Is the slice ever going to make a comeback for Women's tennis?

[stroke]

Fed no doubt had the best slice backhand. Grigor is very close.

[arturohernandez]

As usual...Roger Federer is "The Living Proof". Proof of what used to be more or less standard issue. You can see even in the best one handed men's backhands these days that the universal use of the slice is exactly the opposite. It isn't universal. All are lacking in some sort of way or manner.

The slice is performed in a many plethora of ways and means. The backhand slice in particular. Even when hitting the ball in the air. The spin, speed and trajectory of the shot (the subtle power of the shot) are accomplished by:

1. The trajectory of the swing through the path of the ball. The trajectory ranges from severe "chopping" to almost flat.

2. The speed of the swing through the path of the ball.

3. The angle of the racquet face through the path of the ball. Ranging from nearly on its edge to completely open to the point where the strings are pointing to the sky.

4. The combination of the trajectory of the swing and the angle of the racquet face through the path of the ball.

morespin begins to give us a list of the possibilities and in reality they are too many to list. Tactically...the range is from severe defense to attacking offence. What passes for a slice backhand these days is far too one-dimensional. The subtle uses of slice in approach shots and volleying technique are extinct facets of the old classical game. So..."is the slice ever going to make a comeback for Women's tennis?" Answer...not unless we see a woman playing true serve and volley. Certainly and only if there is a one handed backhand woman playing the all court game. But I don't rule that out...given the proper combination of conditions coupled with a player that somehow finds themselves trained and skilled to carry out such a mission. But it will have to come at the proper coach teaching the proper student because all conventional wisdom has ruled out such an outcome.

And yet if a girl were to develop a great slice it would give her a path to beat many opponents she might lose to if she hit like everyone else. I worked with my daughter on heavy slices on Sunday. It is just nasty when she puts that much slice on it. It lands just past the service line and stays below the knees.

I do agree with everyone's view that the variance between Barty's jumpy forehand and low slice must have been unnerving.

But back to the use of the slice. There are so many times that I see players in heavy exchanges on TV and think "slice." Unless you are better than your opponent on a particular stroke, you will lose in an even exchange. So, the best shot is to change the pace. But do so more often.

Roger and Ash were the only ones who could really do it. So, we are left with bashers and if a player bashes they will eventually lose to someone who bashes better.

But if they tried to slice and mix it really well, it would be deadly. The question is why more people don't see that there is another way.

[don_budge]

And yet if a girl were to develop a great slice it would give her a path to beat many opponents she might lose to if she hit like everyone else. I worked with my daughter on heavy slices on Sunday. It is just nasty when she puts that much slice on it. It lands just past the service line and stays below the knees.

I do agree with everyone's view that the variance between Barty's jumpy forehand and low slice must have been unnerving.

But back to the use of the slice. There are so many times that I see players in heavy exchanges on TV and think "slice." Unless you are better than your opponent on a particular stroke, you will lose in an even exchange. So, the best shot is to change the pace. But do so more often.

Roger and Ash were the only ones who could really do it. So, we are left with bashers and if a player bashes they will eventually lose to someone who bashes better.

But if they tried to slice and mix it really well, it would be deadly. The question is why more people don't see that there is another way.

Why don't more people see that there is another way? Because they don't understand how to play the game. Good work on the "making the ball lie down" in the grey area of the court. Fool around with the landing zone relative to the sideline as well. This area of the court is often the achilles heel of the two hand backhand and it begs to be exploited. Once again, it is Roger Federer as "The Living Proof" as it seems that only he was aware of this tactic. Tactically if this is used in a Federer versus Djokovic example...Djokovic would have limited tactical responses and much of it is dictated by the height of the net. It would be pretty difficult to be aggressive going down the line over the high part of the net into the Federer forehand. So the response may just be a slice back to the Federer backhand then advantage Federer as Djokovic will now be playing Federer's game. Also if Federer brings Djokovic into this "no man's land" then Djokovic must retreat and he leaves his deep forehand corner vulnerable and even the backhand as well, particularly if he dares to go down the line to the Federer forehand. So much for anyone seeing that there is another way.

Slice backhands have a very large dispersion of executable variations. Learn to hit the medium high ball at various speeds ranging from medium pace to the soft side of soft, five to ten feet over the net and landing as close to the baseline as possible. Here is a great reset ball. Roger was using this tactic much more later in his career and it was so effective. Even on serve returns. If you get that ball over on the backhand side...once again it is sort of strange that it is difficult for the opponent to really drive such a ball. Taking the air out of the ball. Most championships are won with great defense. Tennis is no different and the slice backhand is an excellent defensive tool. The game is played constantly in transition...transition from offence to defense and vice versa. Having the slice backhand in all of its variations is a great transitional tool. A must have in the classic game. The slice can range from extreme defence to even tactical offence.

The thing that makes Roger Federer so unique is his seemless transition from defense to offence. Actually Djokovic is the master of this as well on the two hand backhand side of the game. It is imperative to keep the ball in play...particularly at the level your daughter is playing at now and buying time and keeping the point going while neutralizing is a very important tactic. Once a player at her level becomes very effective at this ploy then it the time to start on being able to drive that backhand as well. It sounds like it is getting interesting.

[morespin]

I tell my players that it isn't about what they want to do or how they like to play, it's about what bothers their opponents the most. To be able to bother your opponents requires different spins, speeds, heights, etc.

How would I coach someone to play against my players? I see my players as opponents and how I would coach against them. Then I work with my players to become competent (at least) on those areas. "Do you want me to see what your weaknesses are or do you want the opponent and his/her coach to see your weaknesses?"

[arturohernandez]

Why don't more people see that there is another way? Because they don't understand how to play the game. Good work on the "making the ball lie down" in the grey area of the court. Fool around with the landing zone relative to the sideline as well. This area of the court is often the achilles heel of the two hand backhand and it begs to be exploited. Once again, it is Roger Federer as "The Living Proof" as it seems that only he was aware of this tactic. Tactically if this is used in a Federer versus Djokovic example...Djokovic would have limited tactical responses and much of it is dictated by the height of the net. It would be pretty difficult to be aggressive going down the line over the high part of the net into the Federer forehand. So the response may just be a slice back to the Federer backhand then advantage Federer as Djokovic will now be playing Federer's game. Also if Federer brings Djokovic into this "no man's land" then Djokovic must retreat and he leaves his deep forehand corner vulnerable and even the backhand as well, particularly if he dares to go down the line to the Federer forehand. So much for anyone seeing that there is another way.

Slice backhands have a very large dispersion of executable variations. Learn to hit the medium high ball at various speeds ranging from medium pace to the soft side of soft, five to ten feet over the net and landing as close to the baseline as possible. Here is a great reset ball. Roger was using this tactic much more later in his career and it was so effective. Even on serve returns. If you get that ball over on the backhand side...once again it is sort of strange that it is difficult for the opponent to really drive such a ball. Taking the air out of the ball. Most championships are won with great defense. Tennis is no different and the slice backhand is an excellent defensive tool. The game is played constantly in transition...transition from offence to defense and vice versa. Having the slice backhand in all of its variations is a great transitional tool. A must have in the classic game. The slice can range from extreme defence to even tactical offence.

The thing that makes Roger Federer so unique is his seemless transition from defense to offence. Actually Djokovic is the master of this as well on the two hand backhand side of the game. It is imperative to keep the ball in play...particularly at the level your daughter is playing at now and buying time and keeping the point going while neutralizing is a very important tactic. Once a player at her level becomes very effective at this ploy then it the time to start on being able to drive that backhand as well. It sounds like it is getting interesting.

It is getting very interesting. I am about to post two full games from a recent match. I would be very keen to get your take on things. I think she underestimates the value of her slice. When she really puts her body into it and does not just float it then it is lethal. But at times it is just a bunt and this is much less effective.

[morespin]

I call the low, biting slice "slimy." Everyone has a tough time dealing with that shot.
It takes a while to get good at that shot but it's definitely worth the work.

[don_budge]

It is getting very interesting. I am about to post two full games from a recent match. I would be very keen to get your take on things. I think she underestimates the value of her slice. When she really puts her body into it and does not just float it then it is lethal. But at times it is just a bunt and this is much less effective.

This sounds very interesting. Provide some background info such as age, present training schedule, competition schedule and future aspirations. Kick it up a notch to get her to transition to the next level. I read that she is not going to play in college.

[arturohernandez]

This sounds very interesting. Provide some background info such as age, present training schedule, competition schedule and future aspirations. Kick it up a notch to get her to transition to the next level. I read that she is not going to play in college.

It's coming soon!

[don_budge]

Why don't more people see that there is another way? Because they don't understand how to play the game. Good work on the "making the ball lie down" in the grey area of the court. Fool around with the landing zone relative to the sideline as well. This area of the court is often the achilles heel of the two hand backhand and it begs to be exploited. Once again, it is Roger Federer as "The Living Proof" as it seems that only he was aware of this tactic. Tactically if this is used in a Federer versus Djokovic example...Djokovic would have limited tactical responses and much of it is dictated by the height of the net. It would be pretty difficult to be aggressive going down the line over the high part of the net into the Federer forehand. So the response may just be a slice back to the Federer backhand then advantage Federer as Djokovic will now be playing Federer's game. Also if Federer brings Djokovic into this "no man's land" then Djokovic must retreat and he leaves his deep forehand corner vulnerable and even the backhand as well, particularly if he dares to go down the line to the Federer forehand. So much for anyone seeing that there is another way.

Slice backhands have a very large dispersion of executable variations. Learn to hit the medium high ball at various speeds ranging from medium pace to the soft side of soft, five to ten feet over the net and landing as close to the baseline as possible. Here is a great reset ball. Roger was using this tactic much more later in his career and it was so effective. Even on serve returns. If you get that ball over on the backhand side...once again it is sort of strange that it is difficult for the opponent to really drive such a ball. Taking the air out of the ball. Most championships are won with great defense. Tennis is no different and the slice backhand is an excellent defensive tool. The game is played constantly in transition...transition from offence to defense and vice versa. Having the slice backhand in all of its variations is a great transitional tool. A must have in the classic game. The slice can range from extreme defence to even tactical offence.

The thing that makes Roger Federer so unique is his seemless transition from defense to offence. Actually Djokovic is the master of this as well on the two hand backhand side of the game. It is imperative to keep the ball in play...particularly at the level your daughter is playing at now and buying time and keeping the point going while neutralizing is a very important tactic. Once a player at her level becomes very effective at this ploy then it the time to start on being able to drive that backhand as well. It sounds like it is getting interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLLBk2QaCu0

Tremendous match...classic confrontation between the "classic" one hand backhand game versus the modern two hand backhand game. The judicious use of the slice is absolutely mesmerizing. The clever defence coupled with the ability to drive the backhand. Neither player had their "A" game but they were both parrying and thrusting trying to find a way to win. Probing and nicking at the other.

Federer at 36 is feeling the pull back to earth. Gravity in his legs. Novak at 30 years old is not even thinking about that...yet. He is now. He is 36. The shoe is on the other foot. Roger is trying to drag Novak down with the slice. Cleverly placing the ball in a nether region where it is just between the point where Novak can run around his backhand to where he has to take it on his backhand. I always felt there were spots on the court where the two handed backhand could be handcuffed a bit. You see it here. How many times is Novak forced to play it "safe"? In the end it appeared that Novak just had too much in the legs. Federer sort of ran out of gas in the third set tie-break.

But never mind the end result. Here is the tactics to use with the slice. But as jeffreycounts pointed out...driving the backhand is a big part of the effectiveness of the slice. The slice alone is not going to get the job done at a certain level.

[don_budge]

Slice backhands have a very large dispersion of executable variations. Learn to hit the medium high ball at various speeds ranging from medium pace to the soft side of soft, five to ten feet over the net and landing as close to the baseline as possible. Here is a great reset ball. Roger was using this tactic much more later in his career and it was so effective. Even on serve returns. If you get that ball over on the backhand side...once again it is sort of strange that it is difficult for the opponent to really drive such a ball. Taking the air out of the ball. Most championships are won with great defense. Tennis is no different and the slice backhand is an excellent defensive tool. The game is played constantly in transition...transition from offence to defense and vice versa. Having the slice backhand in all of its variations is a great transitional tool. A must have in the classic game. The slice can range from extreme defence to even tactical offence.

The thing that makes Roger Federer so unique is his seemless transition from defense to offence. Actually Djokovic is the master of this as well on the two hand backhand side of the game. It is imperative to keep the ball in play...particularly at the level your daughter is playing at now and buying time and keeping the point going while neutralizing is a very important tactic. Once a player at her level becomes very effective at this ploy then it the time to start on being able to drive that backhand as well. It sounds like it is getting interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCd1E7taZh8

Another stellar example of the versatility of the one hand backhand when it comes to playing defence and transitional offence. Kygios actually shows up to play when Roger Federer is on the other side of the net. Talk about match of the day...this may well have been the match of the year. The action on the court was a close and as intense as you can hope to see. I remember how tense the situations were. What nerves the players showed under the circumstances. Roger eeks this one out by the narrowist of margins. The serving is really stellar. The rest of it...speaks for itself. But as for the slice backhand...watch Federer as he parrys and thrusts his way against an opponent who is hell bent on wreaking havoc. Kyrgios is powerful and at the same time devilishly clever. He's in your head. Pounding away at the serve. Intimidation. But Roger just keeps whittling away. Just trying to "be there" when it is going to be decided. He managed and his relief and his satisfaction are etched all over his face when it is over. Would have loved to see the handshake, but what do you expect? It is the condensed version. A good one too.

[arturohernandez]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCd1E7taZh8

Another stellar example of the versatility of the one hand backhand when it comes to playing defence and transitional offence. Kygios actually shows up to play when Roger Federer is on the other side of the net. Talk about match of the day...this may well have been the match of the year. The action on the court was a close and as intense as you can hope to see. I remember how tense the situations were. What nerves the players showed under the circumstances. Roger eeks this one out by the narrowist of margins. The serving is really stellar. The rest of it...speaks for itself. But as for the slice backhand...watch Federer as he parrys and thrusts his way against an opponent who is hell bent on wreaking havoc. Kyrgios is powerful and at the same time devilishly clever. He's in your head. Pounding away at the serve. Intimidation. But Roger just keeps whittling away. Just trying to "be there" when it is going to be decided. He managed and his relief and his satisfaction are etched all over his face when it is over. Would have loved to see the handshake, but what do you expect? It is the condensed version. A good one too.

Ah yes! The Fed renaissance with an apples to apples racket he shows that everyone had been bothering him with a 10 sq inch advantage. Suddenly, the deficient backhand did not look so deficient anymore. With a meager 2 sq inch difference he was able to handle everything players could throw at him. He was in full flight on his way back from injury.

And below is a point in all its glory, just as you imagined it. Federer plays chess on the tennis court. Uses the slice to fend off Kyrgios's offense. Then in a blink of an eye Fed turns the table by flipping to topspin which must have pushed Kyrgios back deeper behind the baseline. From their Fed uses a combination of forehand and backhands until he wrong foots Kyrgios who has to guard against a deep cross court backhand and a short piercing cross court slice. The backhand winner down the line is setup by Fed's ability to make Kyrgios guard a much larger area on the court.

In the backhand thread, I was stuck with Wawrinka having the best backhand. I still think Stan is the model for withstanding the modern baseline basher that will just bludgeon you. In his prime, his backhand stood toe to toe with a two hander and out two handed everyone with his one hander. That being said we can help but admire Fed for his ability to get his opponent to play the entire court using his own backhand. As I said there, I would be happy to have any of these two.

On Instagram, I keep getting IW Fed highlights. This match shows us why!

https://youtu.be/VCd1E7taZh8?t=231

[don_budge]

Ah yes! The Fed renaissance with an apples to apples racket he shows that everyone had been bothering him with a 10 sq inch advantage. Suddenly, the deficient backhand did not look so deficient anymore. With a meager 2 sq inch difference he was able to handle everything players could throw at him. He was in full flight on his way back from injury.

https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/roger-federer-vs-rafael-nadal/f324/n409

For years I screamed for Roger to change his equipment from this very forum. Either he didn't listen or more likely he never heard. But what a difference it made and one can imagine how many Grand Slam titles it may have cost him not to mention other lesser tournaments. This problem has existed ever since the fundamental change in the racquet. Size matters. All things being equal if players were using the same size the differential was manageable. For example...at the standard size material had a lesser effect.

But just look at this piece of evidence A...Federer's head to head against Nadal. The win for Federer in 2015 at Basel was with his old piece and then he switched and went 6-1 until the end. That was an interesting match that he lost to Nadal at Roland Garros for his last defeat at the hands of the Spaniard. It was played in a cyclone that played into the hands of Nadal. I have always wondered how he would have fared if the wind had not been blowing so hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rpV6KwotvY

The difference in the tactical paradigm pitting Roger's game against Nadal's was always lefty forehand into right one hand backhand. The spin overwhelmed Federer...until he switched. In this condensed match at Indian Wells where we have already viewed Roger against Kyrgios and Wawrinka...Federer declines resorting to the slice backhand and pretty much just unleashes the dragon. The dragon being his new found ability to drive the backhand aggressively from positions he had been unable to until the point where he evened things up.

For too long he handicapped himself with inferior equipment and his "team" has to bear the responsibility for this. If they were unable to talk some sense into him...what were they getting paid for. I was merely an observer and I could see how badly his racquet was costing him.

https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/roger-federer-vs-novak-djokovic/F324/D643

Curiously the racquet did not make the same impression on his results with Novak Djokovic. The reason is that the disparraging factor wasn't so much the equipment as it was in the legs. Novak being six years younger had a distinct advantage over Federer once the Swiss Maestro hit the age of thirty where the legs begin to wane a bit. Once he hit 35 the advantage was more glaring. So it really difficult to assess a Greatest Of All Time status with any surety. So many factors are lost in the translation.

[don_budge]

So the takeaway for Senorita Hernandez is that if she is finding that her opponents are showing some difficulty handling the slice backhand it is time to begin with earnest to learn to drive the ball. I actually began to build my drive backhand against the wall one summer. The summer between my junior and senior years at Ohio University. It took a couple of years to see real results but the work did eventually pay off. Big time.

[don_budge]

Ah yes! The Fed renaissance with an apples to apples racket he shows that everyone had been bothering him with a 10 sq inch advantage. Suddenly, the deficient backhand did not look so deficient anymore. With a meager 2 sq inch difference he was able to handle everything players could throw at him. He was in full flight on his way back from injury.

I railed and screamed bloody murder when the big racquets were introduced to the game. I yelled..."they are taking the art out of the game". Forty some years ago. My rantings fell on deaf ears. Golf too has had its share of engineering and the game has become unrecognizable in comparison to the classic game. I haven't heard a lot about any grumbling about the engineering but here is an article from a man who knows and understands the game. He sounds a bit like me in this regard...regarding the equipment. What a false sense of superiority this sort of change enables the human to categorically accept as some sort of given right. I believe that it some sort of abomination that is clearly being accepted into society at large. The new normal. Philosophically speaking. Not to be confused with politics.


https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/gol...medium=social& utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR0lbHl5-DZ4aGH7encKy8d6qOuTTTH5DizCQl9wcc3XIhSZ0E2vgo25Jwo

[stroke]

I am not certain accepting technological change/improvements dictates some implied kind of given right, or sense of superiority.