One additional point on technique: Thiem and Musetti have their thumbs on top of their pointer fingers, whereas most other players have the pointer finger on top. I believe the thumb-first affords a firmer grip and more locked wrist, whereas the traditional technique of pointer-first allows you to break the wrist on the follow through and roll over the ball easier. Would be interested to hear your take on this.
Also, would like to hear your take on the footwork aspect of the one-hander, specifically the difficulty of hitting it on the run.
We're seeing a lot of two-handers able to slide and generate power from an outstretched outer leg (left leg for a right-hander), essentially hitting an open-stance backhand.
Conversely the one-hander almost necessitates a closed stance, with the essential pivot point allowing you to uncoil being the toes of the right foot (for a right-hander). When stretched wide a one-hander must resort to slicing. This, to me, is the main drawback to the one-hander in today's baseline dominated game.
But yes, more often the best course of action is to slice, and compared to the 2-hander it just isn't as equiped for passing shots or returns. Dan Evans is one guy who is phenomenal at slicing and actually is quite adept at hitting slice passing shots almost in a rafa nadal banana manner where he curls it in.
I asked and you delivered, thanks so much on this piece it was needed. I am seriously on the fence about switching to a one-handed backhand from my two-handed backhand and wanted a more technical input about it rather than "they time it well" or "they've used it since they were kids" so I really appreciate the time gone into this analysis which I will refer to a lot.
I do have a few questions.
1. What do you think about the "simpler" approach to the one-handed backhand by Wawrinka on a much faster court with his racket specs coming in so heavy?.
2. Is an open stance one-handed backhand on the regular a viable shot in the modern game or a fad? I did see this brought up in a forum a while ago and thought it could cut down time for preparation for players like Wawrinka or Gasquet that swing super heavy frames when playing on a quicker court?.
3. Is it possible for someone wielding heavy rackets like Wawrinka and Gasquet play much sharper, harassing one-handed backhands in a similar manner to Nikolay Davydenko in which he could pick up the ball on the rise and cut it off extremely early robbing time off opponents and also neutralising any special effects added on the ball (spin) and playing ridiculous angles, is this a realistic shot that kind of heavy frame allows a player have in his repertoire provided they are strong enough?
1) In general/all things being equal, a two-hander handles pace better than a single. You can just shorten the swing and have control so much easier with a two-hander. That's why the chip and slice is so crucial to fast court success/consistency in single-handers. Any success Wawrinka had on faster surfaces was due to a great block return more than the topspin rally backhand, and he did prefer slower courts that gave him more time.
2) I think the open-stance backhand on the single-hander is here to stay. Thiem took it to a new level in 2019/2020 when he started to hit sliding open-stance one-handers, and I think the movement and athleticism gains of the last 15-years have made that a viable shot. You need to be able to play that shot to be an elite mover.
3) I think so. The old school backhand of Blake/Haas/Mahut is much shorter and can take the ball early. Thiem's backhand shortened in 2020 and got much better on hardcourts also. Blake in particular did not have a backhand to write home about but on hardcourts handled Nadal well with his flat and short backhand swing. It's just that most one-handers are raised on clay these days so we see more of the extreme grip and longer swings. So yeah , it is definitely possible.
Hugh, thanks so much for this analysis. As with many things in tennis there's a lot of noise out there around one-handed backhands, and in particular when discussing this topic people seem to forget the backhand is just one component of the overall athlete.
Trade-off is definitely the operative word. Federer's technique combined with his physiology provided him with a superb backhand that could do just about everything well. The one thing he could not do well - hit powerful groundstrokes on high balls - was unfortunately something that was exploited in a very high-profile way by his greatest rival on said rival's favourite surface. If he'd had Gaudio's backhand, I've no doubt Federer would had more success at Roland Garros against Nadal - and probably a great deal less successful elsewhere. Then again, if Federer had been 10 cm taller, I suspect with exactly the same technique, the Nadal forehand to the Federer backhand would have been a much less profitable trade.
Thanks again and look forward to the next instalment.
Just discovered your site. Really great stuff.
One additional point on technique: Thiem and Musetti have their thumbs on top of their pointer fingers, whereas most other players have the pointer finger on top. I believe the thumb-first affords a firmer grip and more locked wrist, whereas the traditional technique of pointer-first allows you to break the wrist on the follow through and roll over the ball easier. Would be interested to hear your take on this.
That's a good observation and one I haven't picked up on to be honest. I think it's more a matter of personal preference.
Also, would like to hear your take on the footwork aspect of the one-hander, specifically the difficulty of hitting it on the run.
We're seeing a lot of two-handers able to slide and generate power from an outstretched outer leg (left leg for a right-hander), essentially hitting an open-stance backhand.
Conversely the one-hander almost necessitates a closed stance, with the essential pivot point allowing you to uncoil being the toes of the right foot (for a right-hander). When stretched wide a one-hander must resort to slicing. This, to me, is the main drawback to the one-hander in today's baseline dominated game.
The open-stance one-hander is definitely harder than the two, but it is possible and Thiem was doing it quite well at his best.
One-minute mark in this clip is an example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbd1WHZmID0
But yes, more often the best course of action is to slice, and compared to the 2-hander it just isn't as equiped for passing shots or returns. Dan Evans is one guy who is phenomenal at slicing and actually is quite adept at hitting slice passing shots almost in a rafa nadal banana manner where he curls it in.
I asked and you delivered, thanks so much on this piece it was needed. I am seriously on the fence about switching to a one-handed backhand from my two-handed backhand and wanted a more technical input about it rather than "they time it well" or "they've used it since they were kids" so I really appreciate the time gone into this analysis which I will refer to a lot.
I do have a few questions.
1. What do you think about the "simpler" approach to the one-handed backhand by Wawrinka on a much faster court with his racket specs coming in so heavy?.
2. Is an open stance one-handed backhand on the regular a viable shot in the modern game or a fad? I did see this brought up in a forum a while ago and thought it could cut down time for preparation for players like Wawrinka or Gasquet that swing super heavy frames when playing on a quicker court?.
3. Is it possible for someone wielding heavy rackets like Wawrinka and Gasquet play much sharper, harassing one-handed backhands in a similar manner to Nikolay Davydenko in which he could pick up the ball on the rise and cut it off extremely early robbing time off opponents and also neutralising any special effects added on the ball (spin) and playing ridiculous angles, is this a realistic shot that kind of heavy frame allows a player have in his repertoire provided they are strong enough?
Thanks again and have a safe flight.
1) In general/all things being equal, a two-hander handles pace better than a single. You can just shorten the swing and have control so much easier with a two-hander. That's why the chip and slice is so crucial to fast court success/consistency in single-handers. Any success Wawrinka had on faster surfaces was due to a great block return more than the topspin rally backhand, and he did prefer slower courts that gave him more time.
2) I think the open-stance backhand on the single-hander is here to stay. Thiem took it to a new level in 2019/2020 when he started to hit sliding open-stance one-handers, and I think the movement and athleticism gains of the last 15-years have made that a viable shot. You need to be able to play that shot to be an elite mover.
3) I think so. The old school backhand of Blake/Haas/Mahut is much shorter and can take the ball early. Thiem's backhand shortened in 2020 and got much better on hardcourts also. Blake in particular did not have a backhand to write home about but on hardcourts handled Nadal well with his flat and short backhand swing. It's just that most one-handers are raised on clay these days so we see more of the extreme grip and longer swings. So yeah , it is definitely possible.
Hugh, thanks so much for this analysis. As with many things in tennis there's a lot of noise out there around one-handed backhands, and in particular when discussing this topic people seem to forget the backhand is just one component of the overall athlete.
Trade-off is definitely the operative word. Federer's technique combined with his physiology provided him with a superb backhand that could do just about everything well. The one thing he could not do well - hit powerful groundstrokes on high balls - was unfortunately something that was exploited in a very high-profile way by his greatest rival on said rival's favourite surface. If he'd had Gaudio's backhand, I've no doubt Federer would had more success at Roland Garros against Nadal - and probably a great deal less successful elsewhere. Then again, if Federer had been 10 cm taller, I suspect with exactly the same technique, the Nadal forehand to the Federer backhand would have been a much less profitable trade.
Thanks again and look forward to the next instalment.
How do the Evans and Federer racket setups compare? Evans is still significantly more head light?
Evans reportedly around 310mm strung. Federer 316mm strung.