti do it sometimes too

The real beauty of the 2HBH is how easily you can change the RF angle; almost infinite options and that's why it's so useful to set up on returns with a 2H.

i do it myself (I have a OHBH), but I never considered it to have something to do with my backhand which is actually my stronger side. I started doing it more often after watching Wawrinka do it, because the most important part of a succesful return is getting the damn ball in play. You don't think that Musetti maybe does it because Stan is his idol?

 

[bobeeto]

coaches gave up on the one hander once the two became status quo - some talented kids probably could have reinvented it but were forced to shovel the two-ey

 

[Rosstour]

i do it myself (I have a OHBH), but I never considered it to have something to do with my backhand which is actually my stronger side. I started doing it more often after watching Wawrinka do it, because the most important part of a succesful return is getting the damn ball in play. You don't think that Musetti maybe does it because Stan is his idol?

They both do it because they have to. When I tried using a 1H return I ran into the same problem. But I knew there was a place in my game for the shot and I've found it. Just not on serve returns.

And Musetti's idol is Federer. Not Wawa

 

[sliceroni]

It’s just never coached anymore, mainly kids start off with 2 not having strength to execute the 1hbh, then not breaking their pattern makes sense. The last 2 years playing more, aside from my 2 brothers, we are the only 1hbh players I’ve been seeing on the courts.

 

[BumElbow]

Have you checked out the game of Mpetshi Perricard? His OHBH is very much a threat.

OMG! If the OHBH is dead then how am I still alive?

 

[Olli Jokinen]

They both do it because they have to. When I tried using a 1H return I ran into the same problem. But I knew there was a place in my game for the shot and I've found it. Just not on serve returns.

And Musetti's idol is Federer. Not Wawa

I just heard him say it was Stan a couple of years ago when he beat him in Rome, but you're right, it's Federer. My issue is that I have a pretty big backswing on my topspin forehand, so after seeing Stan use the chip the forehand return, I got more returns in play with more safety and length by doing the same thing.

 

[Alcawrath]

AO Junior champion Henry Bernet begs to differ with the OP

 

[Sudacafan]

I agree. A 1hbh is a liability. It cost Federer the slam race.

 

[Rovesciarete]

The trend is clear, by Tennisabstract.

 

[Smecz]

AO Junior champion Henry Bernet begs to differ with the OP

Yeah, His backhand is too open, lacks closure.

It's more of an old school backhand drop, I like his slices.

 

[JMR]

AO Junior champion Henry Bernet begs to differ with the OP

Bjorn Fratangelo won the FO boys title in 2011. That was a big deal at the time, because an American's winning such a title on clay seemed to promise great things. (BF was also a local kid, so it was really in the news around here.) Alas, while BF can at least say he went on to play in the adult slams as well, he never won an ATP tour level title, and his ranking peaked at no. 99. (But now he's a slam-winning coach!)

The moral is that the junior titles mean very little as predictors of professional success. Moreover, the point of this thread was never that absolutely no decent player in the universe uses a one-handed backhand. It's that the stroke has disappeared as a factor among the top players.

 

[nolefam_2024]

The trend is clear, by Tennisabstract.

Just keep the ledger pushing to red I say.

In some years no professional will even hope to break through top 10 with a single hander unless a freak 6'8 like GMP

 

[JMR]

The trend is clear, by Tennisabstract.

From half the field to a lonely holdout.