..i agree on your footwork notion, as it affects and often dictates how we return whatever shots we've given. IMO, the *ideal* footwork should be squared and neutral to the net, so as not to give one side of our body an advantage over the other.. Re grip, IMO, both grips have their own advantages and disadvantages. However, re the statement i've highlighted in bold, IMO, i would say that's the advantage of a backhand grip, even if one is wrong footed, as the range of arm/racket coverage is "greater" than a forehand grip; esp. for doing defensive shots of shuttles that are in front of one's body..In comparison, using a forehand grip, wrong footed or not, slightly "limit" one's range of arm/racket coverage; unless you want to do one of those between the legs shot returns or behind your back/wrap around your legs shot returns with your forehand...
Not if you have the right "forehand" grip. Many players have a neutral "shake hands" position for the forehand, as illustrated on this page of the BC grips guide: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/badminton-central/content/view/81/35/1/2/ The correct "forehand" grip, however, is slightly closer to the thumb grip (and away from panhandle). See this notice: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33784&highlight=grips+guide One surprising advantage of this grip is that you can use it to defend on both sides, forehand and backhand. You can use it without changing grips at all, or you can make a slight farther adjustment towards a thumb grip as you hit a backhand. This basic grip is actually better for backhands than a full thumb grip, which severely limits the quality of backhand long defence. Unfortunately, many players are taught the thumb grip for backhands, leaving them with the double problem of poor long defence and an inability to cover the forehand side. See Lee Jae Bok's www.ibbs.tv video on smash defence for a similar view.
Thanks for adding a few more tidbits.. ..yah, i would agree also with the above comments/links...But i was referring more to the arm/elbow action as one swings using a "backhand" posture (grip/form). I think the "backhand" posture has to do more with the efficiency of the movement. That form allows one's arm & elbow to move from side to side in front of their body, so as to create a continuous sweeping "U-shape"(left to right) in a "backhand"/defensive posture. I'm sure we all have seen pro-doubles players do so, repeatedly and often in a rally. Now, imagine doing so in a "forehand" posture, it'll be somewhat awkward. Sure it's possible to change form, but by the time one switches to a "backhand" posture and back again to "forehand", who knows how fast they can recover their position/posture. It's the changing of the forms which IMO, is not as efficient. An example, by the time one wants to reach their left side, one's elbow will be "caught" at their ribs area.. ..That's why we see players use their "forehand" posture & do the B-T-L(between the legs) and A-T-L(around their legs) shots to reach those shots flailing to their left side(if one's a righty)..
That seems like a problem, but actually it isn't. It's not a problem because you should avoid making such a big swing in the first place. Rather than bring the racket backwards, take it forwards as you supinate the forearm and hyperextend the wrist. Then hit the shuttle in front of your body with a quick, short flick (the forearm pronates and the wrist flexes back to neutral). That's for the forehand. The backhand is more or less a mirror image. The reason for those B-T-L and A-T-L shots is that the smash was fast enough to get past the "wall" that the player tries to keep in front of him -- he should always try to play the shuttle well in front of his body, stepping back farther on defence if necessary. Once the shuttle gets past this zone in front of his body, the situation is desperate.
So, which form would you prefer to take.. ..hmm, say if the shot hit to you falls just slightly a bit to the left of your left leg(say if you are right-handed)?? And you are somewhat in a neutral stance..Would you *feel comfortable* still to take that shot using your "forehand" form or "backhand" form??..
I'm not sure what you mean by "forehand form" and "backhand form" here. If the shuttle comes to my left side, then obviously I will play a backhand. You can make small adjustments in grip and posture, but there is no time for a big adjustment.
I'm referring backhand and forehand forms..as they are.. not sure??..well: ...to "forehand form" = *in relation* to using your suggested "correct forehand" grip (posts 22 & 24).. ...to "backhand form" = *in relation* to using normal/reg. backhand grip... And thank you for answering my small question..
Okay, in that case yes, I would feel comfortable defending with the "forehand form" when the shuttle is to my left.
What you described as "forehand form" (i.e. with "forehand" grip and neutral posture) but it's still a backhand stroke (with "the backhand side" of the racket). There's no contradiction. Backhand strokes are not defined by the grip you use. You can play a backhand stroke with a "forehand grip". That's one of two reasons I hate the names "forehand grip" and "backhand grip".
Then... ..how do you define a "Backhand strokes are not defined by the grip you use"??..What grip is used then?? Is it a neutral grip?? forehand grip or backhand grip?? If that's the case, then why can't we also say : One can play a forehand stroke with a "backhand grip"(with slight variations etc.)??.. As far as i can see, both forms are different. And both use different grips. No matter if there is a slight variation or rotation of grip, it's either or. (Top)Forehand form = in general, palm is facing away from body. Arms away from the body. (Bottom)Backhand form = in general, palm is facing into the body. Arms cross the body. See pics below; sorry, they're not the best example, but the closest i can find.
ctjcad, you keep changing your definitions of "forehand form" and "backhand form" Yes, forehands are all played with the palm leading, and backhands are all played with the back of the hand leading (hence the names!). We can say that, because it's true: One can play some forehand strokes with a "backhand" grip One can play some backhand strokes with a "forehand" grip We can go much farther than that, however. This is also true: Every grip used for a forehand stroke also has a backhand application. Every grip used for a backhand stroke also has a forehand application. Have I made myself sufficiently clear yet? What you think of as "the backhand grip" only actually works well for a few backhand strokes (such as serves and net kills). Other backhand strokes use different grips. In particular, many lifts (such as lifts from a smash) are played using the same "forehand" grip on both sides of the body. The only difference is which side of the racket you hit with. Like I just said: the grip is the same, but you are hitting with different sides of the racket. So here is my view of good smash defence: Prepare with a neutral posture, square-on to the smasher Hold the racket in front of you, neither to the left nor the right If the smash comes to your forehand, turn the hand to your right so that your palm is facing forwards. If the smash comes to your backhand, turn the hand to your left instead, so the palm is facing more towards you. In either case, you can now hit the shuttle without changing your grip. Again, if you want a good demonstration of this, I recommend Lee Jae Bok's www.ibbs.tv video. He calls the grip "neutral grip", and it's not exactly the correct basic "forehand" grip (in my view), but it's the same idea.
Oops, Lee doesn't say anything explicit about the grip in his video. ....but see my question on the "Ask Lee" page, where he answers that you should use the "neutral" grip for smash defence, because you don't have time to change your grip.
I agree with mr. gollum regarding a good defence is a good neutral defense posture, turning your hand left or right depending on where the shuttle goes. however, from my experience, the smash return from this positition limits the placement of shuttle to either straight drop or slow cross drop, straight drive or straight lift. without changing the grip to either total backhand defense or forehand defense (depending on where i am on court) i seem to NOT be able to do a fast crosss court drive or lift (or a quick cross court drop) using this neutral defense posture. perhaps my wrist is not strong enough to do the FAST cross drop/drive/lift at this position, but i'd like to have the option of the cross drop/drive/lift in order to gain back the offense in a rally. hence, i have strong leaning backhand/forehand grip/posture when the situation demands it. just my 2cents
Last take...and hope the original thread starter is clear.. hehe, with your explanation above, you've just confirmed that it's a wording/technicality issue after all.. hmm, if i may ask where in this thread did i keep changing my definition of those 2 forms??..Or maybe i was changing my definition or term on forehand/backhand grips, but not forms??... well, on this, let's just say and hope our dear friend who asked the original question(exalted) is clear on what's been discussed here. Anyways, i think we're just going around here on technical wording or terminology. But here's my last take and i'll just leave it as is: True we can have both forms when we're *on the defensive*, being "attacked". But our form in this situation, as quite often, will tend to be a *backhand form*(as is the norm posture/form of being defensive. (see pics above). Not often do we have a *forehand form*(see pics above) in those situation. Why? For 1 main reason: *backhand form* covers a greater range of coverage, being in a defensive posture/form; as we want to "protect" our front areas as much and as wide as possible. But as far as i know: a. *backhand form* uses a backhand grip, NOT a forehand grip. b. and a *forehand form* uses a forehand grip, NOT a backhand grip(see pics again above). Variations of grips(ie. "forehand" grip like what Gollum brought up), IMO, is more like a "transition" or "in-between" grip. If anyone is not clear, maybe one can try doing the *backhand* form with a true forehand grip. And a "forehand form* with a true backhand grip. Let's see how easy or "comfortable" that would be. It's definitely not for me. Anyways, hope my explanation(s), well sort of, is quite clear..if not, y'all can just ignore it..
No, I don't agree. I've said this many times, but you seem determined to find an alternative interpretation that makes my view consistent with yours. From what you've said so far, it's not. We have incompatible views about smash defence. You can use the same grip for both sides, forehand and backhand, when defending a smash. You do not need to change your grip. The waiting grip is the same (or nearly the same) as the hitting grip. Lee Jae Bok uses what he calls the "neutral grip", which is the old-style forehand as illustrated in the BC grips guide. I prefer the new style forehand as seen in Badminton England coaching manuals, and Power&Precision April 2005 edition (also on the BE techniques DVD). The new style forehand grip is slightly closer to a thumb grip, with the V shape between thumb and finger placed towards the diagonal bevel, not directly over the side of the racket. This grip will be called the basic grip in the 2007 coaching syllabus, because we're trying to get away from all this forehand/backhand grip nonsense. Looking at pictures of professional players is of limited benefit, because people tend to see what they expect to see. It's comfortable for me, and for Lee Jae Bok too (with forehand grip, not backhand grip. Backhand grip is rubbish for any smash defence). (And by the way, a line of emoticons doesn't say anything coherent :crying:) My school students frequently say, "that way doesn't feel right". Of course it doesn't feel right, because it's different to what you normally do. It's like trying on a new pair of shoes -- at first, they feel much less comfortable than your worn-out old shoes. The right technique does not necessarily give the best initial results or feeling. Most techniques require training before you can use them effectively. Of course, you don't have to believe me, nor must you believe Lee Jae Bok. But why not try it for a bit? You've nothing to lose, and plenty to gain.
..Gollum, i've tried it(your suggestion) before; if not i wouldn't write my p.o.v.(point of views)..It's somewhat true, somewhat not so, just my preference...But bottom line, let's hope anyone else who's reading this posts/discussion and esp. exalted can try it him/herself..
hmmm I have more trouble with my forehand smash defence in doubles than singles. But I defend differently for each because of the different areas to defend.
I like to thank the posters here in this thread for their insight, as I noticed significant improvement in my defense during my single's games yesterday... also the Zhao JianHau videos helped alot, too.
