Let's talk about Backhand...

[Gozo Zyreruna]

This is something that I come across recently regarding backhand. It seems there are two main type, so I am aware.

1. The throwing of a frisbee type backhand. This is what I am familiar with, that is, perform a backhand like mimicking the throwing of a frisbee. I think a good candidate for this type of backhand, IMO, is Bernedette Szocs. To me, she has a backhand that is archetypal of this type of backhand.

2. The other one, which I learned recently is like tearing a piece of paper into half. The archetypal athlete that uses this type of backhand is Ma Long. This type of backhand I am not so familiar.

3. For those who are in the know, what do you think are the pros and cons of each type?

 

[matt243385]

my backhand stroke is very open like #2, Its more stable for me but slightly less spin, I also like to punch a lot so keeping it open favors that. When I loop heavy underspin, my racket almost faces upward

 

[zhzhzhz]

For me it seems the first one is kinda like RPB and the second one is like TPB. TPB is still way more different but I guess it is more similar to the second one.

 

[banbekas]

Fan would be the type 1, I think? More power, better spin generation, good in all position. For us mortals, this kind of backhand would be disastrous because it's harder to control. You must have good timing for this.

Type 2 would be better for control, imho. My own BH is just like this and I tend to borrow the power and spin from the opponent. It's stable and easier to control, perfect to set up a FH loopkill. Spin and power generation aren't as good as type 1.

 

[Lazer]

Attacking I am throwing a frisbee, zoro punching for me, chop blocking every once in a while. Side sweeping slow very spinny balls…

Cheers
L-zr

 

[Dr Evil]

I also think in terms of two types of backhand motion, linear and circular. Linear involves extending the elbow and shoulder, as in a punch, so the blade moves forward in a straight line. Circular rotates the forearm around the elbow (similar to a frisbee throwing motion), so the blade moves forward in a curved path. You can play pure linear (which doesn't have to be a punch if you make brushing contact) or pure circular (if your elbow doesn't move relative to your body), but the most powerful backhands are a combination of linear and circular motion (so the blade moves along a cycloidal path) which allows for whip action: Elbow starts forward before the forearm via shoulder extension as with linear motion. This preloads the rotator cuff, and then forearm whips through the circular motion.

The advantage of linear motion is simplicity. Because the hitting surface is moving in a straight line through the whole stroke, timing can be less precise. One disadvantage is lack of power compared to circular motion; linear motion is like pushing a shot put, versus throwing/whipping a baseball. Another disadvantage is slower recovery; circular/cycloidal backhands can be more compact because they're more efficient.

 

[pong99]

This is one of several BH videos in a series on wrm

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

I was at practice last night and this is me thinking out loud:

1. This newly found BH style, that is, like tearing apart paper, is suitable for quick counter-attacking or when opponent return is fast and you can borrow the power from your opponent. It is suited for against quick drive type return where speed and topspin dominate.
2. The older, I shall call it, classic BH style, that is, like throwing a frisbee, is a mechanics where you can generate more power and spin, and to my mind, is suited for ball that are slower and with less momentum. Hence you need this stroke mechanics to generate the power and spin yourself. It is more suited against slower but more spiny ball or against ball with backspin.

What do you all think? Is my assessment spot-on? Leave a response, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments.

 

[John_]

I like to think of 2 backhands.

The modern backhand, infront of the body with the basis being the wrist snap, like Kallberg, Boll.

And the classic backhand, on the side of the body with the basis being the forearm movement, like Kreanga, Samsonov.

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

I like to think of 2 backhands.

The modern backhand, infront of the body with the basis being the wrist snap, like Kallberg, Boll.

And the classic backhand, on the side of the body with the basis being the forearm movement, like Kreanga, Samsonov.

I have a question for you friend,
In this modern era, is it a case of learning
1. either one type only or
2. is it to better learn both type and to adapt each type to a different incoming ball?

 

[Kopp]

IMO, there are many variables.

• Style: BH to control and defense only or attacking as well
• Racket: Your setup e.g. rubber hardness, blade type, tackiness etc.
• How strong your hand and body are?
• Are they well coordinated when executing the BH strokes?
• Speed: Can you execute the BH quickly and still be coordinated?
• Can you move your feet while the upper body doing the job?

BH strokes are individual style. I see many players in my club have different techniques when executing their BH. I think as long as the ball drops in with or without qualities, all good.

 

[Topspinslinger]

I use the triangle (tearing a piece of paper)
Makes my stroke more reliable and stable during intense situations.
Frisbee methode is very powerful, but requires more precision. If you are a hot head this technique is very satisfying, because you can miss 90% and still be happy with it.

 

[John_]

I have a question for you friend,
In this modern era, is it a case of learning
1. either one type only or
2. is it to better learn both type and to adapt each type to a different incoming ball?

The old style is slow and was developed for use from mid and long distance when spin was playing a major role.

Nowadays the meta is to stay close to the table and have very quick stroke reset to keep a high and stable attacking frequency.

It's not a matter of what you should learn, it's what suits you better, we don't play at very high level so it doesn't really matter. You should do what you can already do better and more stable, and improve on that.

For example I do the first because it's easier on my wrist and I can get spin easier. Close to the table I drive or punch. Coming from tennis it felt more natural too.

If you want to play at a higher level then the second is pretty much a one way road.

 

[Amayzde]

There is not 1 backhand stroke for all situations.

There is a really interesting video of Heming Hu demonstrating 3 different types of backhands;

The 1st one he demonstrates is more the 'frisbee' backhand. The 2nd and 3rd are more the 'Ma Long type' backhand.

I found the 2nd and 3rd backhand very interesting. This is he first time I have seen someone explain how the backhand technique of Ma Long works.

 

[dingyibvs]

I was at practice last night and this is me thinking out loud:

1. This newly found BH style, that is, like tearing apart paper, is suitable for quick counter-attacking or when opponent return is fast and you can borrow the power from your opponent. It is suited for against quick drive type return where speed and topspin dominate.
2. The older, I shall call it, classic BH style, that is, like throwing a frisbee, is a mechanics where you can generate more power and spin, and to my mind, is suited for ball that are slower and with less momentum. Hence you need this stroke mechanics to generate the power and spin yourself. It is more suited against slower but more spiny ball or against ball with backspin.

What do you all think? Is my assessment spot-on? Leave a response, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments.

It's more about playing distance and recovery IMO. The modern game requires you to play closer to the table, where you just don't have the time to do the Frisbee throw AND have time to recover for the next shot.

The issue with BH shots is that you end up with your hand way outside of your body, away from your center of gravity. This is as opposed to FH shots where your hand ends up just to the left of your centerline, right around where your center of gravity is at assuming good weight transfer to your left foot. This makes recovery harder after big BH shots, and the Frisbee throw one is especially a grave offender in that respect.

 

[netdriver]

my coach taught me the 2nd one but i mostly use the 1st one (honestly i use both, it depends)

i find the 2nd one good for topspin rallies close to the table, you're leveraging/borrowing force from your opponents to send the ball back at good speed and decent spin

ofc this means that once you back away from the table its harder to put power onto the ball

the 1st one has a lot more spin and power onto it, i can pull backspin reliably compared to the 2nd method and also be able to play better with my BH in mid-distance

sometimes it can even outright end the point, but against better experienced opponents (especially close-table SH players) i find myself outpaced

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

Spoiler: BH is like throwing a frisbee:

Spoiler: then fh be like:

of course minus the twirly bit. Stay with me, the sensation at the point of contact of a fh should be like throwing the discus sensation.

 

[oophyte]

The smaller movement is for contacting the ball during rising phase. This is either reactive because the placement is too deep relative to where you are standing, or proactive because you want to keep a high tempo to pressure the opponent.

The bigger movement is for contacting the ball at or past peak. The bigger wind-up is a necessity at mid or far distance from the table to generate enough power. If you can pull this off consistently close to the table though, either you have great reaction/prediction and footwork, or your opponent is too passive relative to your level.

 

[songdavid98]

I have a question for you friend,
In this modern era, is it a case of learning
1. either one type only or
2. is it to better learn both type and to adapt each type to a different incoming ball?

Learn both for sure. Like why would you “refuse to learn” something? (That’s a great way to get stuck at a certain rating)

But it really is not “one or the other”. These strokes are all on a spectrum.

Just different combinations of moving your racket from point A to B at a certain racket angle and speed.

 

[NextLevel]

I was at practice last night and this is me thinking out loud:

1. This newly found BH style, that is, like tearing apart paper, is suitable for quick counter-attacking or when opponent return is fast and you can borrow the power from your opponent. It is suited for against quick drive type return where speed and topspin dominate.
2. The older, I shall call it, classic BH style, that is, like throwing a frisbee, is a mechanics where you can generate more power and spin, and to my mind, is suited for ball that are slower and with less momentum. Hence you need this stroke mechanics to generate the power and spin yourself. It is more suited against slower but more spiny ball or against ball with backspin.

What do you all think? Is my assessment spot-on? Leave a response, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments.

First of all I dont speak Chinese but this is what I have heard and I can be corrected.

IMHO, the Chinese are usually the best at such things with respect to technical detail, where in English we have this generic term of backhand topspin which is applied to all backhand strokes, just about every single technique in China has a name that.mskes it distinct and specific for its content of application. So when you se Fan Zhendong doing a stroke, when he does it off the bounce, or Harimoto fors it off rhe bouncer, there is a different name and contrxt for that technique vs when Fan Zhendong is off the table. And even close to the table, there are ways of approaching the ball that harimoto does very aggressively that other players don't do quite like him. All these techniques eill get called "backhand topspin" in English but in China, there will be different names for all these techniques.

In amateur table tennis, it is better to learn stuff and keep doing what works to score points. And.since as @songdavid98 pointed out, when you develop a lot of swings, they start to come together to give you an instinctive idea of how to approach different balls based on the incoming spin and energy and the ball you want to send out. In my head I feel like I use one backhand stroke, but i can't be attacking over the table, opening vs backspin, blocking, counterlooping and topspinning against blocking all with one stroke. I must be adapting somehow but it all.feels the same after you have practiced adapting a lot. The one thing that is easy to miss with backhand is that very often you don't have time to do anything big against aggressive players and borrowing power is critical. Therefore taking big swings against players who can control your ball is a recipe for instant disaster if you cannot recover after a quick counter. I used to wonder why I was under pressuee in backhsnd rallies against younger players until I realized I needed to control the exchange to play at a seed that I could manage and not just try to overpower them and get surprised by the block. Obviously the more quality you can get into shorter strokes the better, but this is a balancing act that comes eith practicing and trying to get more efficient over time with one-inch punches and tight whips. Because if your opponent can block your max quality, you need to find quality that you can use to maintain and control the point, not hit outright winners. Any outright winners on backhand are just gravy.