Two-handed Backhand Stances & One-handed Slice

[bottle]

Who says stroke mechanics can't be fun?

[lovati4]

Thank you for the reply.
Actually there is one more stance we have not talk about yet. I noticed than Novak Djokovic prefers it when returning serves with a backhand. In this stance a player steps across the body hitting the ball before landing on the front foot - with his front foot in the air. I think It is not just a variation of a closed stance. It is one of the main stances.
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...4%20250fps.mp4
I notice that I play like that naturally (while returning a serve) on my forehand side - stepping across and hitting the ball with my front foot in the air. But on the backhand side it does not come naturally to me.
So I decided to check high speed archive on Tennispayer to see how often Novak Djokovic returns a serve in this stance.
Results are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Novak Djokovic's returns of serve with a backhand

First serve returns
	1	2
Number of times	8	13
%	62	100
Second serve returns
	1	2
Number of times	15	22
%	68	100

where,
1 - closed stance with a front foot in the air
2 - total number of backhand returns of serve

Closer look at the video shows that his feet movement is even more interesting. He pivots on his left foot opening his left hip (super little move), then he might take 1-2 more adjustment steps if he has time and then he steps with his right foot across hitting the ball before landing on the front foot. This step may be quite small. This is what I expected.
But this is not all. Novak seems to kick back with his left leg at the same time. Actually it looks funny. It might help Novak keep balance, one of the key elements of a high-quality stroke.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...1%20120fps.mp4
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...r%20500fps.mp4
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...4%20250fps.mp4

[stotty]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoSN...ature=youtu.be

I think Owen is under pressure with the feeds and doesn't always hold the line with shots or get true alignment...at least not for long enough. On some he does, some he doesn't I think the fifth shot in he does a great shot and keeps his balance beautifully. It will be interesting when I do some high speed filming when I see him tomorrow. We will get a better view then.

I found Kerry's article interesting but wouldn't necessarily follow it. Teaching open stance first in a player's development risks too many things going wrong. The great thing about stepping in is key things happen by default. I can see what John means about the difficulty of the extreme closed stance but still think a player like Owen could pull that off relatively easily because he has learnt to hit an open stance quite well and this has developed good balance because of it. I feel this prepares a player well for every backhand scenario there is. Don't forget Owen is a case study, a study aimed at whether a typical junior player can hit off ANY stance easily if taught in a sequenced, timely fashion. Because I believe difficult might only be difficult because coaches teach one way for too long...me included. Neutral, closed, more closed, fully closed, semi open, fully open...do the whole lot. Another year and I will post Owen doing all those things, for sure.

But I would't teach open stance first. I wouldn't teach it on the forehand either. That kind of stuff is too dicey for me. Combinations of neutral and fairly closed work well to get a player started in my view. Just don't wait too long to open up.

[lovati4]

What do you think of the idea of having legs close to the line of the shot? In a neutral or closed stance players keep their back leg behind the body during the whole stroke. Playing in an open stance he (she) brings his (her) front leg closer to the line of the shot.
For example
https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/novak-djokovic/
https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/novak-djokovic/
https://www.tennisplayer.net/tp_player/novak-djokovic/
Players might be doing this naturally to keep hips from rotating too much too soon, to keep better balance during the stroke.
Do you see Owen doing that?

[stotty]

At some point coaches teach their players to stay longer with a shot. It means longer followthough. But it also means keeping the whole body (hips and both legs) in line with a shot a little longer.
Kerry Mitchell called it true alignment. https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...nded-backhand/
The 3rd element is good weight transfer during a stroke.
There might be a compromise here between quality of the stroke and ability to get back to the middle of the baseline more quickly. In my view the former is more important. Staying in line with a shot allows a player to keep better balance during the stroke which leads to better quality and consistency.
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...3%20250fps.mp4

Good point about compromising to get back to the middle. I think the open stance is a neat way to give yourself a split second more time to do that. But, yes, commitment must come before recovery, no question.

[stotty]

A couple of problems with the Novak Djokovic versus Roger Federer analogy:

1. Novak is much younger that Roger and the second half of these head to head sort of reflect this disparity in age. Djokovic has beaten Roger with younger legs. I have been writing this for a couple of years.

Not convinced. Roger has been a better player in his 30s than his 20s. Five of Roger's wins were when Novak was in his teens; and two aged 20. Since 2011 Novak has won over two thirds of their encounters and is ahead in big events. He's just that bit better, not all the time, but two thirds of the time he is, and he's done it with a more limited game style. He's a lot more difficult to beat than just sliding balls in low to his forehand or coaxing him to the net. Look how quickly he got used to Medvedev's extraordinary hooked backhands. Novak learns quick. He's bright.

I am am happy to give Roger the GOAT title for the number of slams he's won, his longevity, and his services to the game. But when it comes to the Big 4, Novak is the best.

[lovati4]

At some point coaches teach their players to stay longer with a shot. It means longer followthough. But it also means keeping the whole body (hips and both legs) in line with a shot a little longer.
Kerry Mitchell called it true alignment. https://www.tennisplayer.net/article...nded-backhand/
The 3rd element is good weight transfer during a stroke.
There might be a compromise here between quality of the stroke and ability to get back to the middle of the baseline more quickly. In my view the former is more important. Staying in line with a shot allows a player to keep better balance during the stroke which leads to better quality and consistency.
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...3%20250fps.mp4

[don_budge]

One dimensional play can bring great results. Getting really good at one thing can make you tough to beat. Djokovic does mostly one thing when you think about it. The problem is he's awfully good at it and even has a winning head to head against the most versatile player ever to wield a racket.

The thing is it's nice to teach an array of shots because most players are better off with having options. Plus, it's more fun for the coach and makes the job more tenable.

A couple of problems with the Novak Djokovic versus Roger Federer analogy:

1. Novak is much younger that Roger and the second half of these head to head sort of reflect this disparity in age. Djokovic has beaten Roger with younger legs. I have been writing this for a couple of years.

2. The conditions are set up for the Djokovic game. When things play faster Roger can still make Djokovic look like a fish out of water. He simply doesn't have the game to fit the circumstances. But as it is even the hallowed grass at Wimbledon plays like a velcro surface. It has been this way for years.

But of course the two handed game is a very viable option and one can learn to play it well and effectively. Particularly so if the player's coach encourages this.

[don_budge]

He hits a bit more than a modicum. It's about the perfect amount, whatever that is; I just know it when I see it. A lot of two-handed backhands you see at Wimbledon are struck almost flat. If I see a two-hander with too much spin I tend to think something must be wrong with it.

The balls aren't spoon fed. He knows where they are going but has work to do to spot what to do. If the ball is fed wide but a little up the court he will step in and across, if it's wide and lateral/or deep he will hit open. It's very easy to get it wrong and opt for the less optimal stance without plenty of trial and error practice. Owen nearly always gets it right these days.

It's perfect. Nice job.

[stotty]

Couldn’t agree more. Having all the shots pays off later when one is expected to play on all surfaces and when one begins to encounter more fit and athletic opponents. One dimensional play no longer produces victories.

One dimensional play can bring great results. Getting really good at one thing can make you tough to beat. Djokovic does mostly one thing when you think about it. The problem is he's awfully good at it and even has a winning head to head against the most versatile player ever to wield a racket.

The thing is it's nice to teach an array of shots because most players are better off with having options. Plus, it's more fun for the coach and makes the job more tenable.

[stotty]

It would be nice to have him try and be fluid and not worry so much about pace but more about feeling the ball.

Maybe ask him to hit soft deep lobs to change up his rhythm.

He is very fluid already. As John says, he just needs to improve his follow through. He's good at changing pace and rhythm. He's also pretty good at throwing in a sliced backhand to change things up.

Owen only plays around 3 hours a week maximum so we can only go so fast. He is a good example because players like Owen are the typical staple for many coaches the world over. He has bit of talent but only plays so much. Most coaches will relate to a student like Owen because they exist in every club.

[stotty]

As for Stotty's student he makes a very nice pass at the ball. The balls sort of look to be spoon fed so the kid is doing what he prefers to do with the ball which appears to me is to hit it fairly flat (not a lot of spin) but with a "modicum" of overspin with a flat trajectory. This is the preferred starting model. He makes such a nice swing through the "path of the ball" that with just a subtle manipulation of the backswing or the racquet face he will be able to change and control the trajectory, spin and speed. I have yet to look at his slice. I know if I do and I like his swing my question will be..."why not one hand"?

He hits a bit more than a modicum. It's about the perfect amount, whatever that is; I just know it when I see it. A lot of two-handed backhands you see at Wimbledon are struck almost flat. If I see a two-hander with too much spin I tend to think something must be wrong with it.

The balls aren't spoon fed. He knows where they are going but has work to do to spot what to do. If the ball is fed wide but a little up the court he will step in and across, if it's wide and lateral/or deep he will hit open. It's very easy to get it wrong and opt for the less optimal stance without plenty of trial and error practice. Owen nearly always gets it right these days.

[stotty]

"why not one hand"?

Good question! Because he prefers the two-hander. It’'s his choice. He can hit a one hander too. That’'s part of the deal. Every lesson he spends a few minutes hitting one-handed backhands. He’'s actually quite familiar with the shot.

The two-hander is a great shot in the right hands. It’'s every bit as good as a one-hander and maybe a tad better. It has the edge on return of serve for sure according to Connors, Agassi and Novak.

The main thing for me is to get their slice backhand as good as any one-hander out there, which is entirely possible if the shot is taught from a young age and allocated plenty of time in a player’s development, not 5 minutes here and there.

A two-handed player can have the best of both worlds by developing a really good sliced backhand.

[don_budge]

Shaping the ball flight?? Sounds like golf to me and makes sense. Visualize the flight shape, let the computer determine the speed/spin ratio. Flight path feedback will reinforce swing shape. As Peter Freeman has said: " develop a baseline rally ball that cannot be easily attacked". So, create shapes to do that----sometimes slice, sometimes flat, sometimes topspin. . What influences swing shape? Body type and conditioning I suppose. Federer seems to rarely significantly change his backswing shape, but somehow can alter the forward swing and significantly shape different flight paths.

Absolutely spot on. The shape of the shot can be determined by the shape of the backswing in conjunction with the shape of the follow through and all points in between. In other words...the shape of your shot whether it is a tennis ball or a golf ball is going to be determined by how the racquet or the club passes through the intended flight of the ball. Interesting that golf clubs come in different lofts...and you can manipulate the loft of the tennis racquet as well. Particularly on the slice backhand. All golf shots are hit with underpin...intentionally. You can add loft to your racquet or deloft it.

Swing shape can be influenced also by the footwork. Certain stances will encourage more or less spin.

As for Stotty's student he makes a very nice pass at the ball. The balls sort of look to be spoon fed so the kid is doing what he prefers to do with the ball which appears to me is to hit it fairly flat (not a lot of spin) but with a "modicum" of overspin with a flat trajectory. This is the preferred starting model. He makes such a nice swing through the "path of the ball" that with just a subtle manipulation of the backswing or the racquet face he will be able to change and control the trajectory, spin and speed. I have yet to look at his slice. I know if I do and I like his swing my question will be..."why not one hand"?

[doctorhl]

I haven't seen the video. But your response to doctorhi was interesting. Not sure how to quantify it? Because you cannot. So the best thing to do is to qualify it. When you spoke of the sliced backhand you mention the "ball flight". This is where you start. But what about the slice backhand? Which flight? There are many, many flights that a ball can take...particularly with the slice.

When I am working with a student I often refer to the shape of their shot as it relates to the shape of their swing. Recently I was working with a practice partner on his forehand backswing and in effect it changed the shape of his swing...which by no coincidence changed the shape of his shot.

To describe the amount of topspin a student is generating you look at the shape of the shot and the net clearance and depth of the shot in combination. Of course you take into consideration the speed as well. All of the elements of control...which is essentially power.

Does the student have the ability to drive the ball two meters over the net with good pace and still bring the ball down inside the baseline? That tells me that he is generating a lot of spin.

Thanks for you thread...they always turn into interesting discussion. My current interest in two-handed backhands is rather mute at the moment. I am going to take a sabbatical from teaching and concentrate on seeing what I can generate out of myself. Who knows? I might just do a klacr and post myself. Ready forum...take aim and fire.

Shaping the ball flight?? Sounds like golf to me and makes sense. Visualize the flight shape, let the computer determine the speed/spin ratio. Flight path feedback will reinforce swing shape. As Peter Freeman has said: " develop a baseline rally ball that cannot be easily attacked". So, create shapes to do that----sometimes slice, sometimes flat, sometimes topspin. . What influences swing shape? Body type and conditioning I suppose. Federer seems to rarely significantly change his backswing shape, but somehow can alter the forward swing and significantly shape different flight paths.