The One-Handed Backhand: A Dying Legacy or Awaiting Rebirth?

This morning, I watched the 2026 Wimbledon final again in a small hotel room in Paris. Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal produced one of the greatest matches in history, but what stopped me was not Nadal's incredible passing shot, but a moment in the fourth set: Federer running, sliding, and hitting a one-handed backhand deep to the corner. That is a shot rarely seen among young players today. I remember watching a tennis academy in Paris where coaches almost forced every 10-year-old to switch to a two-handed backhand, convinced that one-handed was a tactical flaw. Commitment to a style is becoming a quiet rebellion. There was a time when the one-handed backhand was the weapon of legends. Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, Pete Sampras, and later Roger Federer – all conquered Grand Slams with one hand. But since the late 1990s, the trend shifted toward the two-handed backhand, thanks to Andre Agassi and perhaps Jimmy Connors earlier. The reason is simple: two-handed is more stable when returning serves, easier to generate heavy topspin, and less vulnerable to high-bouncing balls. Now, only about 7% of the ATP top 100 use one hand, and top 10 has no one except maybe Stefanos Tsitsipas. Looking at the junior circuit, I see this even more: almost all U18 players hit two-handed, as if it were a mandatory standard of modern tennis. But let me be clear: the one-handed backhand is not inferior. It has advantages that two-handers cannot replicate. First, reach and angle. With one hand, players can stretch wider and unleash sharper cross-court shots, while two-handers often default to the middle. Second, the one-handed slice – a deadly tactical weapon – has almost disappeared among two-handers. A deep, sliced ball can disrupt rhythm, keep the ball low, and force errors. Federer used it to neutralize Nadal on clay; Wawrinka used it to set up his forehand. But today, young players rely too much on heavy topspin, ignoring the variety of this shot. Data from my 10 years following the ATP Tour also shows a paradox: one-handers have a higher serving points won percentage than average, but a worse break-point saved rate. The reason lies in defense: the one-hander is weaker when opponents target the backhand with heavy, spinning balls. But this does not indicate absolute inferiority; it indicates a lack of preparation in movement and tactics. A one-handed player must step faster, position earlier, and use more slice. In other words, they must play smart, not just strong. The issue is not the technique but the training system that teaches young players to choose the safe option over the optimal one for long-term development. Even when Dominic Thiem won the US Open in 2026, he was alone. The one-handed backhand needs a 'gene preservation' effort. I remember a lesson from my own journalism career. My 2026 media failure taught me: data needs heart to become a story. In tennis, the same applies. If coaches only look at statistics, they will conclude the one-hander is inefficient. But if they look at moments, at Wawrinka's artistic swings in the 2026 Roland-Garros final, they will see an emotional difference that numbers cannot measure. Fans come to the court for those shots, not for average rally length. From the U21 stands, I realized that the biggest trend always wears the most modest disguise. The one-handed backhand is not flashy, not glamorous, but it holds a tactical depth that two-handers lack. When everyone plays it safe, the one who dares to go against the flow will make the difference. I saw high-pressing from the U21 European Championship long before it became a language. With the one-handed backhand, I believe it will not die; it is waiting for a revolution in coaching methods. When academies focus on developing thinking rather than forcing technique into a mold, when they teach young players how to use slice to change rhythm and how to move to protect weaknesses, the one-hander will revive. But it takes a generation of coaches brave enough to break the norm. The question is: are we abandoning a heritage for tactical safety, or are we witnessing an inevitable evolution? I lean forward. To me, the one-hander is an unfinished symphony, and someone will complete it.