How long before the one handed backhand goes the way of the continental forehand?

First topic message reminder :

I had to quit tennis for a couple of years due to living in Iran and back issues. But I have just got back into over the last couple of months. And coming back I started to play matches against lower ranked club players than i am usually used to. Not to toot my own horn but I was an A rated or 5 point amateur at a very strong club. But coming back I started to play the really bottom barrel guys first, and I have never in my life seen anything as attrocious as your average weekend hackers one handed topspin backhand. At every step up the ladder as well you see the same thing, the one handed backhands all get picked on. From the ATP down to the weekend hacker. One gentleman at my club has literally spent years working on his one handed top spin backhand with thousands of dollars of coaching and if you saw him hit one you would think he had never picked up a racquet before.

The one handed topspin backhand is a difficult shot to execute and becomes more so as you increase the height of the ball and the spin on the ball. And the game is evolving towards more elevation on the ball and spin. The new racquets and strings allow you to really put work on the ball and like the continental the one hander really was popular due to serve and volleying. The one handers could easily chip or pick up the low and short ball, hit aggressively on the move, in these respects one hander is superior to the two hander. But two hander is not just a harder shot on average, but it is more compact, and less prone to break down. Also it is a much better stroke for coming over the return. I was even more impressed with the beauty and workmanlikeness of this shot when the first time after a 2 year hiatus I came back to hit for the first time. My forehand is again my best shot and always has been along with my return, but the first time I hit the ball I had trouble keeping a forehand on the court for first couple of sessions. But the two handed backhanded I swear to god the first time I swung at the ball hit the thing clean as whistle deep and with a lot of spin and pace.

The two hander just suits the modern game better, and I wonder how long the one handed top spin backhand will last? I personally don't think you will see it maybe more than one or two guys within the next 10 to 15 years. If I was a coach I would coach pretty much 99.99999 percent of kids not to use it and would go as far as switching kids from one to two. In short while it is a beautiful shot it is being decimated at all levels from the club game to the pros. The inside out forehand with the modern racquet and strings is the spine of the modern game. And in this area the one hander has shown that it just can't hold up well enough except in the rare cases. The one hander is like the last cavalry charges of World War 1, where fool generals charged men and horses at artillery and machine guns well because that had been a successful strategy at one time.

I dont know when DHBHers overtook SHBHers socal. But the reasons for it are not straight forward. Some of it is due to the early age with which kids learn to play now. But if you took the top 10 in say 94...it probably had a fair number of SHBHers....Edberg, Stich, Sampras, Becker, Krajicek to name but a few.

As strings and racquets got better more consistent use of power came into the game and ralleys could be sustained for longer. This was when for me DHBHers started to take over...its due to increased ralleying. Slowing courts exacerbate that further.

Poly strings are known to cause arm problems, as are light racquets. Ok not all get them but many do now. Its simple logic. Luxilon ALu Power is a very stiff string with no give in it...it doesnt absorb the energy of the ball the same so more vibration goes into the arm.

But the point socal is that if SHBHs could survive in the shoot-out 90s with very little time for preparation they could now. But its a harder shot to teach...you said that yourself...hence my point about coaches being lazier than before. If they taught Western grip SHBHs (like Almagro's) then we would see a much more successful type of shot on that wing again.

Socal...if you analyse the preparation for Almagro's BH its not dissimilar to a DHBH in that there are 2 hands on the racquet at the rearmost position...same goes for Wawrinka. Its as the racquet comes through that the hand lets go. But in letting go of the racquet at the hitting zone, the player gets more variation of angle.

Yes its just as efficient...infact its more efficent because you arent using the same amount of energy on the shot as you dont have to rotate your core the same.

As I said...Almagro SHBH is the future of the shot...he can ralley that side all day at any power level and DTL. It just needs coaches to teach western grip SHBHs...and for more attacking conditions to encourage it.

Look at the takeback of Almagro on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siYXcoPdvx8

The stability of the DHBH is replicated in the SHBH preparation...but the hitting zone and follow-through is different.
But by then the racquet is already on its way from a stable base. Guga, Henin and Gaudio had similar techniques.

By the way...a DHBH will never look as good as this.

lydian wrote:Socal...if you analyse the preparation for Almagro's BH its not dissimilar to a DHBH in that there are 2 hands on the racquet at the rearmost position...same goes for Wawrinka. Its as the racquet comes through that the hand lets go. But in letting go of the racquet at the hitting zone, the player gets more variation of angle.

Yes its just as efficient...infact its more efficent because you arent using the same amount of energy on the shot as you dont have to rotate your core the same.

As I said...Almagro SHBH is the future of the shot...he can ralley that side all day at any power level and DTL. It just needs coaches to teach western grip SHBHs...and for more attacking conditions to encourage it.

Well I disagree. Yes those are two very good more westernish single handers in Almagro and Wawrinka, but if I would rate their backhands against two handers I would never take their more artistic and flamboyant single hander over good ATP tour two handed backhand. Neither Wawrinka and ALmagro have ever placed among the highest percentage guys in terms of getting breaks either. Take Gasquet's backhand, in my mind the greatest one hander I have ever seen, how has that impacted his career. All three of these guys have exquisite one handers superior to that of fed's and they have basically never been more than periphery guys. Very talented but not winning tournaments a whole lot, except for almagro in latin america.

What I mean by analyzing results and taking a results based view of the tennis world is that you have to acknowledge that the two handed backhand is a superior weapon for hitting a solid return especially off the kick serve. That is why every really great returner has had a two handed backhand that isn't just a coincidence.

Tennis is a multimillion dollar industry if getting wins was easier with the Almagro one hander people would use it. If getting wins is easier with a two hander, which it is, then it will get established as the dominate shot. The fact that 90 percent of the tour use that shot isn't because of lazy coaches. Slowing conditions only sped up an already long time trend. If you have to ban technology and change the balls, courts, strings, racquets, and so on just to save the shot; well I say let it die. As pretty as it is.

Gasquets BH for me is too spinny, I prefer others ahead of that.
At the end of the day some players are just more talented than others but Almagro is a solid top15 player...in the scheme of things he's at the very pinnacle of tennis. He also gave Nadal his toughest match at RG'10.

My point is that SHBHs CAN work. But the western grip SHBH isnt taught routinely. Yes the DHBH has a slight advantage on returns but disadvnatges elsewhere and is more vulnerable to deep slice. But as I say because the game has slowed slice isnt as effective as it was so isnt used as much now. But ALmagro can return a kick serve from his SHBH fine...but there just arent many guys like Almagro who play the shot.

Can you imagine if 10 times as many people learnt to play ALmagro-type BHs...you would get even better players than him.

The point here is that coaches are not teaching what could be a very effective shot...but they dont because teaching a DHBH is easier as thats what kids start with and then they dont change them in their teens because the playing conditions dont encourage it.

So I dont agree its a dead shot. If nothing else Almagro et al. prove that!

Lydian I am sorry I find your arguments unpersuasive. Would you take the Almagro backhand over the Novak, Nadal, or Andy's two hander? And Nicolas has a great one hander. In the multi-million dollar business of tennis the history of the game is that if there is an evolution or innovation to be made that can improve results they are made. I am unconvinced by your western one hander argument. It is not a matter of grip Lydian alone. That ball is very heavy, has a lot of kinetic force and spin and there is no comparison in terms of stability of the racquet and racquet face with the two hander when compared to the one hander.

And of course I like your mini concession on the return of serve. The two hander is slightly better at returning. Come on Lydian slightyly better. I wonder who was the last player with a one handed backhand who has lead ATP tour in returning, I can't remember really man great returning one handers, ever. The two handed backhand dominates the one hander for coming over a return. As returners like Murray, Novak, Nadal, Agassi, Connors, Nalbandian, and Hewitt can attest to.

I mean you keep stating how defensive the two hander is. The average speed of a two hander is higher than a one hander. And typically for going for winners with your backhand its seems that the great two handers are generally more consistently effective. So I don't know how a harder shot all of sudden gets labelled as defensive.

Of course you CAN still play on tour with a one handed backhand, just like you CAN learn to eat with your feet, why you would want to when it is easier to do it with your hands i don't know.

I dont have to persuade its a better shot, I simply have to point out to respond to the OP question reasons why it wont be extinct like the continental forehand.

So to your OP I say 'No' and you wont convince me otherwise. I'm not saying the SHBH is overall better than DHBH, but nor is it worse...otherwise it would be extinct already! Its just different, with different advantages. Its the shot of the more aggressive player - that cannot be denied when you look at the players who use it. If more 'aggressive conditions' come back you'll see the use of SHBH go up as it has inherently more flexibility which is important when time is reduced and bounces are lower.

But taking the future aside, guys like Federer, Wawrinka, Gasquet and Almagro have no problem in defeating the majority of DHBH players on tour and yet we're to believe its a dinosaur shot? The very fact it still survives today at the highest level in these slower, higher bouncing conditions ensures it can and will continue on.

At the end of the day, if the SHBH was as poor as you make out its a wonder Roger et al. haven't already switched to DHBHs years ago! Also...Federer alone will have already inspired a whole batch of future SHBH players. So for me SHBHs are here to stay for many reasons.

Well I will go Tenez on you when Federer and many of the older pros like Ljubi and Wawrinka started using the one hander and playing as juniors you still had Sampras in the game and many other good one handers. The conditions at that time where very fast. And the one handers while the minority shot on tour in that period was not seen as a career damaging shot. In the last 10-15 years the view has changed when Fed retires in a couple of years who will be the next one hander in the top ten? Almagro? Gasquet? I don't think so, the views on that shot I would posit within the game has deteriorated even further in the last 10-15 shots. I just don't see any coaches teaching it to kids anymore.


I think the one hander is inferior, and has proven itself as being inferior under the technology and current conditions of the tour. If they drastically ban technology and change conditions for more speed like you are predicting well then the one hander will make a comeback. But i doubt tennis will be doing that any time soon. Despite the moaning of certain online segments the modern game is healthy and the fans for the most part happy. I doubt that they will ever appreciably speed up the conditions enough to breathe life back into the tyrannasorus rex of the 50 and 60s the one hander. At this point in the modern game it is viewed as a career damaging shot, and that view is accurate under current tech and conditions.

Zzzzzzzz

Is there anything knew to say on this because many of the posts on this thread oukd have been cut and pasted. They generally begin "I think....."

bogbrush wrote:many of the posts on this thread oukd have been cut and pasted

Sorry to bore you BB.

lydian wrote:

bogbrush wrote:many of the posts on this thread oukd have been cut and pasted

Sorry to bore you BB.

Easily done, apols.

Who died and made you critic BB, buzz off. You pollute my threads with "two handed backhands are a girl's shot". Don't you get the picture when someone doesn't want to talk to you. Now you come onto subjects that I am having an enjoyable discussion and dialogue on and you spout your 2 cents where no one cares and no asked. Buzz off if you don't like the thread.

People need to read what I think. They demand it. What can I do?

Oh, and nobody needs to die to make anyone a critic, it's an expression normally used when referring to an appointment in authority. Just a tip

PS it is a girls shot, that was simple truth for the benefit of the thread.

Back to the original thread, Lydian it does seem that we are agreed about one thing. That a resurgence of the one handed backhand will probably require banning technology and changing conditions. That seems life a fair assessment to me. But again I don't see the demand for that kind of radical action to be out there. I know I wouldn't support it.

It depends whether technology goes even further.
You now have guys spraying their strings with silicone to gain even more spin.
Limits need to be applied otherwise you lose the fundamental fabric of the game...95-98sq in seems big enough to me, string tension no lower than 50 lbs, and ban aluminium strings for mains and crosses.

SHBH will continue, DHBH will grow whilst we have current conditions. At end of day it comes down to what style of game you like, and what style of game you'd like to see on tour. I want variety...and variety in itself would ensure the SHBH lived on.

In the meantime my son gets coached a DHBH much to my chagrin! And guess who fave player is? Djokovic!!!

Spraying silicon? Absurd.

The trend to favour brainless tennis will lead nowhere good, and of course when it causes problems some quarters will say nobody could have forseen it...

More of the older ex-pros are speaking out about increasing technology:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/tennis/the-use-of-silicone-strings-in-effect-turns-racquet-into-a-mini-trampoline/story-fnbe6xeb-1226407028315

http://www.10sballs.com/2012/06/25/players-are-concerned-about-spraying-racquet-strings/

"mini trampoline" lol

Its almost like doping, it gives the weaker players a chance to hit the ball much smoother and rallies will go on forever. Lets see a wooden racquets only tournament in 1 of the masters.

Well I would opposed any banning of technology or speeding up the balls and courts beyond a minor tweeking. If we have to go to all that bother and radically alter the game to protect the single handed backhand and the serve and volley game then I say just let them die. I mean at one time they used to play football with 4 forwards, sports evolve and change over time.

Changes wouldn't be to preserve SHBH, they would be to make the net somewhere skill can be displayed other than shaking hands at the end of the match.

Socal you may want to see 20+ shot ralleys point after point hit from robotic identikit DHBHs, I don't.

"I mean at one time they used to play football with 4 forwards"

They still do, its called Barcelona.

By the way, there will always be a 1 handed BH...the slice.
This shot will also always encourage a topspin SHBH for those that like using it aggressively.

If a DHBH has appeared over the last 35yrs....how long until we see the DHFH appear commonly?

I don't think we will see a double handed forehand but if we did and it was an effective shot why not. And I also believe it is a misnomer that if you have a two handed backhand you will not have a good slice backhand. There are a lot of two handers on tour right now who have excellent slice one handers. I have a two hander and have a decent enough slice backhand.

I think unless we see radical changes to the game that I think there is no desire for, and I certainly would oppose the single handed backhand will be an oddity on tour within the decade.

Well if you'd oppose them then we should let the ATP know to save wasting time.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:"I mean at one time they used to play football with 4 forwards"

They still do, its called Barcelona.

And they used to play incredibly negatively, so they changed the rules.