Hello, I am a returning badminton player. I had a break of 15 years - and now I'm finding out that for whatever reason my body knows perfectly how to do consistent forehand short serve, but backhand short serves go all over the place (much too high or much too low, no consistency at all). Is there anything wrong with sticking with the forehand low serve in doubles? People keep telling to switch to backhand, but nobody so far could tell me exactly why that's so important. The only drawback I see is that I need to stand a bit farther back to avoid net kills, so the opponent has just a bit more time to see how the cock flies. But I am not too bothered about that, I am not playing against world class players. We're strictly in the "competitive advanced amateur" area, i.e., mostly old-ish adults (30-50) with no tournaments at all (but we do play pretty fast and intense). I'm thinking about whether to stick with what I have, or whether to put effort into switching to the backhand serve (instead of putting effort elsewhere). Thanks for any input!
Backhand low serves do have a few advantages over forehands: Much simpler action, therefore more accurate (with practice!) Contact point out in front of you, rather than at the side -- so it's a bit closer to the net, and closer to the midline when serving from your forehand service court Square-on body stance makes it easier to get ready quickly for the next shot Overall, a backhand low serve has the potential to be slightly more accurate and slightly harder to attack than a forehand. This is why all the professionals serve backhand in doubles nowadays. However, it's only a slight difference. If you prefer to stick with your forehand serve, then you're only taking a slight disadvantage. Then again, a basic backhand serve is quite easy to learn. It's really up to you. The main advantage of a forehand serve is that the service variations are easier: it's easier to get power for a flick serve, and it's easier to play wide low serves. However, you can do all these things on the backhand too, with practice. Even at my level of play, which is nothing to write home about , I can really notice the difference: the forehand low serves give me significantly more time, so I'm often taking them right off the net tape. Against a good backhand low serve, I cannot attack as decisively: I can't reach the shuttle until it has travelled a short distance from the net tape.
I did practice them some, last session, and I found that during practice they are pretty fine. It's more during a game that they go far off. I never had that problem with the backhand serve, for whatever reason. Guess I'm probably tensing up too much. On the other hand, maybe the strings are a bit too old now (at least a year of use followed by 15 years of hanging in the closet ). Since you mention it - was this different in the past? I really cannot recall that the backhand serve was used a lot, back in "my time" (granted, I only made it into local, lower tier youth tournaments). Huh, if it's easy to learn then I do have to learn it, or it would be too shameful. Well, that settles it for me. Thanks a lot for your advice!
Be innovative. No harm to have variation. I am close to 50. I stopped playing badminton for more than 10 years, starting in the early 90s and resumes only in 2004-5 and saw most players was serving backhand. Now I can serve both forehand and backhand, and I can assure you, the backhand is better.
This is normal when you're learning a new skill: it takes some time to "transfer" it from the practice court into real games. It's partly about confidence, but also about grooving the action so that it becomes second-nature. Yikes! Yeah, that is a bit old. Personally, I try to get my rackets restrung about once a month, or at least once every few months. They just go "dead" if you leave them too long. The backhand serve was popularised by Asian players in the 80s, I believe. By the late 90s, I think all the top men's doubles players had switched to backhand serving, with the exception of Michael Sogaard (watching the brilliant 1997 semi-final, you could see just how much of a disadvantage this was to Sogaard). My perception is that the men in mixed doubles took slightly longer to move on to backhands (which is logical, as getting distance on the flick serve is challenging). Easy to learn, hard to master. But I rarely fail to get students playing a decent low serve with even a few minutes' instruction. Good luck. You might find my page about the backhand low serve technique useful.
I find that the natural continuation of body motion after serving short with your forehand is a hindrance to recovery compared to backhand. As you continue the motion you're twisting into yourself, rather than opening up as you do with a backhand.
I think really, it just comes down to personal preference. You'd be much better off hitting a good forehand serve than an awful backhand one. In my opinion, it's good to have the option of a forehand low serve there just in case the backhand serve isn't working for you on a particular day. Likewise, forehand serves can be useful to mix things up. As for why the backhand serve is "better", that's an interesting question. When I look at the forehand serve, I don't notice any particularly significant disadvantages over the backhand serve. Perhaps some little things but probably not enough to make a difference at most levels of badminton. A theory I have is that most people use the backhand serve much more often than the forehand serve in doubles. The likelihood is, they also practise the backhand short serve more than its forehand equivalent. Therefore, it is probable that their backhand short serve is better. They may then assume that because it is what they do more of and are better at, the backhand serve is the better option. (All of this coming from someone who very rarely uses a forehand short serve in doubles)
The forehand serve is more predicable to the opponents; therefore will be able to anticipate what kind of serve (short/flick) the server will be doing based on the arm and hand motion.
Yeah, I have been reading your site, congratulations by the way. I think I'll practice a few hours at home, to get it right - and see someone for restringing.
Pretty much what everyone has mentioned.. ..reading through, i concur with what everyone has mentioned (on the advantages and disadvantages of either type of serve). For one, i really do admire those folks who can serve consistently or even master a forehand short serve in doubles, considering the length of where s/he stands in comparison to the net and the receiver. Everything (from arm, hand & wrist motion to the timing to the player's touch when the stringbed makes contact with the shuttle) really has to fall and be in sync to execute a "perfect" forehand short serve. Otherwise, against an aggressive receiver, bam, it'll most likely be an easy pt. Personally, i enjoy serving a forehand short serve in doubles for 1 main reason: it is much more challenging, esp. against an attacking receiver.
