The Two-Handed Backhand

from "Play Better Tennis In 2 Hours" by Oscar Wegner:

"A two-handed backhand provides power similar to a one-handed backhand but with a shorter stroke, making it easier to make minute adjustments. Because it works the left side of the body, it also develops a more balanced body. The only disadvantage is a slight reduction in reach compared to the one-handed bakchand, but this is offset by several advantages. If you hit the two-handed bakchand in an open stance, it's easier to recover toward the center. It also can be hit powerfully with almost no backswing. And your arms can be bent, which makes returning a ball close to your body or a high bouncing ball easier. Both of these are more difficult to return with a one-handed bakchand. Most top players who use a two-handed bakchand also employ a one-handed backhand slice (chop under the ball with the racquet) to reach a ball that is too far away for a two-handed stroke. Hitting a two-handed bakchand is like hitting a forehand with your left hand while keeping the right hand on the racquet. The left hand does most of the work while the right hand steadies the racquet."

For details on how to execute the two-handed backhand with Oscar's Modern Tennis Methodology, refer to his book, chapter five pp. 104-113 or his DVD's with complete video instruction and drills www.tennisteacher.com

TWO-HANDED IS SUPERIOR TO ONE-HANDED BACKHAND

A lot of discussion is going on about which backhand is better:one handed or two handed? So far I have never read someone stating that one or the other one is better;they always state disadvantages and advantages of one and the other or their subjective feeling toward one or the other backhand.Why?I really do not see any valid reason for it.If we agree on definition of better(more efficient for tennis competition ) it is not hard to see which one is better by comparing its advantages and disadvantages .One more thing;one handed backhand means one handed drive,topspin backhand .Do not confuse it with one handed slice backhand because they are completely different in terms of muscle memory.


INTRODUCTION

There were times when two handed backhand was an exception
Before 70¨s it would be completely inappropriate to have such a discussion.Nobody even spoke about two handed backhand.It did not appear even in the tennis handbooks.Than few players came to the stage such as: Jimmy Connors,Chris Evert ,and later Bjorn Borg who made such success using two handed backhand that from than on more and more players have used it. In today professional tennis is prevailing;especially in women's tennis.I think that this is valid enough reason to find out which one of the two and why is better.Furthermore this is very important to the coming future stars streaming to make mark in professional tennis because it can save them time to figure it themselves out and put them on the right track rightaway.


THE COMPARISON OF THE TWO

At first I am going to explain few well known myths about one and the other

Easier to learn- two handed backhand is easier to learn (children have no such strength of wrist ,arm ,and shoulder so it is difficult for them to execute one handed backhand),and coordination by one handed backhand is more complicated..These characteristics by itself would not mean much because the point I am trying to proof here is which backhand is better for professional play..If all other characteristics were in favor of one handed backhand this one would not count much.

More reliable – means which one will perform better in crounch situations.By common sense is known that in tight situations players have to use bigger body parts to lessen the impact of musles tightening.This is again in favor of two handed backhand

More consistent- it means with which one you can hit more or less the same shot over and over again.It is obvious;two handed backhand because two hands on the handle enable more controlled backswing and more stable position of racket at impact

More precise- again two handed backhand because of the things just mentioned, and also because the margin for error for one handed bachand is higher due to more precise positioning in relation to the ball (the ball has to be hit ahead of and bit to the left of front foot:small deviation will cause big repercusions)

More versatile- two hander is much more versatile than one hander.With two hander you can hit drive,different topspins,topspin lob,short topspin cross,half-volley,balls on the rise,high balls with topspin or on the rise,and all these different shots are much more easier to execute on one hand (much higher percentage of success), and with more variation on the other hand than using one handed backhand .Furthermore , players who use two handed backhand easyly transfer this technique to hit drive and topspin (very difficult shots hit with one hand)volleys .One handed backhand is better suited to hit half-volley close to the net

Better diguise- again there is no comparison between the two.Two hander is far out because of the other hand which will help to overcome different ponts of contact what is not case with one handed backhand.This luxury to commit a bit later is the main point in disguising a shot (keeping the intentions to you till is too late for opponent to react)

More power- power at one handed backhand comes mostly by stepping into the ball;rotation of the body, and backswing are second in line .When htiting two handed backhand power can come also from stepping into the ball (lateral force),but as well as rotating upper body around head (angular force), and to lessen degree from the backswing..So it obvious that two hander has edge over one hander.

Return of serve- it is almost impossible to return fast flat serves on fast surface using one handed backhand drive,topspin because by using one hander you cannot adjust your backswing length and by not adjusting it you are late, and when you are late there is no way to hit one handed backhand (there is not second hand to come around on the ball).Also because of less difficult stroke mechanics player who uses two hander can quicker prepare which is of paramount importance for return of serve

Running backhand- here again two hander is superior to one hander
because gives a player bigger margin of error.To hit one handed running backhand you have to position yourself more precisely because you have very narrow effective striking area(ahead of and to the left of front foot).It is true that you have greater reach with one hand in comparison to two hands but to no avail because if your hitting arm is too far away from the body produces ineffective shot.On the other hand,when executing two handed backhand because of the help of the second hand striking zone is larger, and arms to body position more tolerable.Here again if the timing is not perfect there is not comparison between the two.

Transition to the net- two hander is again better than one hander as an approach shot because you can hit it from open stance (the same as forehand) which enables to move through the shot and gets attacker closer to the net (better positioning)

Low balls- to hit topspin on low (slice) balls is difficult by itself (need to turn backwards to forwards rotation of the ball), and if the knee bent is not deep enough the ball will finish in the net.Here again two hander has edge because by executing two hander base of support is wider so the shot itself is more stable

Short , low balls-for this kind of balls neither of the two is well suited .One handed backhand has further reach but without body laverage (only wrist and arm)is impossible to produce satisfactory shot.For two handed backhand this kind of shot is beyond the reach because of two handed backhand mechanics which determine the point of contact (point of contact has to be in the line with body).

Really wide balls-neither one is well suited, The same reasons as in previous case .The only difference is that all what is said for balls ahead of the body now applies for the balls to the side of the body

Balls hit directly at the body-here one hander has advantage because by two hander second hand stops upper body from moving away from incoming ball

THE TRENDS IN MODERN TENNIS

To further value one or the other;it is very important to give a few hints where the game of tennis is heading to:
- newcomers will be physically stronger compared to todays players (faster,more powerful,more agile) which translates into faster ball exchanges overall
- based on this trend more and more balls will be hit from dynamic balance (from movement)
- more and more balls will be hit from the air and on the rise
- more and more balls will be hit(on both wings) from open stance in order to recover as soon as possible for the next ball
- opening of the point will play even greater role (solid return will be must)
- trend of slower playing surfaces will cause the balls to bounce higher


THE DESCRIPTION OF THE TWO

One handed bachand:
1. less stable racket at the moment of impact
2. needs more time to prepare
3. less controlled backswing
4. full backswing is almost a must
5. the point of contact has to be ahead and to the left of front foot (otherwise you are in trouble)
6. upper body must be more than perpendicular to the oncoming ball
7. necessary very strong shulder,arm,and wrist(more injuries)
8. after finish your body is still mostly sideways
9. the most power is generated by stepping into the ball
10.lineal (close) stance is almost a must (less balanced)
(all the others reflect seriously on the efficiency of shot)
11.ellbow must be close to the body otherwise the shot is ineffective (narrow striking zone)


Two handed backhand:
1. more stable racket at the moment of impact
2. quicker preparation
3. controlled backswing
4. with variety of backswings is possible to produce quality shot
5. the point of contact is in the line with the body and bit to the left (.if you are late the other hand can help you)
6. upper body must coil but not as much as on one handed backhand
7. because of the two hands impact is more evenly distributed so it is not necessary so strong shoulders,arms, and wrists(less injuries)
8. after finish you body faces the net and you can easily move sideways
9.. power is generated by rotating your shoulders around your head and stepping into the ball
10.all stances are possible (more balanced)
11.because of the help of the other hand ellbow can be in various position in relationship to the body for the shot to still be effective (larger striking zone)




ONE HANDED BACKHAND SLICE AS MANDATORY

Although it is obvious that the two hander is the stroke of modern tennis as obvious is that one handed backhand slice (in spite of the fact that topspin rotation dominates slice rotation) is must.The game of tennis is more and more attack, and counterattack but one handed backhand slice is needed for defense (really wide balls,block returns),for specialty shots(reaching drop shots,transition to the net on low,short balls ), and as surprise weapon by changing rally¨s pace and spin .So every aspiring player has to have one.


CONCLUSION

One handed backhand can be very effective stroke but needs that all conditions are met to its fullest(strong wrist,arm, and shoulder,complete shoulder turn,full circular backswing,very precise positioning,stepping into the ball,optimal impact point).If any of the conditions is not fullfilled the stroke losses substantially to its effectiveness.And it is impossible to meet these conditions(very difficult now and evenmore in the future) because of the trends in modern tennis (faster rallies,more balls hit from the air,and on the rise,extreme importance of hiitng from dynamic balance,need for fast lateral recovery,high bouncing balls).So in spite of one handed backhand evolution(it used to be that finish is with shoulders sideways to the net and today is that shoulders can turn quite a bit)this is not enough to stop one handed topspin,drive backhand of becoming an obsolete.Where is the answer?At first sight seems difficult to find the answer but actually it is very easy.One just has to look at the forehand side and its evolution(different stances,different impact points,=hitting from dynamic balance).To translate it to backhand side(and in many tennis handbooks I read that these two strokes are mirror picture of each other)reads two-handed backhand.


www.mytennistory.com

In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations

Wow, what a comprephensive analysis!

good analysis, but i disagree with you on quite a few of those points. transition to the net for one is much better with a one hander.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeFaB

good analysis, but i disagree with you on quite a few of those points. transition to the net for one is much better with a one hander.

---

+1

good work otherwise Bubo

Two handed backhand gives move control of ball placement, but one handed backhand is easier to prepare.

Over the past 20 years, in the men's game, the only two handed #1 players were Nadal, Agassi, Courier, Wilander, and Rios (there may have been others who held the spot for 15 minutes) and all of them were for a very limited time. As for the answer to this question, which is better, neither is better. They both have their advantages and faults, but I wouldn't put a moniker of better or worse on either one of them. If the one hander were worse, I guess that Sampras, Lendl, McEnroe, Federer, and Kuerten would have been dominated by the two handed players. As for the women's game, I think Navratilova, Graf, and Henin did quite a job of holding the #1 spot with their one handers, but developing the back of the deltoid muscle on a woman is tougher than it is on a man, thus the two hander is easier for a woman. Both can be weapons when trained properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tennisking1

Over the past 20 years, in the men's game, the only two handed #1 players were Nadal, Agassi, Courier, Wilander, and Rios (there may have been others who held the spot for 15 minutes) and all of them were for a very limited time. As for the answer to this question, which is better, neither is better. They both have their advantages and faults, but I wouldn't put a moniker of better or worse on either one of them. If the one hander were worse, I guess that Sampras, Lendl, McEnroe, Federer, and Kuerten would have been dominated by the two handed players. As for the women's game, I think Navratilova, Graf, and Henin did quite a job of holding the #1 spot with their one handers, but developing the back of the deltoid muscle on a woman is tougher than it is on a man, thus the two hander is easier for a woman. Both can be weapons when trained properly.

---

Or you could look at like this: imagine how good Federer would be had he used a two-hander.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tennisking1

developing the back of the deltoid muscle on a woman is tougher than it is on a man, thus the two hander is easier for a woman. Both can be weapons when trained properly.

---

"In absolute terms (i.e., total weight lifted), the average woman is about two-thirds as strong as the average man.

In relative terms (i.e., based upon identical areas of cross-sectional muscle), the strength-gain potential between women and men is identical.

Women tend to be weaker than men in the chest, shoulders, and arms because they have less overall muscle tissue in these areas.

Coaches must understand that female and male muscle tissue is uniform, indicating that the ability of muscle tissue to gain strength and produce power is independent of gender." source: STRENGTH TRAINING FOR FEMALE ATHLETES, The Free Online Library

On the 1HBH the the delts move the arm away from the body, but it is the traps that provide the power in the stroke by squeezing the soulder blades together. Alternately, it is the opposing muscles, the pecs, together with the biceps and brachialis that function on the forehand to bring the arm in and across at impact to impart power.

Bubo notes: "One just has to look at the forehand side and its evolution(different stances,different impact points,=hitting from dynamic balance)."

The evolution of the forehand has been mirrored in the 2HBH as Oscar Wegner has taught it for the past 40 years. In the near future more and more players will realize they can apply the open stance, hitting below the center and dynamic movement to the 2HBH as well. However, Bubo's predictions about the future may not be complete. There is a whole other evolution that is soon to emerge as we move "Tennis into The Future"...

Well, as many advantages as it may have, i, for one, will never adopt the 2-handed backhand. Not under threat of torture, not if you told me i could win Wimbledon. Why?
Because it is graceless, so ridiculously inelegant compared to the 1-handed backhand. Look at Djokovic, easily the most elegant 2-handed backhander out there - and then compare him with Gasquet. The fact is that Djokovic looks clumsy and compact, while Gasquet looks to have the grace of a ballerina.
For the sake of the beauty of the game, i do hope this one point of Wegner's wins no broader accept than it already has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnusEffect

Well, as many advantages as it may have, i, for one, will never adopt the 2-handed backhand. Not under threat of torture, not if you told me i could win Wimbledon. Why?
Because it is graceless, so ridiculously inelegant compared to the 1-handed backhand. Look at Djokovic, easily the most elegant 2-handed backhander out there - and then compare him with Gasquet. The fact is that Djokovic looks clumsy and compact, while Gasquet looks to have the grace of a ballerina.For the sake of the beauty of the game, i do hope this one point of Wegner's wins no broader accept than it already has.

---

lol, that's borderline gay. jk ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawn Tennis

lol, that's borderline gay. jk ;)

---

Lol, yeah :p He does, though :D

Wow, what a comprehensive analysis!
Totally biased, oftentimes wrong, but well thought out and presented.
Great communications skills, but too one sided for anyone to seriously believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeD

Wow, what a comprehensive analysis!
Totally biased, oftentimes wrong, but well thought out and presented.
Great communications skills, but too one sided for anyone to seriously believe.

---

Lee, I don't understand who you are referring to as biased. Could you specify? This thread was initiated about the 2HBH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tennis Angel

Lee, I don't understand who you are referring to as biased. Could you specify? This thread was initiated about the 2HBH.

---

The thread is biased because it completely and unshakeably asserts the superiority of the 2HBH over the 1HBH without taking a wealth of things into account - without, for example, looking at the currently best 2HBH on tour and comparing it's stats to the best 1HBH - or exploring in detail whether or not the 1HBH encourages a more complete game, in terms of learning to slice and volley properly.

I heard a theory that posits that 1HBH players end up developing a better forehand since they tend to run around their backhands more often than a 2HBH player. I wonder if that's the case and forehands of 1HBH players tend to become bigger weapons on the average than forehands of 2HBH players. It is reasonable to expect the guy with the bigger weapon to win on the average, especially in pro tennis, I think. Thus, even if the 2HBH is inherently stronger than the 1HBH, players with 1HBH would benefit from a better forehand. Crazy theory, but it almost sounds true!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tennisplayer

I heard a theory that posits that 1HBH players end up developing a better forehand since they tend to run around their backhands more often than a 2HBH player. I wonder if that's the case and forehands of 1HBH players tend to become bigger weapons on the average than forehands of 2HBH players. It is reasonable to expect the guy with the bigger weapon to win on the average, especially in pro tennis, I think. Thus, even if the 2HBH is inherently stronger than the 1HBH, players with 1HBH would benefit from a better forehand. Crazy theory, but it almost sounds true!

---

i dont know. that theory to me seems to say, "one way or another, you're only so good".. in other words, compensation will come through. Lastly, even on the pro level, consistency seems to win.

Backhand – One Hand or Two?
The Realities of Two Contrasting Backhand Styles
Oscar Wegner

Today there is a tendency to teach a two-handed backhand when coaching youngsters of high level. A quick observation shows that most of the young players we see at important competitions are, in fact, two-handers. The exception is the defensive reach for a distant ball where a one-handed slice is the tool of last resort, or a slower ball to change the pace of the rally.

Surprisingly, Francesca Schiavone is the only top 20 player on the Sony Ericsson tour with a one-handed backhand.

On the men’s tour, we see four one-handed backhands in the top 20. On the women’s side, the odds of being two-handed on the backhand are even more dramatic. Only one top 20 player, Francesca Schiavone, plays the backhand one-handed. We could also include a returning Justine Henin in this category, to make the scenario less one-sided.

Is the two-hander a more formidable weapon, or is something else behind this particular trend?

Recent History

Keeping in mind that the equipment started to change in the 1980s, and that the larger-size graphite/composite material established itself on the tour in the early 1990s, it would be fair to include in this study only players of the last two decades.

On the men’s side, including the last 80 weeks of former reigning number one Ivan Lendl, which ended in August, 1990, and including Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Thomas Muster, Patrick Rafter, Pete Sampras, Gustavo Kuerten and Roger Federer, one-handed backhand players had 688 weeks at number one out of a total of 1,047 weeks, that is, close to 66% of the time.


On the men's side, one-handers like Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, and Pete Sampras have dominated at the top since 1990, yet today there are only four in the top twenty.


Two-handed backhand players, including Jim Courier, Marcelo Ríos, Carlos Moya, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Marat Safin, Lleyton Hewitt, Andre Agassi, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Andy Roddick, spent 329 weeks at the top of the world ranking, about 34% of the time.

On the ladies side the success of two-handers is more dramatic. Only Steffi Graff, Justine Henin and Amelie Mauresmo have been number one in the world with one-handed backhands. Starting with Steffi Graff’s record reign for 186 consecutive weeks, these three women were number one for 533 out of 1,056 weeks, roughly 50% of the time. If you factor in that the reigning number one woman in 1993, Monica Seles, was sidelined from a stabbing incident after being at the top for 86 consecutive weeks, the numbers favor slightly the two-handers, eleven in all, including Arantxa Sánchez Vicario, Martina Hingis, Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams, Serena Williams, Kim Clijsters, Maria Sharapova, Ana Ivanovic, Jelena Jankovic and Dinara Safina.


Since 1990, only Steffi Graff, Amelie Mauresmo, and Justine Henin have been number one in the world with one-handed backhands, however, they stayed at the top for 533 weeks.

Why the trend to Two hands?

As you may have noticed, most of the top pros today have started playing tennis assiduously before they were 10 years old; many before they were 8, and some before they were 6 years old. At a tender age the two-hander is a solution for lack of power in the shoulder and upper back. Most efforts by a child in everyday early life consist of picking up light things and lifting them, developing the strength of the front muscles most.

On the forehand, if left on their own, tiny tots tend to use two hands to hit it, especially if the racquet is of some size. The same for the backhand, but here for a more specific reason: it is much easier at that stage. Some, copying an adult or some favorite player on TV (today’s prevalent baby-sitter), may have a mental image or decision to be a one-hander in the future. But for starters, they choose the easier course.

As their physical development progresses, so does their strength. If the child is already a good player and is becoming what is known as a kid-phenomenon, hitting every ball back in the court, parents and coaches take notice and they aid the youngster providing as much practice time as possible. This reinforces the child’s muscle memory and confidence that what he or she is doing is the correct way to advance the goal (a goal the parent and coach may share as well).

The young player could be faced with making a decision as to whether he should keep the two-hander as a main backhand stroke, or switch to a one-hander. The one-handed slice is introduced usually as a supplementary, defensive stroke. But it is not unusual for parents or coaches to have some ideas of their own, insisting the player switch permanently to a one-handed stroke. The player may be wary of taking that route. What would be your response if you have money in the bank and you are offered a proposition to use it all in a new investment, one which would take some time to produce results? Would you give up your security in an instant, deciding to struggle for a couple of years until your investment paid off? Or would you be more conservative and keep something that obviously is working and giving you results?

Jan Silva, at three years old, using a full size racquet, was already pounding forehands with uncanny regularity. Check out the nifty one-handed backhand that appears in videos.

One new factor that may facilitate a decision as a child begins in the sport is the emergence of progressive tennis, where strength is not a factor, even for the tiniest of tots, because of the use of appropriate size equipment, i.e. small, light racquets and soft, low pressure, low bouncing balls.

Today’s appropriate child equipment makes the coach’s decision far easier. What type of player does he prefer? A dogged two-handed groundstroker like Nadal, with limited incursion to the net, or an attacking wizard like Pete Sampras, who traded his trusted two-handed backhand for the unknown vagaries of the one-hander in his early teens. Sampras had his role model, Rod Laver, in sight for his choice. The kid in the video, Jan Silva, a child phenomenon before he was four years old, had James Blake in mind, watching his recordings over and over before he learned to walk.

Advantages and Disadvantages

We all know the advantages and disadvantages associated with each of these strokes, like the added reach of the one-hander or the shorter backswing on the service return of the two-hander, however, these things are incidental, because champions come in both styles.

So, how does one arrive at a decision? Is it best left to the coach or the parent who takes the child to the court for the first time? Would that bring the full potential later in the child’s life?

Maureen Connolly was a natural left-hander yet she played tennis with her right hand.

(more to come)

That brings another interesting point. Many human beings are one sided, meaning they have a preference to do things with one particular hand, others are ambidextrous. Furthermore, some are left-handers confused by the social trend insistence that they use primarily their right hand. According to science, the left brain is predominant for right-handers, the right-brain for the lefties, for some others they work in cooperation, for still others, the left and right fight. Furthermore, in my experience as a tennis coach, in many cases the authoritarianism of the adult, whether a parent or a coach, over the child leads to a confusion that determines whether the child (or the grown adult) is coordinated or not.

On the other hand, on the advice of their coaches, champions like Maureen Connolly and Rafael Nadal, a left-hander and right-hander respectively, learned to play tennis with their off hands.

So, how should such a plethora of options, right-hander, left-hander, two-hander, backcourt wiz or attacking whiz, be handled? Easy solution, show the child his options and let him choose that which feels most natural. If he changes his mind after a while or after a few years, let him. After all, it is his game and his life.

The toddler does not speak yet? Play games where he might develop ability in both hands, and he’ll let you know his preference. You can do the same when you start him on the court. Show him everything, but let him be the boss.

Bear in mind, as well, that two-handers can develop exquisite deft with one hand on defensive shots or as a change of pace as did Mats Wilander late in his career.

It is easier for a budding player to decide early in his career which route to take if he has already envisioned himself as emulating the strokes of his favorite tennis star. He’ll either prefer to be one-handed across the board, or half-and-half. But the decision is complicated with the existence of a team; everyone may have an opinion of what the next step should be. From my experience, the decision is best left to the child, with a short trial of the options, which will preserve his love of the game. I allow my students to make up their minds, and even change their minds. Tennis is a game, and on court, it is best played by the player, not by his team in the stands.

Despite the predominance of two-handed backhands, Federer's one-hander still rules the game.

Decisions like this must be made carefully. By imposing a change, the team may be unwittingly fighting against something that has become instinctive and has been chosen intuitively by the player as the best way to perform.

On the women's side, the choice is complicated by the prejudiced idea that girls lack strength to hit one-handed backhands forcefully. Although it is true that little boys tend to lift heavier weights earlier in life than little girls and it is in the culture and in their childhood games, girls don’t have to be restricted to the two-handed backhand. This idea that girls can't hit one-handers is easily contradicted by the fact that the best one-hander in women's tennis was Justine Henin, one of the smaller girls on the tour. So, this misconception of girl’s strength is easily conquered with the proper practice. Girls can have great strength in their upper body with adequate muscle conditioning.

Now comes the million dollar question: which is the superior stroke, the one-handed backhand or the two?

The answer is neither, it depends on the person. Champions come in many different packages. People have different assets and different strengths. Some are ambidextrous, some are one sided, some don’t express a preference. The most practical route would be to ask the young player if he wants to give both backhands a try. Test it for as long as the player wants, including alternating both styles so he can make an informed choice.

It is interesting to note that the subject of backhand preference applies to adult beginners as well. Decision is king. It is far better for the player to make an informed decision (meaning trials of right and wrong) than a shot in the dark. In the case of sports, feeling strong and natural is perhaps closer to the spirit. Let feel be King.

I must agree with TennisAngel. The 2 hander is in my opion a far easier shot to execute and all the advantages mentioned i agree with! However, not everyone can hit a two hander, I can't, I tried for years. I do have a good one hander, but, if I could, I would be hitting a two hander.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2much

I must agree with TennisAngel. The 2 hander is in my opion a far easier shot to execute and all the advantages mentioned i agree with! However, not everyone can hit a two hander, I can't, I tried for years. I do have a good one hander, but, if I could, I would be hitting a two hander.

---

do you have a physical handicap or are you just saying it's not your style?

I think the 1 hander is better for certain styles- especially all court.
Federer, anyone?

I switched to one hander because I realized that during my follow through I would always end up releasing my left hand early for the 2 hander, so I just took it as a sign and tried a 1 hander..

It works well for me-more penetration and depth.

I also don't think 2 hander was taught properly to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 03White

I think the 1 hander is better for certain styles- especially all court.
Federer, anyone?

I switched to one hander because I realized that during my follow through I would always end up releasing my left hand early for the 2 hander, so I just took it as a sign and tried a 1 hander..

It works well for me-more penetration and depth.

I also don't think 2 hander was taught properly to me.

---

i was trained to use the one hander and switched to the two. i just felt that i wasn't progressing. i gave it so much attention yet felt vulnerable during a match cause of the bh. now that i'm using the two-hander, i no longer have a weakness there. actually, at times my two hand backhand is better than my forehand. if my bh slice is working, i almost prefer to play a lefty so my bh gets more action.

one other problem i had with the one hander was high balls and a lack of pure power.

It seems to be different for everyone =).
I have to agree with the power aspect, I can hit flatter, with a bit of spin so it goes farther, but I think for more power I need to seriously start conditioning..

On the other hand, on the advice of their coaches, champions like Maureen Connolly and Rafael Nadal, a left-hander and right-hander respectively, learned to play tennis with their off hands.

Makes you wonder when someone will learn to use an off hand forehand and not even use a backhand. Hmmmmmmm........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Architeuthis

On the other hand, on the advice of their coaches, champions like Maureen Connolly and Rafael Nadal, a left-hander and right-hander respectively, learned to play tennis with their off hands.

Makes you wonder when someone will learn to use an off hand forehand and not even use a backhand. Hmmmmmmm........

---

I've played with amatuers who became ambidextrous in regards to a forehand. The one in particular did alright. On the pro level, it simply seems too bulky, but who knows.