BACKHAND One/Two hands?

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by BRIA » Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:50:04


Ok people, I know this has been asked before, but I wanna know.
I use a one-hander, but 90% of people I play/watch use two. I feel that I'm
fine as long as I don't let the ball get too high on my backhand side, when
that happens, I feel I must hit a slice(mostly defence). The game I play is
mostly from the baseline, just moving the guy around until I can hit a
fore-hand winner. I do hit back hand winners, but only maybe a 1/4 of the
amount I do with the forehand... I know that Sampras has a little weeker of
a backhand than a forehand, but then I watch Guga, and Rafter, And they both
look to be on top with their one-handers.... so, what I wanna know is, For a
mostly base-line game, what do u think(not what u use) is the better shot?
Thanks
 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by robin.. » Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:11:38

It's a matter of personal preference really.
Currently 2-handers are quite fashionable, but 10-20 years time it may
well be the other way round.
Both have weaknesses.
1 handers have problems with high bounces and fast serves.
2 handers have problems with low bounces and hitting on the run.

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Davi » Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:48:43

Quote:
> Ok people, I know this has been asked before, but I wanna know.
> I use a one-hander, but 90% of people I play/watch use two. I feel that
I'm
> fine as long as I don't let the ball get too high on my backhand side,
when
> that happens, I feel I must hit a slice(mostly defence). The game I play
is
> mostly from the baseline, just moving the guy around until I can hit a
> fore-hand winner. I do hit back hand winners, but only maybe a 1/4 of the
> amount I do with the forehand... I know that Sampras has a little weeker
of
> a backhand than a forehand, but then I watch Guga, and Rafter, And they
both
> look to be on top with their one-handers.... so, what I wanna know is, For
a
> mostly base-line game, what do u think(not what u use) is the better shot?

I switched from a one-handed backhand to two- simply for better control.  It
was much more difficult for me to come over the top of the ball with any
significant amount of control with one hand.  Two-hands does require a bit
better footwork, but I find the trade-off in control to be worth it.   I
still tend to slice high balls on the backhand side rather than wait for the
ball to drop in order to come over the top with two hands, but it really
depends on positioning.  If I'm in position, though, I'm going to come over
the top or hit it flat more often than not.  At my level, the idea is still
to stay in the point until I have an opportunity rather than force something
big.

David

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Robert B. Wal » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:00:59

[ ... ]

Quote:
> >For a
> >mostly base-line game, what do u think (not what u use) is the better shot?

> I believe most pros would tell you that the two-hander is the better shot,
> if (as you say) one mostly does not need the reach-and-balance-flexibility
> to try to get to net (as on clay) (other things equal, e.g. if one is
> equally willing to commit to learning both strokes).  If one's goal is to
> win the French, grow up with a 2-hander.

But if one's goal is to win Wimbledon, grow up with a one-hander. :-)

It really is a balance. A two-hander gives you more power and accuracy,
a one-hander makes it easier to handle low balls and makes it easier
to produce more different sorts of spins. Depends on what you want
to do. If you want to be a baseliner, then yes, the two-hander is
pretty definitely the superior shot.

--
Robert B. Waltz

"There are two things, science and opinion; the former begets
knowledge, the latter ignorance." -- Hipparchus

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Benjam » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:24:37

I use both ...

two-hander for:  pentrating return of serve, high balls (except when I
want to hit underspin), hard-hit topspin shots, out wide shots that are
not so far out that I have to hit fully on the run (topspin; easier to
control)

one-hander for:  underspin, chip return, approach shot, half-volley,
volley, drop-volley or drop-shot, overhead, alternate for top-spin shot
when I have more time to set up, when stretched out very wide and/or
hitting on a dead run (underspin)

personally, I do not find hitting a two-hander to be a problem w/ low
balls, though you do have to bend down w/ legs (but that's a good form for
almost any stroke); some low balls I hit w/ one-hand (underspin, flat or
top-spin), and some w/ two-hand (flat or top-spin)

basically, I try to mix it up, so my opponent has a harder time getting a
bead on any one shot, and also so it messes up his anticipation

one other issue on this topic that I rarely see discussed is the question
of the different body stresses from each:

two-hand backhand torques the knee more (because you plant your ***
front foot and then rotate into it); also puts more stress on ***
shoulder, since you have to reach back further

one-hander is far less stressful to knee or shoulder

I know one player who had to switch from two- to one-hand after knee
surgery just to be able to keep playing

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Serge » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:46:00

[..]
Quote:

> > I believe most pros would tell you that the two-hander is the better
shot,
> > if (as you say) one mostly does not need the

reach-and-balance-flexibility

Quote:
> > to try to get to net (as on clay) (other things equal, e.g. if one is
> > equally willing to commit to learning both strokes).  If one's goal is
to
> > win the French, grow up with a 2-hander.

> But if one's goal is to win Wimbledon, grow up with a one-hander. :-)

> It really is a balance. A two-hander gives you more power and accuracy,
> a one-hander makes it easier to handle low balls and makes it easier
> to produce more different sorts of spins. Depends on what you want
> to do. If you want to be a baseliner, then yes, the two-hander is
> pretty definitely the superior shot.

Whose two-hander could be considered superior to Kuerten's one-hander
on clay? Also notice, at least half of Spanish players, who all
love clay and are successfull on it play one hand.

Sergei

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Robert B. Wal » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:24:27

Quote:

> [..]

> > > I believe most pros would tell you that the two-hander is the better
> shot,
> > > if (as you say) one mostly does not need the
> reach-and-balance-flexibility
> > > to try to get to net (as on clay) (other things equal, e.g. if one is
> > > equally willing to commit to learning both strokes).  If one's goal is
> to
> > > win the French, grow up with a 2-hander.

> > But if one's goal is to win Wimbledon, grow up with a one-hander. :-)

> > It really is a balance. A two-hander gives you more power and accuracy,
> > a one-hander makes it easier to handle low balls and makes it easier
> > to produce more different sorts of spins. Depends on what you want
> > to do. If you want to be a baseliner, then yes, the two-hander is
> > pretty definitely the superior shot.

> Whose two-hander could be considered superior to Kuerten's one-hander
> on clay? Also notice, at least half of Spanish players, who all
> love clay and are successfull on it play one hand.

That's true, and of course Conchita Martinez (who is the most
clay-loving of all female players) has a one-handed backhand. But
Martinez never hits winners. :-)

And those clay players aren't baseliners, they're
behind-the-baseliners. :-)

A good one-handed backhand can be successful on any surface, of
course. But statistically, it's best on grass. It seems to
be very bad on rebound ace, by contrast. Clay is so slow that
any kind of backhand can work. :-)

I guess I should have said it differently. A two-handed backhand
will help more offensively. A one-handed backhand is a more
defensive stroke. So a lot depends on how good your forehand is.
If you don't have a good forehand, you really want a two-handed
backhand so you can hit an occasional winner. If you have
a good forehand, a one-handed backhand can keep you in rallies
while you prepare to chip and charge. :-)

--
Robert B. Waltz

"There are two things, science and opinion; the former begets
knowledge, the latter ignorance." -- Hipparchus

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by bartleb » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:20:03


Quote:
> Ok people, I know this has been asked before, but I wanna know.
> I use a one-hander, but 90% of people I play/watch use two. I feel that
I'm
> fine as long as I don't let the ball get too high on my backhand side,
when
> that happens, I feel I must hit a slice(mostly defence).

The high bouncer to the backhand is tough for anyone.  My own sense, as a
two hander, is that it's the footwork and position relative to the bounce
that matters more than the number of hands.  If my feet are feeling slow or
I don't position myself well, I end up catching the ball behind; if I'm
sharp, I hit it just about waist high, out in front, and therefore and
flatly and well.  I would recommend trying to hit the slice more
aggressively; really knifing the ball and keeping it low (Graf comes to
mind) will give a two-hander all kinds of trouble.

The game I play is

Quote:
> mostly from the baseline, just moving the guy around until I can hit a
> fore-hand winner. I do hit back hand winners, but only maybe a 1/4 of the
> amount I do with the forehand... I know that Sampras has a little weeker
of
> a backhand than a forehand, but then I watch Guga, and Rafter, And they
both
> look to be on top with their one-handers.... so, what I wanna know is, For
a
> mostly base-line game, what do u think(not what u use) is the better shot?
> Thanks

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Benjam » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 05:08:04

Quote:
> The high bouncer to the backhand is tough for anyone.  My own sense, as a
> two hander, is that it's the footwork and position relative to the bounce
> that matters more than the number of hands.  

that's a good point ... personally, I try not to let high-bouncing balls
bounce too high on me -- I prefer to try to take them low off the bounce,
both because I get more accuracy that way, and because it gives my
opponent less reaction time (and a high-bouncing shot is often a defensive
one, so taking it early removes some of its defensive effectiveness)
 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Gerar » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:53:56


Quote:

> I use both

Wilander used both just like you do.  IMHO Wilander still had the best
slice backhand of any baseliner even better than Lendl's 1/3-slice, 1/3
chip and 1/3 "push" one handed "slice" backhand.

Quote:
> two-hand backhand torques the knee more (because you plant your ***
> front foot and then rotate into it);

Well the recent trend is to use a semi-open to open stance on two-handed
backhand, Serena Williams is a great example of that.  If you use a more
open stance you put more onus on hips and shoulders and much less on knees.

Quote:
> one-hander is far less stressful to knee or shoulder

See above.  If you open the stance then yes.  Try hitting that one-handed
backhand down the line on the dead run and you will put some torque on that
knee, not as much a two hander (imho, from my junior days I clearly
remember nearly falling over my right leg every single time I was doing a
running two hander).

Quote:
> I know one player who had to switch from two- to one-hand after knee
> surgery just to be able to keep playing

Never underestimate the human mind to adapt.  Good for him.  Don't forget
that Aleksandr Volkov became a left-handed player after breaking his right
hand.  

To stay on the point-
I myself went from a two hander at 16 yrs old to a one handed and haven't
regretted it at all.  I get more shoulder into it, still can handle the
high bouncing ball, can really lean into the shot, easier to handle
"jamming serves" and use my wrist more if I want to pull it cross-court or
down the line.  I already had a pretty good one-handed slice (I thank the
tutorial Wilander gave on May '88 edition of "Tennis") so the transition
with slices and chips was easy.

It really is a matter of preference and style.  You just have to keep
seeing what works for you.

--
Men and women are fools, the sooner they realize it the better.

Lord Melbourne

 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by Ursula Winkle » Wed, 31 Jan 2001 21:36:16

Quote:

> That's true, and of course Conchita Martinez (who is the most
> clay-loving of all female players) has a one-handed backhand. But
> Martinez never hits winners. :-)

That doesn't imply that it is impossible to hit winners with a single
handed backhand. It just means that C.M. can't (or don't want to)
do it :-)

Quote:
> And those clay players aren't baseliners, they're
> behind-the-baseliners. :-)

> A good one-handed backhand can be successful on any surface, of
> course. But statistically, it's best on grass. It seems to
> be very bad on rebound ace, by contrast. Clay is so slow that
> any kind of backhand can work. :-)

> I guess I should have said it differently. A two-handed backhand
> will help more offensively. A one-handed backhand is a more
> defensive stroke. So a lot depends on how good your forehand is.

No. An one-handed BH can be as offensive as a two-handed. It
just needs (usually) *more time* to develope the feeling for perfect
timing, footwork, balance, etc. Most people don't have the patience
to invest that time/effort and prefer to see "the fast success". I think
this is the main reason why nowadays the twohander is prevailed
(together with the baseline game). But I'm convinced that in 10
years things will turn around again -  once gotten the feeling
for the one-hander, then one has 1) gained the needed power,
2) superior varity related to the two-hander and 3) almost probably the
necessary constancy (usually much more than on the forehand side).
 
 
 

BACKHAND One/Two hands?

Post by BRIA » Wed, 07 Feb 2001 15:03:08

Half the time I make this change, the other time I flatten it out and just
slice it. Right now the grip I manily use on my backhand is an eastern  The
problem with making that change (for me) is that I tend to hit more of a
"moon-ball" than a authoritative ground stroke. It happens because if I'm
hitting the ball from that hight, (which I probably shouldn't do, or have
to) my racquet goes from low, to really high. I know that this can be an
effective shot, (when hit deep) but it lack the power to put the ball away.
which is something I can do on my forehand side. don't misunderstand me, I
hit many winners off my backhand, it just seems to me that my strike zone on
my back hand is smalled than on my forehand. it just seem that I can hit my
forehands with more pace and acuracy from many differnet positions, while my
backhand it seems that I have to set up better if I want to hit a winner.
thanks brian


Quote:
> x-no-archive: yes

> Brian wrote about 5 days ago regarding one-handed versus two-handed
> backhands ...
> >I watch Guga, and Rafter, And they both
> >look to be on top with their one-handers...

> It would be nice if you responded to my prior question:
> Perhaps you would do better with high one-handed backhands, if you, like
> some pros,
> switch from a Continental backhand grip (which you probably use for your
> slice, and should continue to use) to a true Eastern backhand grip or even
> more-severe grip (with the palm closer to directly behind the handle).  Do
> you
> make this grip change?  (My guess is that you don't, and it makes a big
> difference.)

> (If you don't know the grip vocabulary i can define it for you upon
> request.)