Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is Tsitsipas...
On 4/27/26 3:36 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is Tsitsipas...
Tsitsipas is a sad case.
Ruud can look very good or very bad. It seems like it is not game by
game, but much large cyclical oscillations.
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/27/26 3:36 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is Tsitsipas...
Tsitsipas is a sad case.
Ruud can look very good or very bad. It seems like it is not game by
game, but much large cyclical oscillations.
Ruud just beat Tsitsipas, but it was extremely close, three
tie-break sets.
Rafa Jodar beat Vit Kopriva to advance to the quarterfinals.
He will face Jannik Sinner. That is a match I want to see.
br,
KK
I saw Jodar beat Fonseca and it was my opinion that Fonseca crapped out enough for Jodar to beat him.
Jodar looks a shade slow, somehow.
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/27/26 3:36 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is Tsitsipas...
Tsitsipas is a sad case.
Ruud can look very good or very bad. It seems like it is not game by
game, but much large cyclical oscillations.
Ruud just beat Tsitsipas, but it was extremely close, three
tie-break sets.
Rafa Jodar beat Vit Kopriva to advance to the quarterfinals.
He will face Jannik Sinner. That is a match I want to see.
br,
KK
On 4/28/2026 12:14 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/27/26 3:36 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:Tsitsipas is a sad case.
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is Tsitsipas... >>>
Ruud can look very good or very bad. It seems like it is not game by
game, but much large cyclical oscillations.
Ruud just beat Tsitsipas, but it was extremely close, three
tie-break sets.
I wish I could have seen it, but due to work and evening playoff hockey,
I won't be able to.
Tsitsipas needs to understand that there is a lot more riding here -
it's *not* about him getting grade-A pussy, but he leading the gallant one-handed backhand to more slam titles...
Rafa Jodar beat Vit Kopriva to advance to the quarterfinals.
He will face Jannik Sinner. That is a match I want to see.
br,
KK
Regards,
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type, fluidity etc.
Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he was able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to him.
If my memory serves me right?
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on slice and volley.
Take Alcaraz for example, his forehead drip shot is better than backhand one.
Nevermind that his forehand drop shit is best in the history of tennis, for sure, but I'm specifically pointing out to forehand having the edge in commanding slice.
On 4/28/26 7:24 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/28/2026 12:14 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/27/26 3:36 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/26/2026 6:16 PM, Kalevi Kolttonen wrote:
Hello!
Madrid ATP1000: In the battle of the 19-year-olds, Spain's
new rising star Rafa Jodar just beat Brazil's Joao
Fonseca! What a great match! Hahah!
br,
KK
I was surprised that Ruud won so easily. His next match is
Tsitsipas...
Tsitsipas is a sad case.
Ruud can look very good or very bad. It seems like it is not game by
game, but much large cyclical oscillations.
Ruud just beat Tsitsipas, but it was extremely close, three
tie-break sets.
I wish I could have seen it, but due to work and evening playoff
hockey, I won't be able to.
Tsitsipas needs to understand that there is a lot more riding here -
it's *not* about him getting grade-A pussy, but he leading the gallant
one-handed backhand to more slam titles...
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get it
right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.
If you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type, fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he was able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to him. If my memory serves me right?
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on slice and volley.
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get it
right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If you had
a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you want him/her
taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type,
fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he was
able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to him. If
my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and shortened due
to hip injuries.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in
being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on
slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I think so.
On 4/29/26 4:41 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get it
right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If you
had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you want
him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type,
fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he was
able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to him. If
my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and shortened
due to hip injuries.
I thought Thiem had a hell of a 1 H BH.
Lendl also comes to mind, but his FH was so good that it over-shadowed
the BH.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in
being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on
slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I think
so.
Yes. You can be late to the ball and often still hit offensively,
whereas with a 1H BH, if you're late you end up having to slice to stay
at neutral. Anything else is a crap shoot.
To be really offensive with 1H BH, the ball needs to be in front of you
and you've got to get your feet just right. If the ball gets further
back it gets real hard to TS it.
Me, I would optimally like it about 1 foot in front of me (toward the
net) and knee to waist level. Higher forces a grip change, and lower
forces you more to slice.
On 4/29/2026 7:19 PM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 4:41 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get
it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If
you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you
want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type,
fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he was
able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to him. If
my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and shortened
due to hip injuries.
I thought Thiem had a hell of a 1 H BH.
I read the Yahoo article where Thiem rated bh's and he refused to rank himself, which is understandable. Top 3 or 4, without doubt IMHO.
Lendl also comes to mind, but his FH was so good that it over-shadowed
the BH.
Both true points, and with the 1980's tech. Laver, Emerson, and others
get nods for lack of tech too.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in
being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on
slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I
think so.
Yes. You can be late to the ball and often still hit offensively,
whereas with a 1H BH, if you're late you end up having to slice to
stay at neutral. Anything else is a crap shoot.
I agree.
To be really offensive with 1H BH, the ball needs to be in front of
you and you've got to get your feet just right. If the ball gets
further back it gets real hard to TS it.
Correct, for me anyway.
Me, I would optimally like it about 1 foot in front of me (toward the
net) and knee to waist level. Higher forces a grip change, and lower
forces you more to slice.
I love it when the ball is at my waist to about 6" below my shoulders-
then I can *really* blast the yellow ball.
Nothing pisses me off more than when I lean back on my 1hb shots. When I
am tired, lazy, or mind dumb from doubles (I *much* prefer singles) I do that. And then I get pissed off like McEnroe and play worse...
On 4/29/26 7:19 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 7:19 PM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 4:41 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get >>>>>> it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If
you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you
want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type,
fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he
was able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to
him. If my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and shortened
due to hip injuries.
I thought Thiem had a hell of a 1 H BH.
I read the Yahoo article where Thiem rated bh's and he refused to rank
himself, which is understandable. Top 3 or 4, without doubt IMHO.
Lendl also comes to mind, but his FH was so good that it over-
shadowed the BH.
Both true points, and with the 1980's tech. Laver, Emerson, and others
get nods for lack of tech too.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in
being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on
slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I
think so.
Yes. You can be late to the ball and often still hit offensively,
whereas with a 1H BH, if you're late you end up having to slice to
stay at neutral. Anything else is a crap shoot.
I agree.
To be really offensive with 1H BH, the ball needs to be in front of
you and you've got to get your feet just right. If the ball gets
further back it gets real hard to TS it.
Correct, for me anyway.
Me, I would optimally like it about 1 foot in front of me (toward the
net) and knee to waist level. Higher forces a grip change, and lower
forces you more to slice.
I love it when the ball is at my waist to about 6" below my shoulders-
then I can *really* blast the yellow ball.
Nothing pisses me off more than when I lean back on my 1hb shots. When
I am tired, lazy, or mind dumb from doubles (I *much* prefer singles)
I do that. And then I get pissed off like McEnroe and play worse...
Good man, Scall!!!
Eastern˙ BH grip? For very low balls, shift to continental (for slicing)?
Thinking back on it, I never tried consciously to adopt a grip. I just dicked around with getting the racquet so that I could hit the ball
well, and it gradually ended up with eastern forehand (I liked the ball sorta low--knee to diaphragm) and eastern backhand. But adjusting grips
a lot depending on the ball. If it was outside the normal strike zones I
had for myself, just swap out grips.
I can recall eventually going to a western-like FH grip if the ball got
up around head level.
Anyway, later I looked for what to call the grips I had evolved to using
so that I could describe them to other people.
When I first started in the mid-60s (gulp!) I was advised to use
continental only. Not to shift grips. Bad advice.
On 4/30/2026 10:59 AM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 7:19 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 7:19 PM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 4:41 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to get >>>>>>> it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, etc.If >>>>>>> you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH would you >>>>>>> want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type,
fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he
was able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to
him. If my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and shortened >>>>> due to hip injuries.
I thought Thiem had a hell of a 1 H BH.
I read the Yahoo article where Thiem rated bh's and he refused to
rank himself, which is understandable. Top 3 or 4, without doubt IMHO.
Lendl also comes to mind, but his FH was so good that it over-
shadowed the BH.
Both true points, and with the 1980's tech. Laver, Emerson, and
others get nods for lack of tech too.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in >>>>>> being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural on >>>>>> slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I
think so.
Yes. You can be late to the ball and often still hit offensively,
whereas with a 1H BH, if you're late you end up having to slice to
stay at neutral. Anything else is a crap shoot.
I agree.
To be really offensive with 1H BH, the ball needs to be in front of
you and you've got to get your feet just right. If the ball gets
further back it gets real hard to TS it.
Correct, for me anyway.
Me, I would optimally like it about 1 foot in front of me (toward
the net) and knee to waist level. Higher forces a grip change, and
lower forces you more to slice.
I love it when the ball is at my waist to about 6" below my
shoulders- then I can *really* blast the yellow ball.
Nothing pisses me off more than when I lean back on my 1hb shots.
When I am tired, lazy, or mind dumb from doubles (I *much* prefer
singles) I do that. And then I get pissed off like McEnroe and play
worse...
Good man, Scall!!!
Eastern˙ BH grip? For very low balls, shift to continental (for slicing)?
No, Eastern Backhand grip regardless of backhand shot. Continental for serves and volleys. Semi-Western forehand.
I'll say. Personally I didn't receive coaching until about 8 years into playing. By then I had many bad habits that were a nightmare and took *years* to fix. But at the time (pre-internet) I thought that I couldn't avoid coaching.
Thinking back on it, I never tried consciously to adopt a grip. I just
dicked around with getting the racquet so that I could hit the ball
well, and it gradually ended up with eastern forehand (I liked the
ball sorta low--knee to diaphragm) and eastern backhand. But adjusting
grips a lot depending on the ball. If it was outside the normal strike
zones I had for myself, just swap out grips.
I can recall eventually going to a western-like FH grip if the ball
got up around head level.
Anyway, later I looked for what to call the grips I had evolved to
using so that I could describe them to other people.
When I first started in the mid-60s (gulp!) I was advised to use
continental only. Not to shift grips. Bad advice.
On 4/30/26 4:43 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/30/2026 10:59 AM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 7:19 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 7:19 PM, Sawfish wrote:
On 4/29/26 4:41 PM, Scall5 wrote:
On 4/29/2026 11:27 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
It's a great looking shot, and it took me a very long time to >>>>>>>> get it right, mostly. Inside-out 1H BH, with top spin & pace, >>>>>>>> etc.If you had a kid and wanted to get them lessons, which BH >>>>>>>> would you want him/her taught--assuming you had the choice?
It should be subject to some deeper analysis, height, body type, >>>>>>> fluidity etc. Guga had most vicious powerful 1hb and the fact he >>>>>>> was able to play inside out with it means it was very natural to >>>>>>> him. If my memory serves me right?
Originally yes, then Stan the Man replaced him. IMHO. I so loved
watching Guga and regret that his career was hampered and
shortened due to hip injuries.
I thought Thiem had a hell of a 1 H BH.
I read the Yahoo article where Thiem rated bh's and he refused to
rank himself, which is understandable. Top 3 or 4, without doubt IMHO. >>>>>
Lendl also comes to mind, but his FH was so good that it over-
shadowed the BH.
Both true points, and with the 1980's tech. Laver, Emerson, and
others get nods for lack of tech too.
Overall 2hb has the advantage but I guess it comes at a price, in >>>>>>> being able to cover less court and being weaker or less natural >>>>>>> on slice and volley.
I agree. Does the 2bh require less exact footwork? Personally, I
think so.
Yes. You can be late to the ball and often still hit offensively,
whereas with a 1H BH, if you're late you end up having to slice to
stay at neutral. Anything else is a crap shoot.
I agree.
To be really offensive with 1H BH, the ball needs to be in front of >>>>> you and you've got to get your feet just right. If the ball gets
further back it gets real hard to TS it.
Correct, for me anyway.
Me, I would optimally like it about 1 foot in front of me (toward
the net) and knee to waist level. Higher forces a grip change, and
lower forces you more to slice.
I love it when the ball is at my waist to about 6" below my
shoulders- then I can *really* blast the yellow ball.
Nothing pisses me off more than when I lean back on my 1hb shots.
When I am tired, lazy, or mind dumb from doubles (I *much* prefer
singles) I do that. And then I get pissed off like McEnroe and play
worse...
Good man, Scall!!!
Eastern˙ BH grip? For very low balls, shift to continental (for
slicing)?
No, Eastern Backhand grip regardless of backhand shot. Continental for
serves and volleys. Semi-Western forehand.
Terrific exchange!
With your forehand grip it lets you handle a higher ball than with my
grip (eastern FH). Volleys continental, yep, but I eventually went to an eastern BH grip--damned close to my normal BH but for serving--but I
dicked around with it to get different effects, especially 2nd serve American twist. What a fuckin' hop!!! I had so many people actually lean
the wrong way from where the ball bounced.
Of course, they caught on, but it was fun to see the first few times.
I'll say. Personally I didn't receive coaching until about 8 years
Thinking back on it, I never tried consciously to adopt a grip. I
just dicked around with getting the racquet so that I could hit the
ball well, and it gradually ended up with eastern forehand (I liked
the ball sorta low--knee to diaphragm) and eastern backhand. But
adjusting grips a lot depending on the ball. If it was outside the
normal strike zones I had for myself, just swap out grips.
I can recall eventually going to a western-like FH grip if the ball
got up around head level.
Anyway, later I looked for what to call the grips I had evolved to
using so that I could describe them to other people.
When I first started in the mid-60s (gulp!) I was advised to use
continental only. Not to shift grips. Bad advice.
into playing. By then I had many bad habits that were a nightmare and
took *years* to fix. But at the time (pre-internet) I thought that I
couldn't avoid coaching.
Never really had coaching. I once took a summer rec class with group lessons. I really did not take anything away from it WRT mechanics, but
it was the first time in my life where I saw what an offensive TS lob
could do--what it *looked* like˙ going overhead--a helpless, hopeless feeling. The instructor played everyone a few games in singles on the
last day.
So then I taught myself TS lobs!!!!
Man, I also can recall the first time I saw what happens to the ball
when a really good extreme western grip player passes you as you S&V but
are not careful. The hair spun out making the ball looks a bit disk-
like, then it appeared to roll off the edge of a table and run away to toward baseline.
Scared me.
So I adapted as best I could...˙ :^(
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 493845:11:32 |
| Calls: | 146 |
| Files: | 547 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (97K bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,733 |