Your Strokes: Ted Gregory: One Handed Backhand

[johnyandell]

Pedro,

Couldn't have said it better.

[privas]

One handed backhand, role of the elbow (one more comment!!)

John, I have used your articles in Advanced Tennis as a reference for many strokes, especially the one-handed backhand over the years. In that series you analyzed many aspects of this shot, but I noticed that you do not specifically address the dominant arm elbow position during the unit turn and take-back, like you did somewhat in this particular article. The "straight take back" of McEnroe and Lendl results in a more locked elbow during the unit turn and take back, which can also be used with an extreme grip combination on the high balls like Robredo and Gonzalez. As you mention in this article, the bent elbow of Federer may work for him, but How does one teach that elbow to lock just before contact? And How does one teach making contact away from the body with the arm at about 45 degrees with the torso at the point of contact? If the elbow begins in a more locked position, like your subject in this article, and like Lendl, McEnroe, Robredo, Gonzalez, and perhaps Justine, then perhaps this leads to a stronger contact point...out in front, away from the body? The analogy of the one-hander as "tossing a frisbee" is, I believe, inappropriate for most of us who lack that talent. Unlike the tennis ball, the frisbee is already in your hand.

[johnyandell]

Pedro,

Now that is an awesome post. It's very gratifying to see the resources of the site used as they are capable of and that they are creating better understanding and real benefit! Congrats on your analysis and hard work.

JY

[privas]

C-Loop on the One-Hander

John, thanks your your insights.

And Doug, congratulations on 3 excellent articles on the modern two-hander. I think it's great to introduce terms like C-loop and U-loop and wrist break and hybrid grips, etc. I think this will make teaching tennis a more deliberate act.

I have spent the last 5 years and hundreds of dollars on lessons to try to develop more racquet head speed on my one-hander. I wish someone would have told me about a C-loop vs. a U-loop many years ago. My one-hander with the eastern backhand grip and U-loop was effective on the grass and hard courts with a low bounce, but not so much on the clay and higher-bouncing hard courts. I finally took a lesson with my good friend Barry who grew up on the grass of Wimbledon, as his dad is Alan Mills. Barry couldn't figure out why my one-hander couldn't generate enough pace on the higher-bouncing hard court. My form seemed adequate. He then had his assistant pro shoot a video of me with my own iPhone. He figured that I would go home and analyze the video myself. (He's a smart guy!) I then played it back on my computer, alongside Federer's from Tennisplayer.net Stroke Archive. It was clear very quickly. My U-loop was not a C-loop! I then spent hours analyzing Federer's motion, especially his left hand on the C-loop, back and side views. I am still working on this today, but it was a Giant Leap forward. I imagine that the timing issue is what makes teaching this difficult to older adults, as John implies.

The lesson? John Yandell's website is much more valuable than hundreds of dollars in tennis lessons. Perhaps Mac made the U-loop work for him because of his strange grip, but not for me. Certainly on the two-hander, the U-loop rules because you have two arms to help generate pace and it makes the timing much easier, which helps on the return of serve.

Anyhow, Doug and John, I look forward your next installments. Regards, Pedro

[DougEng]

John. I appreciate your insights. I certainly don't want to beat a dead horse. But as a club player having access to all three surfaces, I have struggled with the one-hander for the past 6 years! I have found myself going back the the two-hander time after time. Not just because it makes the "shock-and-awe" return of serve possible, but because on the clay, it is almost impossible to generate any amount of pace on the one-hander unless you have a High Take-back. If, indeed, your article was intended to generate more interest in the one-hander over the two-hander, then an article featuring my one-hander at a 4.5 level would have been good. I, for one, intend to teach my 3 small kids both one- and two-handers, the two-hander for the return of serve only or the really high one you refuse to slice, and the one-hander for everything else.

Most folks like me mistakenly abandoned the one-hander because they cannot generate enough racquet head speed. Most folks think the one-hander too complicated. Most folks have trouble tracking the ball and turning their shoulders early and taking that last Giant Step with their right foot. I propose teaching the High Take-back early in one's training as it will 1. allow for the generation of racquet head speed 2. allow for more simplicity as the take-back is the same for the backhand slice 3. allow for better tracking of the incoming ball with the left hand just below the throat of the racquet, just like the slice (and the forehand too!), and the left arm naturally aids the turning of the shoulder. With all due respect, Federer's backhand is described by most commentators as "textbook." I cannot see your patient ever going beyond a 3.5, or ever playing on the clay, unless he reads the textbook. Perhaps working on simple left arm mechanics to "connect the dots in a circle" using your high-speed footage would have been more useful?

Respectfully, Pedro

Good points, Pedro! I prefer a high backswing myself. Lendl actually takes a high backswing but like I pointed out on the two-hander, there are players who make a C-loop and players who make a U loop. Lendl makes a good size U, John McEnroe uses a small U (racquet goes up but not above his shoulders) and James Blake is quite similar to Lendl (U above the shoulders). I prefer a loop more like Federer, but not like Gasquet. The other point is that you can attack high balls with the one-hander but most players never take the correct mechanics for it. It requires a high-loop backswing and an extreme eastern backhand or western backhand grip. Only a few players will try that grip but it works.

Best,
Doug

[johnyandell]

We did use the high speed footage as shown in the article! And I would never tell another teaching pro not to follow his instincts about who to teach what and when. The student is the person really in the position to evaluate these choices.

Again, there are plenty of 4.0 to 4.5 to 5.0 players (and up) that do great with the one-hander--and also on the return. Both driving and slice.

Others not. That's one of the amazing things about tennis--about 8 basic strokes and a huge range of techincal options on all of them.

I do think we need to distinguish between teaching juniors and teaching adults, especially adult males who take up the game as adults--at least when it comes to the backhand... That is one of the premises of the article. But I think we can safely agree to disagree on this one and still continue to talk about issues in teaching.

[privas]

The High Take-back vs Straight Take-back

John. I appreciate your insights. I certainly don't want to beat a dead horse. But as a club player having access to all three surfaces, I have struggled with the one-hander for the past 6 years! I have found myself going back the the two-hander time after time. Not just because it makes the "shock-and-awe" return of serve possible, but because on the clay, it is almost impossible to generate any amount of pace on the one-hander unless you have a High Take-back. If, indeed, your article was intended to generate more interest in the one-hander over the two-hander, then an article featuring my one-hander at a 4.5 level would have been good. I, for one, intend to teach my 3 small kids both one- and two-handers, the two-hander for the return of serve only or the really high one you refuse to slice, and the one-hander for everything else.

Most folks like me mistakenly abandoned the one-hander because they cannot generate enough racquet head speed. Most folks think the one-hander too complicated. Most folks have trouble tracking the ball and turning their shoulders early and taking that last Giant Step with their right foot. I propose teaching the High Take-back early in one's training as it will 1. allow for the generation of racquet head speed 2. allow for more simplicity as the take-back is the same for the backhand slice 3. allow for better tracking of the incoming ball with the left hand just below the throat of the racquet, just like the slice (and the forehand too!), and the left arm naturally aids the turning of the shoulder. With all due respect, Federer's backhand is described by most commentators as "textbook." I cannot see your patient ever going beyond a 3.5, or ever playing on the clay, unless he reads the textbook. Perhaps working on simple left arm mechanics to "connect the dots in a circle" using your high-speed footage would have been more useful?

Respectfully, Pedro

[johnyandell]

Thanks Pedro and yep, what Fed does is pretty optimal--if you're a high level player. I have found the straight back really helps people with preparation probs at lower levels.

But as you and DB both point out there is a reason why the top players point up--and interestingly, both John and Ivan do go up from that position before they come forward!

[privas]

Racquet Angle at Take-Back

John. Excellent article. The clips of McEnroe and Lendl show them taking their racquets back pointing parallel to the court. Actually McEnroe's tips below somewhat. Your stroke archive shows Federer's racquet on his take back at 45 to 90 degrees, almost like he's gonna slice the ball. This isn't just a camaflouge technique but an excellent way to recruit the help of gravity to generate racquet head speed. Doug Eng's paradigm of "associated techniques" would apply here. Like the eastern forehand grip, the eastern backhand grip effectively places the hand "behind the racquet" on the initial downward path of the arc. I don't have McEnroe's or Lendl's backhand and I enjoy returning with two hands. But when it comes to hitting a one-hander, I can only generate racquet head speed when I point my racquet upwards on the take-back. I don't believe this point is emphasized enough. But alas, few teaching pros today know how to teach the one-hander. Your article certainly helps. Respectfully, Pedro

[johnyandell]

DB,

Thanks for the great input!

JY

[don_budge]

Loosen up Teddy...your a bit too tight (with the shoulders)

But the problem with hitting a one hand backhand, means you are most likely going to return serve that way, which at the very least, has limitations. Since a two hand return is much better for players (at least up to 4.5 level) then you should probably hit your ground strokes that way. The problem with your lesson and thinking (respectfully) is that you are leaving the service return out of the equation, assuming that all that is involved in tennis is groundstrokes. There are exceptions, but the greater control and stability with two hands on the racket will always mean that a two hand backhand is better for most players, especially at the club level.

The big problem with one hand backhands (compared to two, especially on service returns) is that unless one is extraordinarily skilled, it is hard to put pace on balls high to backhand. Let's see how your student hits with topspin, LOL, when balls aren't exactly in his target zone and are up high! He will probably have to slice, where the two hand player can hit hard, even if racket head is above the wrist.

I also believe grip type should have been stated, do NOT do this stroke with a continental grip. Knuckle of index finger should be on top bevel. Eastern backhand grip is best.

One thing left out...there is no reason to hit with a one hand backhand, or a two hand backhand. Why not have both? More on that at another time.

Well John...I read your article and sifted through all of the visual evidence and took all of the logistics into the equation and conclude with very little uncertainty that you are absolutely correct on just about every single fact and nuance that you site. I say "just about" only because I don't know how to say plainly that you are absolutely correct. My bad.

Your assessment of your "patient" is spot on...this guy would never be comfortable scooting around the court setting up for a two handed swing. What he will most likely be most comfortable doing is setting up for a one handed slice and at his level of play this is the most logical choice. Players at the 3.5 level will win most of their matches if they play it a bit safe and conservative and keep the ball in play while at the same time begin to endeavor to maneuver their opponents. When playing at this level I think one of the best tactical routes a player can take is to slice low and wide to their opponents backhand...particularly if the opponent uses a two handed backhand, followed up with a controlled drive or more likely a slice back deep down the forehand side. In fact the converse tactic of using the slice to float or drive deep into the backhand corner then a short low spinning ball to the opponents strong gripped forehand makes for some high percentage tactics against the modern day club player who is most likely attempting to emulate what they are seeing in the professional game.

At this level of play it is paramount to get every single return of serve back into play and not to necessarily put the server at an immediate disadvantage. It is probably safer and therefore wiser to neutralize the serve before thinking about applying any kind of pressure. Club players should be taught to play the game to be patient and try to extract errors from their opponents. In the same respect high balls can be safely played back into the court with an emphasis on net clearance and depth...typically not aggression. Eventually players at Ted's level can take the ball on the rise with underspin which comes in very handy when you understand that winning matches is not all about shock and awe at this level...it is about subtly maneuvering your opponent out of position and hopefully off balance.

Robert's remarks are excellent if one is to take into consideration of a higher level of play. I think it is great that he has such a versatile repertoire and is able to capably demonstrate such a wide range of choices.

As for Mr. Ted Gregory...just a couple of suggestions. Number one when driving the ball with a one hand backhand lower that front shoulder and point it initially at the ball when making a shoulder turn. This should give him a more loaded stance. Number two...keep that left elbow pretty much glued to the side on the backswing, you will find that you can make a bigger turn and therefore a bigger backswing while still maintaining some semblance of control and stability. By fixing the elbow to the side you more or less can calibrate your backswing by the amount that you turn your shoulders. You might want to try taking the racquet head from the level of the back ear to the front ear...I saw this cue in an additional clip in the "A good model for the serve" submitted by lobndropshot. Get a little more swing in that arm eventually.

This was a very nice article...without the bells and whistles and really serves as a great point of reference for Ted or other players at that level of play.

[johnyandell]

Yeah he made a start on that and I agree it's important! Don't think it's a question of "buying in" more "working toward." Hopefully something he'll improve working with the model.

[rboykin]

Ted's backhand

As someone who has put in a fair amount of work on his one-hander, I think Ted would hit the ball with more regular authority if he really worked on his left arm extension. John pointed out the importance of that movement in describing the Federer video, but the "after" footage seems to show that Ted didn't really buy into it. In my experience, getting that back arm out during the shot with some force (while nevertheless leaning into the shot) makes a significant difference in realibility and in power.

[lobndropshot]

pancho segura as well played with a two hander on the forehand side.

Who are the brothers with the two-handled rackets?

[johnyandell]

monica, gene mayer, greg holmes...but those guys were two hands all the time on both sides.