Federer's 'weak' backhand [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer's 'weak' backhand

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 11:12 AM
On the thread about whether Djokovic is the most complete player on our some poeple were saying that Federer is not as complete because he has an old school backhand blah blah blah. These people obviously have no idea what they were talking about. Roger has a touch on his backhand that is unheard of. See for yourself:

Federer Backhand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vrojpBD2iU)

bokehlicious
12-18-2008, 11:14 AM
Welcome to MTF :hug: :hug: you'll soon enough learn that Federer is just an all serve mug lucky enough to play in the weakest tennis era ever :shrug: :o

PiggyGotRoasted
12-18-2008, 11:43 AM
I agree that it is not his weakness but since his left hand doesnt touch the handle when he hits it he will drop out the top 500 tomorrow.

elessar
12-18-2008, 11:49 AM
A lot of great Federer threads have been opened lately, keep up the good work.

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 11:52 AM
Welcome to MTF :hug: :hug: you'll soon enough learn that Federer is just an all serve mug lucky enough to play in the weakest tennis era ever :shrug: :o

You are wrong. I will never learn that because its simply not true. Its clear that you have no knowledge about tennis whatsoever and frankly im embarassed to be the same forum as you.

bokehlicious
12-18-2008, 11:53 AM
You are wrong. I will never learn that because its simply not true. Its clear that you have no knowledge about tennis whatsoever and frankly im embarassed to be the same forum as you.

:awww: so rude :sad:

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 11:54 AM
I agree that it is not his weakness but since his left hand doesnt touch the handle when he hits it he will drop out the top 500 tomorrow.

Mmm, another odd post. Makes no sense whatsoever, is there anyone in this forum that knows tennis?

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 11:56 AM
A lot of great Federer threads have been opened lately, keep up the good work.

Cheers, finally some hope :)

PiggyGotRoasted
12-18-2008, 12:00 PM
Mmm, another odd post. Makes no sense whatsoever, is there anyone in this forum that knows tennis?

Yeh I know tennis, its that game where 2 players play over a net with a small court indoors hitting a shuttlecock to each other.

miura
12-18-2008, 12:26 PM
The reason while people are saying his backhand is weak is because all other aspects of his game is so complete, used to be anyway. For example in lot of the clay encounters against Nadal, his backhand has been the weakest link. But if you take his backhand and look at it separately, it's surely not a disadvantage but an all-round weapon. It's like turning up with a Impreza WRX STi in a drag race against a Zonda F, a Veyron and a Murcielago LP640, it's going to look hugely slow but compared to more down-to-earth cars, it's quite fast. I believe his backhand is sufficent to beat anyone if the rest of his game is above average. A lot of people with limited insight in tennis often does the mistake of labeling his backhand weak and this will go on forever as far as I reckon.

zeleni
12-18-2008, 12:33 PM
Welcome to MTF :hug: :hug: you'll soon enough learn that Federer is just an all serve mug lucky enough to play in the weakest tennis era ever :shrug: :o

You are wrong. I will never learn that because its simply not true. Its clear that you have no knowledge about tennis whatsoever and frankly im embarassed to be the same forum as you.

:awww: so rude :sad:


:lol::lol::lol::haha:

duong
12-18-2008, 12:58 PM
You are wrong. I will never learn that because its simply not true. Its clear that you have no knowledge about tennis whatsoever and frankly im embarassed to be the same forum as you.

Ruanz : you didn't understand that Antonius was just ironic.
Probably he/she likes Federer like you.

He/she just wanted to warn you about the way it goes in this kind of forum.

And besides, he/she welcame you very cheerfully (look at the smilies). Looks very nice indeed.

You need to be very open-minded and ready to read things you don't like in these sites.

Burrow
12-18-2008, 01:23 PM
Federer's backhand is his weakness, no matter what you say, it is by far the most fragile part of his game. That's basically the reason why he hasn't got a French Open to his name already, barring this year when he was just not really his normal self and played horrible in the final. Put him up against pretty much anybody apart from the top 4 and his backhand will look good. The real test is when he faces the likes of Nadal and Djokovic. It breaks down, because of the consistency of their groundstrokes and the fact that he knows it's his weakness. Looked to me at the start of the clay swing that he had tried to change it a little with the help of Higueras, but it didn't last for long and it was as bad as ever.

It doesn't matter what you say but when it comes down to the end of slams when he needs to play his best tennis, i've seen it look the weakest shot on court. It's not an awful shot, in most cases it's a good shot, but that really doesn't cut it when he's aging, he's getting worse and he's still chasing Sampras slam record and I have a feeling if he doesn't salvage some form from the last few years, then things are only going to get tougher with a few more guys coming round the corner who can trouble him.

You can show highlights reel after reel over his backhand, but that doesn't explain the full story, they are highlights.

bokehlicious
12-18-2008, 01:26 PM
Those who think Fed's backhand is weak need to rewatch the 06 TMC semis or some of the 07 AO :angel: :)

Roseisarose
12-18-2008, 01:48 PM
You are wrong. I will never learn that because its simply not true. Its clear that you have no knowledge about tennis whatsoever and frankly im embarassed to be the same forum as you.

:wavey: I agree that there's no need to get all worked up, he was being ironic, not attacking you or Federer. I think this is a case of cultural misunderstanding.

zeleni
12-18-2008, 03:27 PM
Ruanz : you didn't understand that Antonius was just ironic.
Probably he/she likes Federer like you.

He/she just wanted to warn you about the way it goes in this kind of forum.

And besides, he/she welcame you very cheerfully (look at the smilies). Looks very nice indeed.

You need to be very open-minded and ready to read things you don't like in these sites.

:wavey: I agree that there's no need to get all worked up, he was being ironic, not attacking you or Federer. I think this is a case of cultural misunderstanding.

:haha:

P. Antonius got what he wanted. He/she (:haha:) deserved that "rude" (:haha:) answer fair and square with his permanent overrated cynicism. :wavey:

buzz
12-18-2008, 03:43 PM
Federer has one of the best running backhands ever I think. He can hit a passing shot or plane winner with it completely out of position. But these shots are low percentage shots which will get you even more out of position.

his rally backhand is not very good. And for his standards it's even very BAD.

I would estimate his rally backhand to be around top 40 while the rest of the components of his game are all about top 3.

Bad Religion
12-18-2008, 03:51 PM
Federer hits like 500 Home runs per seeason directed to the 10th File with that weak shot

JimmyV
12-18-2008, 03:53 PM
Federer has a good passing game, quick release and good accuracy, but he just can't read coverages that well. A good zone will get him every time. He's vulnerable to the blitz as well, but I still think that he's top 10 in the league.

sammy01
12-18-2008, 04:23 PM
Federer's backhand is his weakness, no matter what you say, it is by far the most fragile part of his game. That's basically the reason why he hasn't got a French Open to his name already, barring this year when he was just not really his normal self and played horrible in the final. Put him up against pretty much anybody apart from the top 4 and his backhand will look good. The real test is when he faces the likes of Nadal and Djokovic. It breaks down, because of the consistency of their groundstrokes and the fact that he knows it's his weakness. Looked to me at the start of the clay swing that he had tried to change it a little with the help of Higueras, but it didn't last for long and it was as bad as ever.

It doesn't matter what you say but when it comes down to the end of slams when he needs to play his best tennis, i've seen it look the weakest shot on court. It's not an awful shot, in most cases it's a good shot, but that really doesn't cut it when he's aging, he's getting worse and he's still chasing Sampras slam record and I have a feeling if he doesn't salvage some form from the last few years, then things are only going to get tougher with a few more guys coming round the corner who can trouble him.

You can show highlights reel after reel over his backhand, but that doesn't explain the full story, they are highlights.

i agree with every word, me and my friend adam constantly say 'if only' when it comes to his backhand, looks nice, can be ok, but just isn't good enough.

bokehlicious
12-18-2008, 05:31 PM
P. Antonius got what he wanted. He/she (:haha:) deserved that "rude" (:haha:) answer fair and square with his permanent overrated cynicism. :wavey:

:haha: I'm devastated indeed :D

Ajde! AO coming soon :rocker2:

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 05:33 PM
Federer's backhand is his weakness, no matter what you say, it is by far the most fragile part of his game. That's basically the reason why he hasn't got a French Open to his name already, barring this year when he was just not really his normal self and played horrible in the final. Put him up against pretty much anybody apart from the top 4 and his backhand will look good. The real test is when he faces the likes of Nadal and Djokovic. It breaks down, because of the consistency of their groundstrokes and the fact that he knows it's his weakness. Looked to me at the start of the clay swing that he had tried to change it a little with the help of Higueras, but it didn't last for long and it was as bad as ever.

It doesn't matter what you say but when it comes down to the end of slams when he needs to play his best tennis, i've seen it look the weakest shot on court. It's not an awful shot, in most cases it's a good shot, but that really doesn't cut it when he's aging, he's getting worse and he's still chasing Sampras slam record and I have a feeling if he doesn't salvage some form from the last few years, then things are only going to get tougher with a few more guys coming round the corner who can trouble him.

You can show highlights reel after reel over his backhand, but that doesn't explain the full story, they are highlights.

Ok here is what you miss. Federer's bachand seems weak to you because the rest of his game is so good. Many top playes would love to have his backhand plus he has a flick on his backhand which is the best in the history of the game. Concerning what you said about the french open there is a simple explanation for that. Nadal is LEFT-HANDED. That makes all the difference, coupled with the fact that he's forehand is one of the most feared in the game. Everyones backhand breaks down against Nadal on clay lol. Thats what he does. It doesnt happen on hard or grass because the rallies are shorter, hence Roger leading Nadal on grass and hard h2h.

The bottom line is its Roger's weakest shot but it's still one of the best one-handers in the history of the game, you need to come to terms with that fact. If you want to see a flawed back-hand then look at Pete's. Now there you have some technical problems. Roger's backhand is technically perfect. Also Roger will be around for a long time still. He will win about 18 slams, so the young guns will just have to wait. Pete's record is all but gone, it's just a question of by how much Roger wil brake it. Expect a good year from Roger in 2009...

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 05:44 PM
The reason while people are saying his backhand is weak is because all other aspects of his game is so complete, used to be anyway. For example in lot of the clay encounters against Nadal, his backhand has been the weakest link. But if you take his backhand and look at it separately, it's surely not a disadvantage but an all-round weapon. It's like turning up with a Impreza WRX STi in a drag race against a Zonda F, a Veyron and a Murcielago LP640, it's going to look hugely slow but compared to more down-to-earth cars, it's quite fast. I believe his backhand is sufficent to beat anyone if the rest of his game is above average. A lot of people with limited insight in tennis often does the mistake of labeling his backhand weak and this will go on forever as far as I reckon.

Well said, people who label his backhand as weak know nothing.

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 05:50 PM
Ruanz : you didn't understand that Antonius was just ironic.
Probably he/she likes Federer like you.

He/she just wanted to warn you about the way it goes in this kind of forum.

And besides, he/she welcame you very cheerfully (look at the smilies). Looks very nice indeed.

You need to be very open-minded and ready to read things you don't like in these sites.

Oh i apologize to Antonius then, i see now that i completely misunderstood. Once again my apologies and thanks for the welcome, im still getting used to the lingo here. :shrug:

manuel84
12-18-2008, 06:17 PM
Roger's BH stinks so bad he should hand back all his titles, retire and not re-emerge from his cave until he learns how to spell and hit a P-R-O-P-E-R backhand. That's an order, Roger!:wavey::wavey::wavey:

Stroba
12-18-2008, 06:33 PM
Federer has one of the best running backhands ever I think. He can hit a passing shot or plane winner with it completely out of position. But these shots are low percentage shots which will get you even more out of position.

his rally backhand is not very good. And for his standards it's even very BAD.

I would estimate his rally backhand to be around top 40 while the rest of the components of his game are all about top 3.

I agree with you completely, when at full strech he can come up with spectacular passing shots both crosscourt and down the line. And of course his slice is the best of current players in my opionion. But the problem is endeed his rally backhand. It looks technically ok when hitting it, but he is often a bit tentative hitting it mid court and/or short, hence giving the opponent the upper hand. And at times his backhand becomes an errorfest.

Overall techically there is nothing wrong with his backhand. It just lacks a bit of consistency.

finishingmove
12-18-2008, 06:33 PM
Those who think Fed's backhand is weak need to rewatch the 06 TMC semis or some of the 07 AO :angel: :)

:confused:

bokehlicious
12-18-2008, 06:35 PM
:confused:

You think it vanished all of a sudden? :confused: one word: m o n o, watch out once it gets back to the "normal" :armed: :D

Vida
12-18-2008, 06:42 PM
:awww: so rude :sad:

:lol:

elessar
12-18-2008, 06:52 PM
You think it vanished all of a sudden? :confused: one word: m o n o, watch out once it gets back to the "normal" :armed: :D
Even with mono, Roger's BH is top 5. At worst.

Fiberlight1
12-18-2008, 07:33 PM
What's with all the fedtards lately?

Aren't good backhands not supposed... to break down?

Exclusive
12-18-2008, 08:01 PM
On the thread about whether Djokovic is the most complete player on our some poeple were saying that Federer is not as complete because he has an old school backhand blah blah blah. These people obviously have no idea what they were talking about. Roger has a touch on his backhand that is unheard of. See for yourself:

Federer Backhand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vrojpBD2iU)
Well, you must don't understand my message in that thread. Read it sloooowly: Djokovic's shots from the left and from the right side are pretty equal. Federer has far far better FH than BH; Nadal in the same situation as well but it's not a topic.

A typical tactics from an opponent going to play Fed: hit backhand, no where else but backhand. That's why this shot by Fed seems to be a weak part of his game. Actually, it really is. He is playing tennis of 199x-2003 right now, succesfully playing just because of an ultimate talent. Weak BH? YES, his backhand is weak, no any other top player plays one-handed BH, it is a way of shot that goes to history. Watch Federer, if you don't do it now, he might be the last player to have the beautiest sort of backhand ever.

peterparker
12-18-2008, 08:30 PM
great passing shots with the backhand. But all the grinders use it as an out whenever they are in trouble. Fed. better get ready to hop around it as much as possible in this coming year.

ORGASMATRON
12-18-2008, 08:44 PM
Even with mono, Roger's BH is top 5. At worst.

I dont know what is meant by mono but i just love this comment lol. Its probably true too! :smooch:

habibko
12-18-2008, 10:07 PM
I dont know what is meant by mono but i just love this comment lol. Its probably true too! :smooch:

mono...mug...bandwagon... you will be introduced to some interesting stuff on MTF, welcome aboard fellow Fed fan :hug:

his backhand is certainly not weak, his rally backhand (groundstroke,topspin) is his weakest shot, his backhand slice, passing shot, lob, volley and dropshots are all outstanding, when Fed-haters bash his backhand they are usually referring to his rally backhand, again not weak, but his weakest.

there is nothing "weak" about Federer's game.

finishingmove
12-18-2008, 10:24 PM
but mono is a a medical term.

and it is a fact roger had mono.

:confused:

Burrow
12-18-2008, 10:59 PM
Ok here is what you miss. Federer's bachand seems weak to you because the rest of his game is so good. Many top playes would love to have his backhand plus he has a flick on his backhand which is the best in the history of the game. Concerning what you said about the french open there is a simple explanation for that. Nadal is LEFT-HANDED. That makes all the difference, coupled with the fact that he's forehand is one of the most feared in the game. Everyones backhand breaks down against Nadal on clay lol. Thats what he does. It doesnt happen on hard or grass because the rallies are shorter, hence Roger leading Nadal on grass and hard h2h.

The bottom line is its Roger's weakest shot but it's still one of the best one-handers in the history of the game, you need to come to terms with that fact. If you want to see a flawed back-hand then look at Pete's. Now there you have some technical problems. Roger's backhand is technically perfect. Also Roger will be around for a long time still. He will win about 18 slams, so the young guns will just have to wait. Pete's record is all but gone, it's just a question of by how much Roger wil brake it. Expect a good year from Roger in 2009...

:lol:

leng jai
12-18-2008, 11:59 PM
Those who think Fed's backhand is weak need to rewatch the 06 TMC semis or some of the 07 AO :angel: :)

Yeah, his backhand was awesome in that tournament. I like how you don't cite the mountain of matches where his backhand has been frame central.

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 12:08 AM
:lol:

Safin has more talent then Roger i believe, therefor he is a hopeless underachiever.

Arkulari
12-19-2008, 02:15 AM
Roger's weakest shot in comparison with the rest of his game, just like Rafa's serve is the weakest part of his in comparison with his own game

every player has a weak shot, no matter how good they are (Roger and Rafa are the best and yet still they aren't perfect :shrug: )

tons of players would kill just to have 10% of the talent of these guys ;)

Safin is a great player, but talent-wise, maybe only Fat Dave on fire has the same level as Roger, that guy is actually the biggest underachiever of this era, at least Marat has gotten GS while FD hasn't ;)

Burrow
12-19-2008, 02:19 AM
Safin has more talent then Roger i believe, therefor he is a hopeless underachiever.

than

And what does Safin have to do with this?

Ps. you're blogs are fucking shit.

LinkMage
12-19-2008, 03:34 AM
Fed's BH was very good, not so much now. He shanks lots of balls.

Serenidad
12-19-2008, 03:43 AM
Every player has a weakness. Federer's backhand may not be as bad as people on MTF make it out to be, but all players have something that isn't as good as the others EVEN IF everything is above average. Obviously the tactic against Federer wouldn't be to constantly hit to his forehand unless it was 2008. (:tape:) In truth, any 1HBH is going to have trouble with Nadal's constant loopers to their backhand over five sets on clay. Federer's backhand is the weakest part of his game. That doesn't mean it is bad. If you take the best shots of any players of your choosing you are still going to have something that has to be the worst of the best or the best of the worst.

chammer44
12-19-2008, 04:09 AM
than

And what does Safin have to do with this?

Ps. you're blogs are fucking shit.

Oh no! He didn't.

Going after the blogs.

Now that's low. :haha:

Naranoc
12-19-2008, 04:33 AM
Safin has more talent then Roger i believe, therefor he is a hopeless underachiever.

than

...

Ps. you're blogs are fucking shit.

lol

Classic burrow post.

FedFan_2007
12-19-2008, 05:01 AM
Up until 2007 Dubai, his rally backhand was excellent, then suddenly it went to shit against Canas and never recovered. I only saw it return into top form very briefly against Nalbandian at Monte Carlo, in the 2nd/3rd sets it was functioning very good.

FedFan_2007
12-19-2008, 05:08 AM
An rare example of Roger's backhand really being on in 2008:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVPMRFoh_yE

bokehlicious
12-19-2008, 06:40 AM
Yeah, his backhand was awesome in that tournament. I like how you don't cite the mountain of matches where his backhand has been frame central.

Just as much as I like how you haters never cite those (moutain) of matches where his mackhand was clearly amongst the best one-handers ever. :)

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 08:07 AM
Just as much as I like how you haters never cite those (moutain) of matches where his mackhand was clearly amongst the best one-handers ever. :)

:rolls::rolls::rolls:

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 08:14 AM
than

And what does Safin have to do with this?

Ps. you're blogs are fucking shit.

Yes it would be shit to Fed haters. I say it again, Marat is a hopeless waste of talent. :devil:

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 08:23 AM
Oh no! He didn't.

Going after the blogs.

Now that's low. :haha:

Lol i dont mind. I love my blog thats all that matters haha. But of course you would expect someone who hardly knows a thing about tennis to say that. :shrug::haha:

bokehlicious
12-19-2008, 08:26 AM
Lol i dont mind. I love my blog thats all that matters haha. But of course you would expect someone who hardly knows a thing about tennis to say that. :shrug::haha:

As a Fedfan get prepared to have your whole family criticized and bad mouthed, at first it's shocking but pretty easy to get used to it :shrug: :D :hug:

leng jai
12-19-2008, 08:26 AM
Just as much as I like how you haters never cite those (moutain) of matches where his mackhand was clearly amongst the best one-handers ever. :)

So I'm a fed hater because I don't think he has the greatest backhand ever? We don't cite the mountain of matches because they don't exist. You're delusional if you think they do. Federer wins matches with his serve and forehand, not because he has a great backhand. Its a good shot but nothing more, and it has broken down countless times during his losses.

bokehlicious
12-19-2008, 08:31 AM
So I'm a fed hater because I don't think he has the greatest backhand ever? We don't cite the mountain of matches because they don't exist. You're delusional if you think they do. Federer wins matches with his serve and forehand, not because he has a great backhand. Its a good shot but nothing more, and it has broken down countless times during his losses.

You're a delusional Haas fanboy :shrug:, no wonder you seem so sensitive when it comes to backhands, time for you to face it, even though the bh is Haas' best shot it remains average at best and certainly not amongst the current 10 best one handers on tour :shrug: :awww: :hug: :D

finishingmove
12-19-2008, 08:43 AM
fed's backhand sucks nowadays, that's pretty obvious

leng jai
12-19-2008, 09:35 AM
You're a delusional Haas fanboy :shrug:, no wonder you seem so sensitive when it comes to backhands, time for you to face it, even though the bh is Haas' best shot it remains average at best and certainly not amongst the current 10 best one handers on tour :shrug: :awww: :hug: :D

Yeah I'm a delusional Haas fanboy who voted for Kuerten in the poll. At least I'm not like you who plays the huge victim in every Federer thread and making out like its so hard being a Fedtard :rolleyes:

Myrre
12-19-2008, 04:03 PM
Consistency is overrated. When you always hit topspin, then your opponent knows what to expect and is ready to deal with it. Variety is the important thing. Federer mixes up his backhand so that his opponents never knows what's coming. That's why Federer's backhand is great! He's got good topspin, can drive thru it when he wants and he's got the best slice in the game. It's mostly on high bouncing courts he has trouble, but so do most one-handers.

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 05:07 PM
Consistency is overrated. When you always hit topspin, then your opponent knows what to expect and is ready to deal with it. Variety is the important thing. Federer mixes up his backhand so that his opponents never knows what's coming. That's why Federer's backhand is great! He's got good topspin, can drive thru it when he wants and he's got the best slice in the game. It's mostly on high bouncing courts he has trouble, but so do most one-handers.

Nuff said.:cool:

Burrow
12-19-2008, 07:58 PM
Yes it would be shit to Fed haters. I say it again, Marat is a hopeless waste of talent. :devil:

I like Roger Federer and Safin has nothing to do with this, yet again.

You're 30 and writing blogs about Federer, sad.

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 08:42 PM
I like Roger Federer and Safin has nothing to do with this, yet again.

You're 30 and writing blogs about Federer, sad.

At least i post my age, your probably 11 years old by the looks of things.

Ozone
12-19-2008, 08:50 PM
Consistency is overrated. When you always hit topspin, then your opponent knows what to expect and is ready to deal with it. Variety is the important thing. Federer mixes up his backhand so that his opponents never knows what's coming. That's why Federer's backhand is great! He's got good topspin, can drive thru it when he wants and he's got the best slice in the game. It's mostly on high bouncing courts he has trouble, but so do most one-handers.

EXACTLY RIGHT! I don't understand why anyone can hate Fed in the 1st place. Anyways, people think his backhand is average just because compared to his top world-class game, you may not get into as much trouble when you hit to his backhand. I think Roger's backhand is beautiful and one of the bests because he changes paces and stays on the offense with it. Sure he frames a few probably because of the different surfaces and the one-hander. REMEMBER MATCH POINT FOR RAFA IN THE 4TH SET BREAKER OF WIMBLEDON WHEN HE HIT A HEAVY BALL TO ROGER'S BACK HAND? ROGER HAS GREAT CONTROL AND GREAT KNOWLEDGE WITH HIS BACKHAND.

octatennis
12-19-2008, 09:42 PM
that mug backhand took 3 roland garros titles out of him. it a wuzzy shot

Matt01
12-19-2008, 09:59 PM
that mug backhand took 3 roland garros titles out of him.


No, that was Rafa :p

octatennis
12-19-2008, 10:01 PM
that's true rafa is better.

Igaarg
12-19-2008, 10:26 PM
that's true rafa is better.

:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::h aha::haha::haha::haha:

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 10:40 PM
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::h aha::haha::haha::haha:

lol that was so funny

FedFan_2007
12-19-2008, 11:22 PM
Federer should have won 2006, 2007 French and 2008 Wimbledon because with the way Murray is getting MUCH stronger his window for winning slams may just have slammed shut.

ORGASMATRON
12-19-2008, 11:35 PM
Federer should have won 2006, 2007 French and 2008 Wimbledon because with the way Murray is getting MUCH stronger his window for winning slams may just have slammed shut.

Nah Fed will win many more slams.

benny1234
12-20-2008, 12:21 AM
Fed will probably win more grand slams but he will never be as dominant as was a couple of years ago. Check out http://newballspleaseblog.blogspot.com/ , looks to be a good new Australian tennis blog

Burrow
12-20-2008, 12:29 AM
At least i post my age, your probably 11 years old by the looks of things.

Probably.

And that makes things for you even worse. 30 years old and writing blogs on tennis that nobody even views.

ORGASMATRON
12-20-2008, 08:37 AM
Probably.

And that makes things for you even worse. 30 years old and writing blogs on tennis that nobody even views.

Nah that makes things great. Who cares who views my blog im having fun doing it as a hobby lol. At least i have an opinion that im putting out there, but i guess you cant expect the same from an 11 year old :baby:

bokehlicious
12-20-2008, 08:41 AM
Ruanz, you blogs are fine :yeah: no wonder haters had to jump on them :rolleyes: since they're lacking arguments as usual... ;)

ORGASMATRON
12-20-2008, 09:24 AM
Ruanz, you blogs are fine :yeah: no wonder haters had to jump on them :rolleyes: since they're lacking arguments as usual... ;)

:smooch: Yeah im gona have a lot of fun with this blog because all the haters are waiting to jump on Roger as he gets older, so i will make sure to keep reminding them who is the greatest off all time :devil:

manuel84
12-20-2008, 12:19 PM
http://newballspleaseblog.blogspot.com

Reminds me of that off-color ad campaign.lol Feddy the greatest player of the New Balls Please era.

Burrow
12-20-2008, 01:51 PM
Wouldn't you just love to be 11 years old again? You're on the downward. You're 30 and can't even spell, ring pirate.

ORGASMATRON
12-20-2008, 03:12 PM
Wouldn't you just love to be 11 years old again? You're on the downward. You're 30 and can't even spell, ring pirate.

Haha i love this. Actually i would not love to be 11 again, i was way too ignorant back then :baby:

theDreamer
12-20-2008, 05:33 PM
Ok...
If there is still room for sensible discussion on this thread, here goes...

I just thought of something - Maybe it's not so much that his technique on the rally backhand
is poor, maybe the problem is that he tries to take the ball so early (he takes his groundstrokes
very early, like agassi did), plus he uses so much topspin?
- using topspin requires good timing, and taking the ball early requires more good timing,
so the combination must require near perfect timing.
- this would explain the frames and mishits since any slight mistake in the timing would result in bad shots
(People who take the ball early, like Agassi, tend to hit flatter).
Any thoughts?

ORGASMATRON
12-20-2008, 06:08 PM
Ok...
If there is still room for sensible discussion on this thread, here goes...

I just thought of something - Maybe it's not so much that his technique on the rally backhand
is poor, maybe the problem is that he tries to take the ball so early (he takes his groundstrokes
very early, like agassi did), plus he uses so much topspin?
- using topspin requires good timing, and taking the ball early requires more good timing,
so the combination must require near perfect timing.
- this would explain the frames and mishits since any slight mistake in the timing would result in bad shots
(People who take the ball early, like Agassi, tend to hit flatter).
Any thoughts?

Well i dont think he frames the ball a lot on his backhand thats probably just haters talking. The only time he ever really gets in trouble on his backhand is against Nadal on clay which will pretty much happen to everyone. About hitting with a lot of topspin i dont think thats necessarily the case, and besides the flatter you hit the ball the more timing you need, not the other way around. I think everyone here knows Roger has a really good backhand which he can change up with the slice as well, they are just looking to find fault with him. But to be honest there isnt any cracks in his game, he is complete.

Burrow
12-20-2008, 08:19 PM
Haha i love this. Actually i would not love to be 11 again, i was way too ignorant back then :baby:

Not much has changed either.

octatennis
12-20-2008, 09:43 PM
Haha i love this. Actually i would not love to be 11 again, i was way too ignorant back then :baby:


the weird thing is that you are still an ignorant.

wcr
12-20-2008, 11:43 PM
Roger's got the greatest all court game since Laver, but in the last two years I have noticed that he is pulling up on his backhand--both with his slice, drive, and topspin.

His preparation is awesome: great shoulder turn, and great footwork going into the shot. But on the point of contact he stops his forward body movement and stands upright, in effect bunting the ball.

It would be great to see him take the ball a little more out in front, lean more into the court, and extend his follow through out towards the opposite court, thereby driving through the ball. The result woud be that the ball stays on stings longer increasing his consistency, and increasing the ball's zip on the other side.

A small criticism of a player that has mastered ever shot in the book at the highest level of play.

moon language
12-21-2008, 12:11 AM
Federer doesn't even have the best Swiss single handed backhand. It's still much more than adequate though and capable of the odd spectacular shot once in a while if he's able to get set up perfectly.

Bernard Black
12-21-2008, 01:14 AM
Not much has changed either.

You can do better than pick on new members, Burrow.

ruanz33 is putting his point across more eloquently than you have in over two years of posting on this board so you should try and take some pointers.

Burrow
12-21-2008, 01:45 AM
You can do better than pick on new members, Burrow.

ruanz33 is putting his point across more eloquently than you have in over two years of posting on this board so you should try and take some pointers.

Have you even read this thread?

"Pick on new members" :spit:

You're nothing but a boring butt kisser.

Theirs absolutely nothing wrong and offensive about my first post in here.

ORGASMATRON
12-21-2008, 09:28 AM
You can do better than pick on new members, Burrow.

ruanz33 is putting his point across more eloquently than you have in over two years of posting on this board so you should try and take some pointers.

:haha:

bokehlicious
12-21-2008, 09:29 AM
Theirs absolutely nothing wrong and offensive about my first post in here.

There's ;) :o

ORGASMATRON
12-21-2008, 09:38 AM
There's ;) :o

LOL and he's telling me i can't spell! Burrows you are losing it mate, much like your hero :banghead::baby:

Spes
12-21-2008, 11:35 AM
I'd wager even Bacsinszky has a better Swiss backhand than Fed.

FSRteam
12-21-2008, 12:36 PM
Well, you must don't understand my message in that thread. Read it sloooowly: Djokovic's shots from the left and from the right side are pretty equal. Federer has far far better FH than BH; Nadal in the same situation as well but it's not a topic.

A typical tactics from an opponent going to play Fed: hit backhand, no where else but backhand. That's why this shot by Fed seems to be a weak part of his game. Actually, it really is. He is playing tennis of 199x-2003 right now, succesfully playing just because of an ultimate talent. Weak BH? YES, his backhand is weak, no any other top player plays one-handed BH, it is a way of shot that goes to history. Watch Federer, if you don't do it now, he might be the last player to have the beautiest sort of backhand ever.

jan silva is coming soon... ;)

ORGASMATRON
12-21-2008, 12:46 PM
I'd wager even Bacsinszky has a better Swiss backhand than Fed.

I cant believe some of the things im seeing here. A guy ive never even heard of has a better backhand then Fed??? :confused:

anon57
12-21-2008, 12:52 PM
I cant believe some of the things im seeing here. A guy ive never even heard of has a better backhand then Fed??? :confused:
:secret:It's entirely possible you've never heard of that guy as I think that poster was referring to Timea Bacsinszky, who plays on the WTA tour;)

ORGASMATRON
12-21-2008, 01:03 PM
Ok thanks for clearing that up now i know the post was a joke.

FSRteam
12-21-2008, 01:10 PM
However, timea has a double-handed bh... :)

Spes
12-21-2008, 01:26 PM
I cant believe some of the things im seeing here. A guy ive never even heard of has a better backhand then Fed??? :confused:

Even worse, Bacsinszky is a woman.

You should really be a bit more open-minded when browsing through MTF. Half of the things said here are filled with sarcasm and attempted wit so don't take it at face value. ;)

Welcome to the board.

Spes
12-21-2008, 01:26 PM
However, timea has a double-handed bh... :)

Which makes it automatically better.

ORGASMATRON
12-21-2008, 02:37 PM
Which makes it automatically better.

I know two hand backhand is probably better but i still like the classic one hand. Call me old school but i think its a harder shot to perfect and looks better.

peterparker
12-21-2008, 04:19 PM
jan silva is coming soon... ;)

that's true jan silva does have a better single handed backhand than federer. good post!

ORGASMATRON
12-22-2008, 01:54 PM
To be honest the fun with Roger's career is now only starting, its now the time when he will brake Pete's record. Proving that hes the greatest off all time. This is not a bump, i promise.

manuel84
12-22-2008, 02:49 PM
but i still like the classic one hand. Call me old school but i think its a harder shot to perfect and looks better.

My own initial attempts at the 1hbh were pretty good but I lost my touch on the 2nd day of training.lol I now use an open-stance 2hbh.

ORGASMATRON
12-22-2008, 06:30 PM
My own initial attempts at the 1hbh were pretty good but I lost my touch on the 2nd day of training.lol I now use an open-stance 2hbh.

Thanks for supporting my point. I always had a kind of obsession with a 1hbh, i guess its cos i watched edberg, lendl and becker at that point playing at wimby. So curiously enough i started with a 1hbh, i never had a 2hbh, ever. I remeber hitting my first one hand backhand against the wall of our house with a wooden raquet lol.

Stefwhit
12-22-2008, 10:23 PM
I'm starting from scratch with my backhand and abandoning my 2hbh. I usually go back and forth between my slice and my two-handed backhand, but now I'm adopting a topspin backhand- cuz I honestly do think it's one the coolest shots in all of tennis.

With all that said it still has its limitations. When it comes to Fed's bckhnd Rafa does a great job of turning what otherwise would be a weapon for Fed, into a liability. Although Fed's backhand is above average it's still his weakest shot and the shot players generally have the best shot of breaking down.

ORGASMATRON
12-23-2008, 12:00 AM
I'm starting from scratch with my backhand and abandoning my 2hbh. I usually go back and forth between my slice and my two-handed backhand, but now I'm adopting a topspin backhand- cuz I honestly do think it's one the coolest shots in all of tennis.

With all that said it still has its limitations. When it comes to Fed's bckhnd Rafa does a great job of turning what otherwise would be a weapon for Fed, into a liability. Although Fed's backhand is above average it's still his weakest shot and the shot players generally have the best shot of breaking down.

Cool nice to see someone feel the same as me, 1hbh is awesome. I think you summed up very well Federer's bh as well. ;)

Matt01
12-29-2008, 01:43 PM
To be honest the fun with Roger's career is now only starting


Fun = Decline.

Dougie
12-29-2008, 03:48 PM
Cool nice to see someone feel the same as me, 1hbh is awesome. I think you summed up very well Federer's bh as well. ;)

Yup, itīs a great shot, I have a one-hander as well. Itīs such a classic, beautiful shot, Iīve always liked players who use it well, like Edberg, Rafter, Haas, just to name a few. Personally I think itīs a more useful and versatile shot than a double-hander, but thatīs just my opinion, and that kind of discussion is pointless without Clay Death.

ORGASMATRON
12-29-2008, 04:30 PM
Yup, itīs a great shot, I have a one-hander as well. Itīs such a classic, beautiful shot, Iīve always liked players who use it well, like Edberg, Rafter, Haas, just to name a few. Personally I think itīs a more useful and versatile shot than a double-hander, but thatīs just my opinion, and that kind of discussion is pointless without Clay Death.

Well if you have the kind of flick that Roger has on his backhand then its certainly a more versatile shot. Roger with a two-hander would have sucked lol.

CyBorg
12-30-2008, 05:21 AM
Well, obviously the highlights of Roger's backhand show all the good shots. In his worse matches, Roger's backhand often deserted him. Badly. But I notice that his backhand improved quite a bit in recent months. Early in the year it was at times woeful.

LEGENDOFTENNIS
05-06-2009, 04:28 PM
Yes, it may not be as good as it WAS but in its day it was a thing of beauty. Too many people think just because his backhand sucks now, it hasn't always sucked...

Check out this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqG-PpP7H0s Roger Federer in his prime vs Richard Gasquet on grass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PzApmLdI5E&feature=related Federer vs Blake in Shanghai, his backhand was ON FIRE this whole tournament, check out all the other matches in this tournament.

He isn't as powerful and as fit as he was in the past which is why his forehand isn't as lethal or his backhand isn't as consistent and that he can't his amazing winners at will anymore.

Roddickominator
05-06-2009, 04:38 PM
Fed is crushing Gasquet on backhand-to-backhand rallies in that vid....goes to show that when he's playing confidently...his one-hander is up there with anyone's. We may not see those days again.

Certinfy
05-06-2009, 04:40 PM
Nice thread this :)... Shows Fed's backhand is/was superb

miura
05-06-2009, 04:40 PM
Yeah I remember Shanghai 2006 well. Roger played amazing the whole tourney. Unfortunately his backhand of late is as broken as a poorly made coo-coo clock :rolleyes:

habibko
05-06-2009, 04:46 PM
in his prime, Federer's backhand was "the lesser of two evils" as Agassi put it very accurately, however it is liable to more and more UEs and shorts balls when Fed is not high on confidence, which started to show in 2008, and since most of MTF started watching tennis in 2008 it has a bad reputation.

in his prime, it was, is and will always be the best single hander of all time.

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 04:47 PM
Yeah I remember Shanghai 2006 well. Roger played amazing the whole tourney. Unfortunately his backhand of late is as broken as a poorly made coo-coo clock :rolleyes:

So true. It was very good, but it seems it's meeting its maker right now. :(

Commander Data
05-06-2009, 04:59 PM
I think Rogers BH gets too much bashing. Yes it is the reason he gets spanked by Nadal time and time again cause he can't handel those heavy top spins. but besides that I honestly don't think his problem is his BH.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 05:06 PM
I think Rogers BH gets too much bashing. Yes it is the reason he gets spanked by Nadal time and time again cause he can't handel those heavy top spins. but besides that I honestly don't think his problem is his BH.

I remember their match at Shanghai 06 very well, Federer's BH stood up flawlessly in that match and made for some spectacular tennis, perhaps the best quality of all their matches in fact.

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 05:09 PM
I think Rogers BH gets too much bashing. Yes it is the reason he gets spanked by Nadal time and time again cause he can't handel those heavy top spins. but besides that I honestly don't think his problem is his BH.

I agree with you on that... his problem is for 90% or more between his ears right now.

I remember their match at Shanghai 06 very well, Federer's BH stood up flawlessly in that match and made for some spectacular tennis, perhaps the best quality of all their matches in fact.

That was indeed one of the last matches Roger played when his BH clicked all during the match. Problem is that Roger's BH has lost its former consistency, just like his serve nowadays.

Burrow
05-06-2009, 05:12 PM
the problem right now isnt his backhand, it's his forehand, when you lose your biggest strength, it has a huge impact, although his backhand obviously is worse.

habibko
05-06-2009, 05:15 PM
I remember their match at Shanghai 06 very well, Federer's BH stood up flawlessly in that match and made for some spectacular tennis, perhaps the best quality of all their matches in fact.

and the same exact match happened in 2007 as well, with even more convincing win from Federer, the reason is the indoor surface of Shanghai not taking Nadal's topspin very well, therefore his forehand goes into Federer's backhand hitting zone and he punishes Nadal, there were actually many rallies were Federer's backhand outhitted Nadal's forehand, tells you enough about how good it is/was.

Babolat - Dan
05-06-2009, 05:15 PM
Fair play his backhand in the clips is amazing. To be fair, Gasquet has a good bhand too.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 05:18 PM
and the same exact match happened in 2007 as well, with even more convincing win from Federer, the reason is the indoor surface of Shanghai not taking Nadal's topspin very well, therefore his forehand goes into Federer's backhand hitting zone and he punishes Nadal, there were actually many rallies were Federer's backhand outhitted Nadal's forehand, tells you enough about how good it is/was.

In 2007 I don't think Nadal was nearly as sharp as he was in their match the previous year, but I agree that Federer was certainly amazing there. The 06 semi was one of the few times when they've both played brilliant tennis against each other pretty much the whole match.

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 05:21 PM
In 2007 I don't think Nadal was nearly as sharp as he was in their match the previous year, but I agree that Federer was certainly amazing there. The 06 semi was one of the few times when they've both played brilliant tennis against each other pretty much the whole match.

Absolutely true, and that's why I think that match was indeed a lot better than that so-called 'best ever' Wimbly final of 2008. :rolleyes:

habibko
05-06-2009, 05:23 PM
The 06 semi was one of the few times when they've both played brilliant tennis against each other pretty much the whole match.

it also happened in Rome 2006, Federer's backhand was also supreme there, and that match is a proof that Federer's backhand can take Nadal on clay as well in his best of days for a long period of time, it was at the climax of his prime years, a player's game and abilities should be judged in his best years not his worst, that's the mistake some posters around here are doing most of the time.

Commander Data
05-06-2009, 05:34 PM
Absolutely true, and that's why I think that match was indeed a lot better than that so-called 'best ever' Wimbly final of 2008. :rolleyes:

I agree, the quality is debatable but you must also take into consideration the circumstances of the match, the emtions envolved, the history beforehand etc. as well as the dramatic of the match going over the full distance and deciding basically who is no. 1. All happening at the most prestigious tournament. It was a tipping point.


This puts it up there IMO.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 05:34 PM
Absolutely true, and that's why I think that match was indeed a lot better than that so-called 'best ever' Wimbly final of 2008. :rolleyes:

The thing with that match is there is so much going on other than the quality of play that elevates it, the stage, the players, the circumstances, the rain, the light, the length, some of the shotmaking etc... I have no problem with people labelling it "best ever" for that reason. However you are right, I've rewatched the match a few times recently and the first 3 sets weren't anything to write home about. If Nadal had secured the break points at 3-3 and make a straight set job of it it wouldn't have been a well regarded final. The end of the fourth and fifth sets were quite something at times though.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 05:36 PM
it also happened in Rome 2006, Federer's backhand was also supreme there, and that match is a proof that Federer's backhand can take Nadal on clay as well in his best of days for a long period of time, it was at the climax of his prime years, a player's game and abilities should be judged in his best years not his worst, that's the mistake some posters around here are doing most of the time.

Yep, that one and Dubai 2006 aswell I think. 2006 was a good year for the "rivalry" :D

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 05:37 PM
I agree, the quality is debatable but you must also take into consideration the circumstances of the match, the emtions envolved, the history beforehand etc. as well as the dramatic of the match going over the full distance and deciding basically who is no. 1. All happening at the most prestigious tournament. It was a tipping point.

This puts it up there IMO.

I agree with you on that, of course, the circumstances are to be taken into account as well. And of course, the fact that Wimbly 2008 match was an absolute 'Change of the Guard' event, is a very important reason why it got all of the hype that it did. Still, on mere TENNIS QUALITY, Shanghai 2006, as well as Miami 2005 and Rome 2006, were much better matches where indeed both players played at their best level for the majority of the match.
Can't be said of Wimbly 2008 imho...

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 05:40 PM
Yep, that one and Dubai 2006 aswell I think. 2006 was a good year for the "rivalry" :D

yeah, where have those good days gone... :sad: :sad: :sad:
That was a fantastic year indeed.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 05:42 PM
I must say I rewatched Miami 05 aswell Karin and... Federer was terrible in the first, and Nadal was non existent in the 5th. But the 2nd and 3rd sets were quality :D

Sunset of Age
05-06-2009, 05:48 PM
I must say I rewatched Miami 05 aswell Karin and... Federer was terrible in the first, and Nadal was non existent in the 5th. But the 2nd and 3rd sets were quality :D

Yeah true. That one is debatable as well. Guess the gorgeous post-match scenes between the two of them blurred my vision a bit too much... :hearts: :inlove: :lol: ;)

BTW, good posting from you overall! :yeah:

prima donna
05-06-2009, 07:17 PM
I must say I rewatched Miami 05 aswell Karin and... Federer was terrible in the first, and Nadal was non existent in the 5th. But the 2nd and 3rd sets were quality :D
So much for the 4th set.

rofe
05-06-2009, 07:34 PM
the problem right now isnt his backhand, it's his forehand, when you lose your biggest strength, it has a huge impact, although his backhand obviously is worse.

I agree that his confidence shot is his FH and if he is able to find his FH again, his BH will follow automatically.

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 07:42 PM
So much for the 4th set.

:lol: The 4th set was fine, but hardly great quality either.

Johnny Groove
05-06-2009, 07:52 PM
in his prime, Federer's backhand was "the lesser of two evils" as Agassi put it very accurately, however it is liable to more and more UEs and shorts balls when Fed is not high on confidence, which started to show in 2008, and since most of MTF started watching tennis in 2008 it has a bad reputation.

in his prime, it was, is and will always be the best single hander of all time.

Let's not get too carried away here. Federer's entire game was basically unstoppable for years, and that included his backhand. Some of the shots he was able to pull off with it in those days were crazy.

Nowadays, though, its a shot that breaks down in rallies. He can still hit some nice passing shots off it from time to time, though.

prima donna
05-06-2009, 08:01 PM
Federer's entire game was basically unstoppable for years, and that included his backhand .
In that case, you agree with habibko's original point.

prima donna
05-06-2009, 08:03 PM
:lol: The 4th set was fine, but hardly great quality either.
Any set that Nadal loses is low quality by definition.

Clydey
05-06-2009, 08:12 PM
Those are highlight videos. You can make Roddick's backhand look good in a highlight video. It cuts out the errors and the short balls and shows all the best parts. That isn't an accurate reflection of Federer's backhand.

Kiedis
05-06-2009, 08:12 PM
Federer backhand was and still is very good when ball bounce low and/or going without much effect. At Wimby we will see Rogers backhand in all its glory again

rafa_maniac
05-06-2009, 08:15 PM
Any set that Nadal loses is low quality by definition.

Which is why I said the 1st set was poor quality, and the 3rd set was great quality :retard: Stop stirring.

Johnny Groove
05-06-2009, 08:20 PM
In that case, you agree with habibko's original point.

His backhand was part of the unstoppable game. That doesn't mean it was the greatest one hander of all time.

habibko
05-06-2009, 08:32 PM
His backhand was part of the unstoppable game. That doesn't mean it was the greatest one hander of all time.

people often make that mistake because all other parts of his game like his forehand were on such a supremely high level, let me explain this in another way: say that on a scale of 10 (1= poor, 10 = perfect) the level of all player's forehand ranged between 6-7 and their single handed backhand ranged between 5-6, Federer's backhand is 8/10 and his forehand is 9/10, so even though his backhand isn't in the same level of other components of his game it still is way better than other single handers.

star
05-06-2009, 08:33 PM
in his prime, Federer's backhand was "the lesser of two evils" as Agassi put it very accurately, however it is liable to more and more UEs and shorts balls when Fed is not high on confidence, which started to show in 2008, and since most of MTF started watching tennis in 2008 it has a bad reputation.

in his prime, it was, is and will always be the best single hander of all time.

So, this makes me wonder when you started watching tennis. Federer's backhand was good, but the greatest single hander of all time?

I watched Kuerten pummel Federer's backhand in March 2003, the year Federer first won Wimbledon -- arguably when Federer was entering his prime. He did the same in 2004 at RG winning in straight sets. And, it must be remembered, Guga was far from his prime in 2003 and 2004. He never played a full schedule those years and was debilitated from hip surgery and continued pain when he played.

I did think during that match that I was watching two beautiful backhands though. :)

habibko
05-06-2009, 08:41 PM
So, this makes me wonder when you started watching tennis. Federer's backhand was good, but the greatest single hander of all time?

I watched Kuerten pummel Federer's backhand in March 2003, the year Federer first won Wimbledon -- arguably when Federer was entering his prime. He did the same in 2004 at RG winning in straight sets. And, it must be remembered, Guga was far from his prime in 2003 and 2004. He never played a full schedule those years and was debilitated from hip surgery and continued pain when he played.

I did think during that match that I was watching two beautiful backhands though. :)

yeah but as you said that wasn't Federer at his prime, there is no single hander that can be compared with Federer's 2004/06 backhand.

Kuerten among others had a very reliable and consistent backhand, but the level, variety of shots and angles that Federer was able to produce under extreme pressure day in and day out were unrivaled.

and let's not forget that a backhand is not only a topspin shot, who can dispute the fact that Federer has the best slice backhand ever? not even his biggest haters can.

star
05-06-2009, 09:10 PM
yeah but as you said that wasn't Federer at his prime, there is no single hander that can be compared with Federer's 2004/06 backhand.

Kuerten among others had a very reliable and consistent backhand, but the level, variety of shots and angles that Federer was able to produce under extreme pressure day in and day out were unrivaled.

and let's not forget that a backhand is not only a topspin shot, who can dispute the fact that Federer has the best slice backhand ever? not even his biggest haters can.

Maybe you missed that Kuerten beat Federer in straigt sets in 2004. I only said that in 2003 Federer was arguably entering his prime. In 2004, he had entered his prime.

Greatest slice backhand ever? Now that's a step down from greatest one hand backhand ever. I think when you say "best ever" you put a lot of pressure on your argument because you ignore other eras and other playing styles. When people actually played serve and volley tennis on grass there were a lot of people slicing backhands all the time to approach the net and they were doing it not only with one hand but with wooden racquets too.

It's enough to say that Federer's backhand served him well and that for a period of time his game was impregnable allowing him to accumlate a record that will be difficult for anyone to rival.

habibko
05-06-2009, 09:23 PM
Maybe you missed that Kuerten beat Federer in straigt sets in 2004. I only said that in 2003 Federer was arguably entering his prime. In 2004, he had entered his prime.

Greatest slice backhand ever? Now that's a step down from greatest one hand backhand ever. I think when you say "best ever" you put a lot of pressure on your argument because you ignore other eras and other playing styles. When people actually played serve and volley tennis on grass there were a lot of people slicing backhands all the time to approach the net and they were doing it not only with one hand but with wooden racquets too.

so what if he lost to Kuerten? he lost to Gasquet in 2005, does that mean Gasquet has a better forehand or even backhand? having a better game and more superior strokes doesn't mean you will win the match.

what about players with wooden racquets? did they have a better backhand? how can you tell that? it's impossible to compare such different eras like that, I'm talking about the modern game.

It's enough to say that Federer's backhand served him well and that for a period of time his game was impregnable allowing him to accumlate a record that will be difficult for anyone to rival.

that would be a clear understatement.

LEGENDOFTENNIS
05-06-2009, 09:37 PM
Kuerten beat Federer on Federers least favourite surface and at the time federer admitted he didn't know how to slide properly on clay + Federer of 2006/2007 would have beaten the legendary Kuerten on that day in 2004.

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 12:59 AM
in his prime, Federer's backhand was "the lesser of two evils" as Agassi put it very accurately, however it is liable to more and more UEs and shorts balls when Fed is not high on confidence, which started to show in 2008, and since most of MTF started watching tennis in 2008 it has a bad reputation.

in his prime, it was, is and will always be the best single hander of all time.

I respect and admire your contribution here habibko, I really do, but this is just not true. In his prime, Fed's backhand was very good, but still not in the top five all time. Hell, I even have my doubts it was in the top ten.

luie
05-07-2009, 01:12 AM
Those are highlight videos. You can make Roddick's backhand look good in a highlight video. It cuts out the errors and the short balls and shows all the best parts. That isn't an accurate reflection of Federer's backhand.
Relax clydey I'am sure when murray reaches 30 years there will be enough footage of him hitting amazing shot to fill a 5 minutes slot (maybe). Back on topic Federer has a good Bh if it doesn't hold against nadal neither is Fakervic & Murray @ least on clay.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 01:14 AM
Federer has an awesome BH, the racist haters are just looking for anything to get back at me for all the years of awesome torture Roger has inflicted on them. Good to see!

habibko
05-07-2009, 01:16 AM
I respect and admire your contribution here habibko, I really do, but this is just not true. In his prime, Fed's backhand was very good, but still not in the top five all time. Hell, I even have my doubts it was in the top ten.

let's agree to disagree then :)

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 01:50 AM
let's agree to disagree then :)

Let us. :)

philosophicalarf
05-07-2009, 03:09 AM
Check out this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqG-PpP7H0s Roger Federer in his prime vs Richard Gasquet on grass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PzApmLdI5E&feature=related


Makes you wonder why he wants to play on - must pain him to be at his current level. Fed 05/06 is so far superior to Fed08/09 it's silly.

heya
05-07-2009, 09:54 AM
Fed 05/06 is so far superior to Fed08/09 it's silly.
Nothing's wrong with Federer and Murray losing because of their lack of imagination. Nadal and Roddick aren't the best runners, but they can simplify their best shots and don't need to hit the edge of sidelines to win. They don't need dozens of unforced errors from opponents...unlike Federer and Murray.

Clydey
05-07-2009, 11:57 AM
Relax clydey I'am sure when murray reaches 30 years there will be enough footage of him hitting amazing shot to fill a 5 minutes slot (maybe). Back on topic Federer has a good Bh if it doesn't hold against nadal neither is Fakervic & Murray @ least on clay.

Nobody mentioned Murray, so stay on topic.

Clydey
05-07-2009, 11:58 AM
Nothing's wrong with Federer and Murray losing because of their lack of imagination. Nadal and Roddick aren't the best runners, but they can simplify their best shots and don't need to hit the edge of sidelines to win. They don't need dozens of unforced errors from opponents...unlike Federer and Murray.

I'm assuming that you're being sarcastic?

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:09 PM
I respect and admire your contribution here habibko, I really do, but this is just not true. In his prime, Fed's backhand was very good, but still not in the top five all time. Hell, I even have my doubts it was in the top ten.

He doesn't have the best one in Switzerland.

groundstroke
05-07-2009, 03:16 PM
Action Jackson blabbering on with his uneducated mind again - who takes the risks of reading this fool's posts? They could cause brain damage - there is that much stupidity in them.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:24 PM
Action Jackson blabbering on with his uneducated mind again - who takes the risks of reading this fool's posts? They could cause brain damage - there is that much stupidity in them.

Sampras must have a better backhand than Federer, you might work it out.

groundstroke
05-07-2009, 03:26 PM
Sampras must have a better backhand than Federer, you might work it out.

Why do you post at all? You offer no contribution - no help and no positive comments to anything, get a life - you have 88 000 posts. :rolleyes:

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 03:26 PM
He doesn't have the best one in Switzerland.

Right now? He certainly doesn't.

Fumus
05-07-2009, 03:29 PM
Sampras must have a better backhand than Federer, you might work it out.

I think that famous Davis cup rubber proved it. Also, when Sampras beat Muster at RG...what a match. Federer could never do that with his shotty backhand.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:35 PM
Why do you post at all? You offer no contribution - no help and no positive comments to anything, get a life - you have 88 000 posts. :rolleyes:

Why does Federer have a better backhand than Wawrinka? Come on genius, actually construct an argument as to why this isn't the case.

The classic you have so many posts thing, got to do better than that, try and see past your Federer worship, darling.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 03:40 PM
Why does Federer have a better backhand than Wawrinka? Come on genius, actually construct an argument as to why this isn't the case.

The classic you have so many posts thing, got to do better than that, try and see past your Federer worship, darling.

Wawrinka has a better BH then Fed, so does Gasquet and so does anyone whose one hand BH is their better shot. Who else is there these days?

Federer's BH was an incredible shot considering it was not his best shot.

groundstroke
05-07-2009, 03:43 PM
Why does Federer have a better backhand than Wawrinka? Come on genius, actually construct an argument as to why this isn't the case.

The classic you have so many posts thing, got to do better than that, try and see past your Federer worship, darling.

Haha you are absolutely kidding me, despite my dislike for Frauderer, you are an idiot for thinking that Wawrinka's backhand is better than Federer's, seriously your posts give MTF a bad image - most people here are 13 or 12 so their lack of tennis knowledge can be excused, but you're what.. 30 years old and you still offer no contribution, why do you still post here?

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:48 PM
Right now? He certainly doesn't.

I was watching Fed and Corretja from RG 2001. The commentator then made a comment about Fed's BH, along the lines that technically his backhand was the safer shot, while the forehand more dangerous was more likely to go off.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:50 PM
Wawrinka has a better BH then Fed, so does Gasquet and so does anyone whose one hand BH is their better shot. Who else is there these days?

Federer's BH was an incredible shot considering it was not his best shot.

That's pretty much it.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 03:52 PM
Haha you are absolutely kidding me, despite my dislike for Frauderer, you are an idiot for thinking that Wawrinka's backhand is better than Federer's, seriously your posts give MTF a bad image - most people here are 13 or 12 so their lack of tennis knowledge can be excused, but you're what.. 30 years old and you still offer no contribution, why do you still post here?

In other words, you can't answer the original question. You got off the Federer horse, when was this, when he started losing more matches.

No, you are the idiot, because you aren't intelligent or competent enough to present reasons as to why Federer has a better backhand than Wawrinka. If it's so easy, then answer the question.

habibko
05-07-2009, 03:58 PM
Wawrinka has a better backhand than Federer? seriously GWH....

he might have a more consistent topspin rally shot, and that's all, there is no backhand in the past or present like Federer's backhand at his prime, in defense or offense, the angles, pace and variation of spin and placement were unrivaled, right now many backhands are more reliable than Fed's backhand, even a blind can see that.

rocketassist
05-07-2009, 04:00 PM
On a clay court, Stan's backhand has the edge.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 04:02 PM
Wawrinka has a better backhand than Federer? seriously GWH....

he might have a more consistent topspin rally shot, and that's all, there is no backhand in the past or present like Federer's backhand at his prime, in defense or offense, the angles, pace and variation of spin and placement were unrivaled, right now many backhands are more reliable than Fed's backhand, even a blind can see that.

No past or present Laver, Rosewall and Kuerten better ones than Fed. If you can't hit decent and consistent topspin on the backhand side, then it can't be considered among the best, because that is the stock standard and then everything else works from there.

habibko
05-07-2009, 04:07 PM
No past or present Laver, Rosewall and Kuerten better ones than Fed. If you can't hit decent and consistent topspin on the backhand side, then it can't be considered among the best, because that is the stock standard and then everything else works from there.


yeah sure it's perfectly sound to compare strokes with wooden racquets with the modern pace of the game.

Kuerten's backhand is impressive and consistent, but I'd still give Federer the edge just by the fact that it was not only consistent but he has the edge in variation, slice and volleys, nto to mention his backhand's innate talent shown in block returns and half volleys.

I'm talking about the backhand of Federer at his prime, this is how you evaluate players, we don't judge Sampras's game by his 2002 game, you make him sound like he never was able to hit a topspin backhand consistently, was Rome 2006 or Hamburg 2007 a fluke then?

hitting a single-handed backhand consistently against Nadal's forehand topspin on clay is the ultimate challenge for the single handers, and Federer proved to be successful in it more than once.

Matt01
05-07-2009, 04:10 PM
Wawrinka has a better backhand than Federer? seriously GWH....

he might have a more consistent topspin rally shot, and that's all, there is no backhand in the past or present like Federer's backhand at his prime, in defense or offense, the angles, pace and variation of spin and placement were unrivaled, right now many backhands are more reliable than Fed's backhand, even a blind can see that.


I think we are talking abou the present and not the past :rolleyes:

And right now Wawrinka has a much better BH than Fed.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 04:12 PM
Haha you are absolutely kidding me, despite my dislike for Frauderer, you are an idiot for thinking that Wawrinka's backhand is better than Federer's, seriously your posts give MTF a bad image - most people here are 13 or 12 so their lack of tennis knowledge can be excused, but you're what.. 30 years old and you still offer no contribution, why do you still post here?

Why are you so nasty? You dont even say why Stans BH is worse then Feds!

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 04:17 PM
No past or present Laver, Rosewall and Kuerten better ones than Fed. If you can't hit decent and consistent topspin on the backhand side, then it can't be considered among the best, because that is the stock standard and then everything else works from there.

The reason why Stan and Gasquets BH is better then Fed is cos it is their best shot and will never fall apart like Feds BH did. The fact that his BH fell apart means that there were cracks and they got exposed, however small they were. Gas and Stan have no cracks in their BH, its rock solid.

Someone like Habiko is way too clueless to see this.

Fumus
05-07-2009, 04:25 PM
I like it when those people who know nothing about tennis but love one player argue hopelessly with those that have a wealth of knowledge about tennis and are completely apathetic about most players. Truly this is an intriguing battle of logic versus emotion. I equate it to similar arguments that I've had with women that I've been in relationships with. It's like trying to reason with a black bear. The bear wants to eat you, that's all it wants.

habibko
05-07-2009, 04:27 PM
The reason why Stan and Gasquets BH is better then Fed is cos it is their best shot and will never fall apart like Feds BH did. The fact that his BH fell apart means that there were cracks and they got exposed, however small they were. Gas and Stan have no cracks in their BH, its rock solid.

Someone like Habiko is way too clueless to see this.

Ok here is what you miss. Federer's bachand seems weak to you because the rest of his game is so good. Many top playes would love to have his backhand plus he has a flick on his backhand which is the best in the history of the game. Concerning what you said about the french open there is a simple explanation for that. Nadal is LEFT-HANDED. That makes all the difference, coupled with the fact that he's forehand is one of the most feared in the game. Everyones backhand breaks down against Nadal on clay lol. Thats what he does. It doesnt happen on hard or grass because the rallies are shorter, hence Roger leading Nadal on grass and hard h2h.

The bottom line is its Roger's weakest shot but it's still one of the best one-handers in the history of the game, you need to come to terms with that fact. If you want to see a flawed back-hand then look at Pete's. Now there you have some technical problems. Roger's backhand is technically perfect. Also Roger will be around for a long time still. He will win about 18 slams, so the young guns will just have to wait. Pete's record is all but gone, it's just a question of by how much Roger wil brake it. Expect a good year from Roger in 2009...


so much for consistency, what will you start saying tomorrow? Federer has a shitty backhand and it never was good? :haha:

:retard:

Benny_Maths
05-07-2009, 04:32 PM
The 'flick'.:worship::D

aferlo
05-07-2009, 04:32 PM
Relativelly speaking, his backhand is the weakest part of his game, specially when he has to hit it over his waist. But that desnīt mean it is a bad hit, and Federer has produced some of the best shots you can imagine from the BH over the years.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 04:36 PM
so much for consistency, what will you start saying tomorrow? Federer has a shitty backhand and it never was good? :haha:

:retard:

Dont try to make excuses for the fact that you are hopelessly clueless when it comes to tennis. There is no inconsistency there but you wouldnt see that.

Now go follow something that your one brain cell can undertand. Something like jogging.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 04:37 PM
The 'flick'.:worship::D

:hearts: :worship: That part of his BH is the best of all time, although ive never seen Laver play much. I doubt he had that though.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 04:41 PM
Why are you so nasty? You dont even say why Stans BH is worse then Feds!

He is just an arse clown and has been over time. The reason is, because he has no thoughts.

The reason why Stan and Gasquets BH is better then Fed is cos it is their best shot and will never fall apart like Feds BH did. The fact that his BH fell apart means that there were cracks and they got exposed, however small they were. Gas and Stan have no cracks in their BH, its rock solid.

Someone like Habiko is way too clueless to see this.

I mean if a player can't handle heavy topspin on the backhand side, then it shouldn't be close to the best. Wawrinka's BH, yes he has a shit slice, but at least he can handle balls from waist to shoulder high comfortably.

Habib, just loves Federer, he'd say Fed would have the best dropshot.

I like it when those people who know nothing about tennis but love one player argue hopelessly with those that have a wealth of knowledge about tennis and are completely apathetic about most players. Truly this is an intriguing battle of logic versus emotion. I equate it to similar arguments that I've had with women that I've been in relationships with. It's like trying to reason with a black bear. The bear wants to eat you, that's all it wants.

Hahahaha, I like that analogy.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 04:44 PM
yeah sure it's perfectly sound to compare strokes with wooden racquets with the modern pace of the game.

Kuerten's backhand is impressive and consistent, but I'd still give Federer the edge just by the fact that it was not only consistent but he has the edge in variation, slice and volleys, nto to mention his backhand's innate talent shown in block returns and half volleys.

I'm talking about the backhand of Federer at his prime, this is how you evaluate players, we don't judge Sampras's game by his 2002 game, you make him sound like he never was able to hit a topspin backhand consistently, was Rome 2006 or Hamburg 2007 a fluke then?

hitting a single-handed backhand consistently against Nadal's forehand topspin on clay is the ultimate challenge for the single handers, and Federer proved to be successful in it more than once.

Corretja was better on the backhand side than Federer at his prime, you didn't see him shitting himself seeing a ball near his shoulders. He isn't even top 10 of all time, let alone best single hander in the world at the moment.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 04:48 PM
I mean if a player can't handle heavy topspin on the backhand side, then it shouldn't be close to the best. Wawrinka's BH, yes he has a shit slice, but at least he can handle balls from waist to shoulder high comfortably.

Habib, just loves Federer, he'd say Fed would have the best dropshot.



Well i am mostly referring to the drive BH which is the stock shot. When it comes to slice no one comes close to Fed. Same goes for the flick, the man has got scary touch.

Fed does have a great touch on the drop shot.

Fumus
05-07-2009, 04:48 PM
Dont try to make excuses for the fact that you are hopelessly clueless when it comes to tennis. There is no inconsistency there but you wouldnt see that.

Now go follow something that your one brain cell can undertand. Something like jogging.

ORGASMO, that's being a bit harsh. I mean not having knowledge on something as complicated as tennis is a lot different than being stupid. It's just, well, you know, you have to watch tennis, play tennis, be around tennis for many years to understand it's nuances and more importantly create arguments to defend your POV and stuff. I will say this though to say any one player has a better anything than anyone else is unprovable by design. That's because it's an opinion. I doubt you'll have Volandri fans insisting he doesn't have a weak serve but if they said it wasn't weak because he never DFs and holds a relatively high percentage of service games, say his serving wasn't weak would be hard to argue. That's because everyone holds a different opinion of what a "strong" or "good" shot is. Is it one that wins you tons of points outright on shear pace and spin alone? Is it a great setup shot? Is it one that never makes errors? So on and so forth...

Basically, you can always argue something subjective that isn't based on fact. NIN NIN NIN NIN ;)

habibko
05-07-2009, 04:54 PM
Habib, just loves Federer, he'd say Fed would have the best dropshot.

at least the most aesthetically pleasing drop shot ever :o but it also might be the best dropshot ever, even Koenig agrees:

x6Bsgk5tu5M

Corretja was better on the backhand side than Federer at his prime, you didn't see him shitting himself seeing a ball near his shoulders. He isn't even top 10 of all time, let alone best single hander in the world at the moment.

it's quite a shame we can't settle this dispute in an objective way, I wish there was a gauge to measure the level of a specific stroke to compare, I'm sure Federer would have won by a safe margin.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 05:03 PM
at least the most aesthetically pleasing drop shot ever :o but it also might be the best dropshot ever, even Koenig agrees:

x6Bsgk5tu5M



it's quite a shame we can't settle this dispute in an objective way, I wish there was a gauge to measure the level of a specific stroke to compare, I'm sure Federer would have won by a safe margin.

Highlight packages are easy to make players look good. Watch Fed against Guga at RG, Mantilla and Costa in Rome, then you will see shanks everywhere and he couldn't handle the shots from these guys, so naturally Nadal increases the intensity from these guys and he still struggles on that side.

Corretja could slice, his topspin drive and he could hit backhand down the line winners consistently.

There is no way at all, when I see the guy shit his points with "the Rafa don't hurt me" with the forehand drive to his backhand.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 05:05 PM
ORGASMO, that's being a bit harsh. I mean not having knowledge on something as complicated as tennis is a lot different than being stupid. It's just, well, you know, you have to watch tennis, play tennis, be around tennis for many years to understand it's nuances and more importantly create arguments to defend your POV and stuff. I will say this though to say any one player has a better anything than anyone else is unprovable by design. That's because it's an opinion. I doubt you'll have Volandri fans insisting he doesn't have a weak serve but if they said it wasn't weak because he never DFs and holds a relatively high percentage of service games, say his serving wasn't weak would be hard to argue. That's because everyone holds a different opinion of what a "strong" or "good" shot is. Is it one that wins you tons of points outright on shear pace and spin alone? Is it a great setup shot? Is it one that never makes errors? So on and so forth...

Basically, you can always argue something subjective that isn't based on fact. NIN NIN NIN NIN ;)

If you see the racist attacks this hater has directed towards me you wouldnt call it harsh. But i stand by my point, i think the troll is clueless when it comes to tennis. If he hasnt been following tennis for a long time then he shouldnt expect me to take him seriously. But i agree with alot of what you said. People find it hard to stay objective, they tend to let their emotions get the better of them. But i dont agree that you cant make a good argument for something. For instance i know Fed has one of the best slices and BH flicks of all time. There isnt much of a question in my mind about it. And its not like im emotional, im a Fedfan yet im saying Stan and Gas have better one handed drives then Fed. If the troll thinks Fed has the best one handed drive of all time he is either clueless or emotional. Both are equally bad in my books.

NIN :cool:

Jimnik
05-07-2009, 05:11 PM
This one was easy to find.

4vrojpBD2iU&hl

Wouldn't be surprised if the producer was one of our own resident Fedtards.

prima donna
05-07-2009, 05:16 PM
Just a quick question: How is habibko's constant lobbying for Fed any different from, say, Nadal fans constantly lobbying for their man ? Would this forum be better off without fanaticism ? Sure, but in some cases, moderate fans have been transformed into extreme ones by the high volume of animus present on this forum.

Moreover, Roddick fans are culprits as well. It's just that we've all grown so accustomed to their behavior that it's been accepted as a sort of shtick. Also, some prefer bitterness to pomposity.

There's also a double-standard when it comes to dealing with certain fanbases. For example, Nadal fans are allowed to get away with nonsensical arguments that have no basis in tennis fact, yet even the slightest error commited by a Federer fan elicits personal attacks. I'm not sure why this is so, maybe Federer fans are held to a higher standard ?

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 05:20 PM
This one was easy to find.

4vrojpBD2iU&hl

Wouldn't be surprised if the producer was one of our own resident Fedtards.

See OP.

Jimnik
05-07-2009, 05:21 PM
See OP.
Did you make it?

Better to embed the videos. :p

habibko
05-07-2009, 05:29 PM
Just a quick question: How is habibko's constant lobbying for Fed any different from, say, Nadal fans constantly lobbying for their man ? Would this forum be better off without fanaticism ? Sure, but in some cases, moderate fans have been transformed into extreme ones by the high volume of animus present on this forum.

Moreover, Roddick fans are culprits as well. It's just that we've all grown so accustomed to their behavior that it's been accepted as a sort of shtick. Also, some prefer bitterness to pomposity.

There's also a double-standard when it comes to dealing with certain fanbases. For example, Nadal fans are allowed to get away with nonsensical arguments that have no basis in tennis fact, yet even the slightest error commited by a Federer fan elicits personal attacks. I'm not sure why this is so, maybe Federer fans are held to a higher standard ?

I have never presumed that what I say is the absolute truth, it's my opinion, and I'm not even the only one who have it, many non-Federer fans also agree with me, and many Federer fans disagree with me.

I wouldn't care less about personal attacks really, I don't live through internet so it hardly bothers me, I have the right to express my views and opinion in the forums and everyone is free to agree or disagree.

MacTheKnife
05-07-2009, 05:36 PM
I will say this though to say any one player has a better anything than anyone else is unprovable by design. That's because it's an opinion. I doubt you'll have Volandri fans insisting he doesn't have a weak serve but if they said it wasn't weak because he never DFs and holds a relatively high percentage of service games, say his serving wasn't weak would be hard to argue. That's because everyone holds a different opinion of what a "strong" or "good" shot is. Is it one that wins you tons of points outright on shear pace and spin alone? Is it a great setup shot? Is it one that never makes errors? So on and so forth...

Basically, you can always argue something subjective that isn't based on fact. NIN NIN NIN NIN ;)

The most sensible post I've read on here in a long time. Arguing which stroke is better is like arguing who's better sexually. There are those that are obviously horrible, but once you reach a certain level, it's all simply a matter of opinions and perspective. I wish there were some objective criterion to evaluate individual strokes, but until then, it's simply my opinion's right and your sucks. Same kind of shit that goes on around the swing set.

prima donna
05-07-2009, 05:41 PM
I wouldn't care less about personal attacks really, I don't live through internet so it hardly bothers me.
It's not so much a question of caring or not caring about personal attacks, but rather that personal attacks tend to divert meaningful discussion. There's something bothersome about the tendency to personalize debates, so that tennis is no longer the focal point. Too many emotions involved for my liking ? Perhaps so, then again we've always had posters who prefer to follow the ad hominem route.

I mean, being berated by the average MTFer isn't exactly the same thing as reading a delightful poster like Sjengster. Things change, I suppose.

MacTheKnife
05-07-2009, 05:46 PM
Oh and I forgot, my opinion on the Fed-Wawrinka discussion is that Wawrinka's BH is a a little more technically sound that Federer's, but if I wanted someone to hit a BH for me down match point, I'd take Federer's all day long.

Fumus
05-07-2009, 05:47 PM
If you see the racist attacks this hater has directed towards me you wouldnt call it harsh. But i stand by my point, i think the troll is clueless when it comes to tennis. If he hasnt been following tennis for a long time then he shouldnt expect me to take him seriously. But i agree with alot of what you said. People find it hard to stay objective, they tend to let their emotions get the better of them. But i dont agree that you cant make a good argument for something. For instance i know Fed has one of the best slices and BH flicks of all time. There isnt much of a question in my mind about it. And its not like im emotional, im a Fedfan yet im saying Stan and Gas have better one handed drives then Fed. If the troll thinks Fed has the best one handed drive of all time he is either clueless or emotional. Both are equally bad in my books.

NIN :cool:

I didn't know about the racist remarks. I was just reading from a few pages back and I was enjoying it. I'm not gonna argue with you about backhands. As we both know your entitled to your opinion.

But NIN rules, that's fact. :cool:

Just a quick question: How is habibko's constant lobbying for Fed any different from, say, Nadal fans constantly lobbying for their man ? Would this forum be better off without fanaticism ? Sure, but in some cases, moderate fans have been transformed into extreme ones by the high volume of animus present on this forum.

Moreover, Roddick fans are culprits as well. It's just that we've all grown so accustomed to their behavior that it's been accepted as a sort of shtick. Also, some prefer bitterness to pomposity.

There's also a double-standard when it comes to dealing with certain fanbases. For example, Nadal fans are allowed to get away with nonsensical arguments that have no basis in tennis fact, yet even the slightest error commited by a Federer fan elicits personal attacks. I'm not sure why this is so, maybe Federer fans are held to a higher standard ?

Huh? There's no double-standards in bullshit. There's bullshit and there's bullshit. Sometimes people believe the bullshit. That's the only difference. Personal attacks are the result of posters believing in said bullshit. It's cyclical really.

The most sensible post I've read on here in a long time. Arguing which stroke is better is like arguing who's better sexually. There are those that are obviously horrible, but once you reach a certain level, it's all simply a matter of opinions and perspective. I wish there were some objective criterion to evaluate individual strokes, but until then, it's simply my opinion's right and your sucks. Same kind of shit that goes on around the swing set.


Mac you know me, I'm a sensible guy. Beer and Wings. What else is new?

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 05:52 PM
I was watching Fed and Corretja from RG 2001. The commentator then made a comment about Fed's BH, along the lines that technically his backhand was the safer shot, while the forehand more dangerous was more likely to go off.

That's another point: technically there's no problem at all with Fed's backhand. It's a very textbook shot, and aesthetically pleasing if you ask me. But that doesn't make it good automatically.

yeah sure it's perfectly sound to compare strokes with wooden racquets with the modern pace of the game.

It is, as long as you don't create an imaginary match where Laver would play with his wooden racket against Federer with his graphite one. That would be pretty pointless.

hitting a single-handed backhand consistently against Nadal's forehand topspin on clay is the ultimate challenge for the single handers, and Federer proved to be successful in it more than once.

Well, not that successful, was it? ;)

I think we are talking abou the present and not the past :rolleyes:

And right now Wawrinka has a much better BH than Fed.

Exactly.

I like it when those people who know nothing about tennis but love one player argue hopelessly with those that have a wealth of knowledge about tennis and are completely apathetic about most players. Truly this is an intriguing battle of logic versus emotion. I equate it to similar arguments that I've had with women that I've been in relationships with. It's like trying to reason with a black bear. The bear wants to eat you, that's all it wants.

:haha: Me thinks sig worthy. May I Sir? :)

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 05:56 PM
Habibko and others, I recommend you to watch the 1969 Wimbledon semifinal between Laver and Arthur Ashe. Backhands were being hit at apalling speed and accuracy by both players, especially by Laver after the first set. Both topspin and sliced. Absolutely incredible for those times and rackets. The funny thing is, none of those two players posessed the best backhand of the circuit back then.

Fumus
05-07-2009, 05:59 PM
:haha: Me thinks sig worthy. May I Sir? :)

I think it's something everyone who's posted on MTF for long enough knows, so because of that many might find it redundant. But I'd be honored.

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 06:16 PM
I think it's something everyone who's posted on MTF for long enough knows, so because of that many might find it redundant. But I'd be honored.

Oh it's not so much because of the point that I want it in my sig, but more because I find the exposition pretty funny. :yeah:

Fumus
05-07-2009, 06:20 PM
Oh it's not so much because of the point that I want it in my sig, but more because I find the exposition pretty funny. :yeah:

haha, well as I said, ya know, I'd be honored.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 06:23 PM
Did you make it?

Better to embed the videos. :p

I know, i made the post when i was a newbie.

habibko
05-07-2009, 06:27 PM
Well, not that successful, was it? ;)

who was that successful then? since Nadal established himself in the scene, Federer is the only single hander player who defeated Nadal on clay and had match points against him in a best of 5 sets match on clay, tell me Gasquet or Wawrinka had that much success with Nadal and I will believe you.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 06:28 PM
I didn't know about the racist remarks. I was just reading from a few pages back and I was enjoying it. I'm not gonna argue with you about backhands. As we both know your entitled to your opinion.

But NIN rules, that's fact. :cool:



You seem like one of the few sensible posters arond here :)

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 06:30 PM
who was that successful then? since Nadal established himself in the scene, Federer is the only single hander player who defeated Nadal on clay and had match points against him in a best of 5 sets match on clay, tell me Gasquet or Wawrinka had that much success with Nadal and I will believe you.

Stop forgetting that Wawrinka and Gasquet lack in other areas to trouble Nadal, it's not because of their backhands that they lose to him.

Har-Tru
05-07-2009, 06:35 PM
who was that successful then? since Nadal established himself in the scene, Federer is the only single hander player who defeated Nadal on clay and had match points against him in a best of 5 sets match on clay, tell me Gasquet or Wawrinka had that much success with Nadal and I will believe you.

And Federer did that by running around his forehand to hit one winning backhand after another?

I thought this was a discussion about Federer's BH, not about who among him, Gasquet or Wawrinka is best or most succesful against Nadal.


EDIT: AJ you meddler.

habibko
05-07-2009, 06:37 PM
Stop forgetting that Wawrinka and Gasquet lack in other areas to trouble Nadal, it's not because of their backhands that they lose to him.

I didn't forget, I conveniently left that part out.

but still if they had a much better backhand then it would compensate for their other weak parts of the game no? how can they be superior to Federer in such an important aspect of their game yet their results are what they are?

I guess your argument would be that all other parts of Federer's game are too good and that's why, but that is not good enough, if his backhand was such a weakness he wouldn't have any kind of success against the likes of Nadal, and if that was the case you would have had a point.

wow I must be so bored to keep arguing about Fed's backhand for like 3 hours :rolleyes:

Fumus
05-07-2009, 06:40 PM
Stop forgetting that Wawrinka and Gasquet lack in other areas to trouble Nadal, it's not because of their backhands that they lose to him.

Did you say they were "lacking the balls"? Or sumtin like that?

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 06:41 PM
I didn't forget, I conveniently left that part out.

but still if they had a much better backhand then it would compensate for their other weak parts of the game no? how can they be superior to Federer in such an important aspect of their game yet their results are what they are?

I guess your argument would be that all other parts of Federer's game are too good and that's why, but that is not good enough, if his backhand was such a weakness he wouldn't have any kind of success against the likes of Nadal, and if that was the case you would have had a point.

wow I must be so bored to keep arguing about Fed's backhand for like 3 hours :rolleyes:

Who is the better player out of those 3? That is clear enough, the rest of the stuff doesn't need answering because it's clearly obvious. To propagate the myth has a great backhand, by using other examples of quality BH's that haven't had success against Nadal, when other areas of their games aren't as good as Federer.

Yes, you are bored.

Action Jackson
05-07-2009, 06:42 PM
Did you say they were "lacking the balls"? Or sumtin like that?

Gasquet doesn't have the balls and Wawrinka doesn't have the shot selection.

habibko
05-07-2009, 06:47 PM
Yes, you are bored.

affirmative :rolls:

Fumus
05-07-2009, 07:13 PM
Gasquet doesn't have the balls and Wawrinka doesn't have the shot selection.

I think tactics are an issue for both players actually.

luie
05-07-2009, 10:47 PM
Nobody mentioned Murray, so stay on topic.
I think Murray deserved honorable mention.:)

FedFan_2007
05-07-2009, 11:04 PM
ruanz - you signature just keeps getting worse and worse. please leave MTF now and forever.

ORGASMATRON
05-07-2009, 11:08 PM
ruanz - you signature just keeps getting worse and worse. please leave MTF now and forever.

You first.

andreevforehand
05-07-2009, 11:44 PM
...

hitting a single-handed backhand consistently against Nadal's forehand topspin on clay is the ultimate challenge for the single handers, and Federer proved to be successful in it more than once.

No he hasn't. And as an aside, obviously Federer has a nice backhand as far as 1 handers are concerned, but in my opinion with the amount of pace and spin on the ball these days, any 1 hander is a weakness, especially on deep balls and/or in prolonged rallys. Yes even Gasquet's. Although it's very pretty, he still has to stand about 8 feet behind the baseline and have time to take a huge backswing if he wants to get any pace on the ball. It's just a simple matter of physics. Trying to generate pace/stability on the left side of your body with the arm on the right side of your body is never going to be as effective as using both arms.

BaselineSmash
05-07-2009, 11:53 PM
Much as it will pain him, I suspect Fed will have to teach his child to play with a two-handed backhand.

theDreamer
05-08-2009, 08:46 AM
Oh and I forgot, my opinion on the Fed-Wawrinka discussion is that Wawrinka's BH is a a little more technically sound that Federer's, but if I wanted someone to hit a BH for me down match point, I'd take Federer's all day long.

:worship::worship:

Action Jackson
05-08-2009, 08:55 AM
I think tactics are an issue for both players actually.

Gasquet doesn't believe he can beat Nadal, so that doesn't help and the forehand isn't up to it.

Well Wawrinka, tactical acumen isn't his strong point.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 08:58 AM
Gasquet doesn't believe he can beat Nadal, so that doesn't help and the forehand isn't up to it.

Well Wawrinka, tactical acumen isn't his strong point.

I think you have Gas And Stan confused, Stan is a master tactician. He's one a the few layers who thinks out there.

Action Jackson
05-08-2009, 09:24 AM
I think you have Gas And Stan confused, Stan is a master tactician. He's one a the few layers who thinks out there.

Far from it, unless you are trying to flame me.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 09:58 AM
Far from it, unless you are trying to flame me.

Lol! No im not flaming you, i think Stan does think out there. Ask anyone. Gas is the mindless ballbasher.

Action Jackson
05-08-2009, 10:17 AM
Lol! No im not flaming you, i think Stan does think out there. Ask anyone. Gas is the mindless ballbasher.

You are flaming me if you think that, Wawrinka is not a thinker on court, he fights hard yes, but tactical acumen, then Stepanek has the best forehand in the game. If you have tactical acumen, then shot selection under pressure is very good and this does not cover Wawrinka.

This isn't about Gasquet, I am far from a fan of his, considering he had nothing to do at all with the point that I raised, if I raise a point to him, then I will do it directly.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 10:23 AM
You are flaming me if you think that, Wawrinka is not a thinker on court, he fights hard yes, but tactical acumen, then Stepanek has the best forehand in the game. If you have tactical acumen, then shot selection under pressure is very good and this does not cover Wawrinka.

This isn't about Gasquet, I am far from a fan of his, considering he had nothing to do at all with the point that I raised, if I raise a point to him, then I will do it directly.

Lol. Ok im not gonna argue with you, we are all entitled to our opinion.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 11:05 AM
I think Fed is right up there taking his slice into account, because it may be the best sice. But guys like Gas and Stan have more solid drives.

Chiseller
05-08-2009, 01:24 PM
When Fed's backhand is in the zone, it can win him so many more points than Stan's.
Sure, it was never as solid as Stan's but that does not mean it's worse.

Fumus
05-08-2009, 02:40 PM
Gasquet doesn't believe he can beat Nadal, so that doesn't help and the forehand isn't up to it.

Well Wawrinka, tactical acumen isn't his strong point.

Gasquet is lost mentally, it's been that way for awhile. I'm not sure if his game will ever click. I thought after he beat Roddick at Wimbledon that could have been a turning point but perhaps it is just that he lacks the belief that he can beat the best players in the world.

I don't argue that out of the two he(Gasquet) needs more points to confidence than tactical point construction. I just think Gasquet point in and point out can lose the plot. He tries difficult shots and attempts low percentage plays when he could just be playing steadier less flashy tennis. A player like Wawrinka with fewer options just tries harder with less. Both players (Stan and Richard) however do not select the correct shots under pressure and don't exactly employ the best game plan against the world's best. Especially on surfaces other than clay.

So as I said, tactics are an issue for both players.

You are flaming me if you think that, Wawrinka is not a thinker on court, he fights hard yes, but tactical acumen, then Stepanek has the best forehand in the game. If you have tactical acumen, then shot selection under pressure is very good and this does not cover Wawrinka.

This isn't about Gasquet, I am far from a fan of his, considering he had nothing to do at all with the point that I raised, if I raise a point to him, then I will do it directly.

Agreed.

heya
05-08-2009, 10:06 PM
As we all know, a long arm with one-handed backhand automatically makes the player beautiful. It also makes him the top 3 player right now, and he never got lucky. The greatest gentleman of all time. Wawrinka beat Federer with a one-handed backhand, so he is one of the top 3 brainiest on clay, then! Oh yes, no doubt, I'm a 20 year old boy.

Steelq
05-08-2009, 10:28 PM
nBAjWOhykNI

moon language
05-08-2009, 10:56 PM
backhand fail youtube clip

:lol:

heya
05-08-2009, 11:47 PM
Only Nadal beat him.

Paris clay contributed to the Mono and crippling back injury in Paris....on hardcourts.

groundstroke
05-13-2009, 11:07 PM
In other words, you can't answer the original question. You got off the Federer horse, when was this, when he started losing more matches.

No, you are the idiot, because you aren't intelligent or competent enough to present reasons as to why Federer has a better backhand than Wawrinka. If it's so easy, then answer the question.

Federer has won 13 Grand Slams and over 60 titles, his backhand has contributes to that, without his backhand he would have won no titles, he has a top-class backhand and you are a fool not to see that.

Wawrinka may hit with more power and pull back the racket more for more topspin/flat, but in terms of volleying, drop shot, passing shots, over head smashes, Federer's backhand is much better than Wawrinka's - naturally you didn't notice this because you have no knowledge of tennis.

I was "never" on the Federer horse, never been one to go on a band wagon on a player, I make an opinion about a player and stick to it - I've always disliked Nadal, him being #1 now or being #3 a few years back? Same - he is a repulsive tennis player.

Wawrinka has a better backhand than Federer? seriously GWH....

he might have a more consistent topspin rally shot, and that's all, there is no backhand in the past or present like Federer's backhand at his prime, in defense or offense, the angles, pace and variation of spin and placement were unrivaled, right now many backhands are more reliable than Fed's backhand, even a blind can see that.

top-class post here.. and you havent even mentioned about federer's backhand volleys, which have helped him win so many matches where his baseline game looked dead

No past or present Laver, Rosewall and Kuerten better ones than Fed. If you can't hit decent and consistent topspin on the backhand side, then it can't be considered among the best, because that is the stock standard and then everything else works from there.

you would be a fool to assume that federer cannot do this

and rosewall's backhand? he hit slice 99% of the time, rarely did he hit with decent topspin - does that mean that his backhand sucked? no - you are such a hypocrite...

Kuerten? his backhand was good on clay where the ball is slow and he can really wind back his shoulders and let rip that unorthodox backhand, but on fast hard court? his backhand wasn't that good, often he wouldnt be able to rip it or hit a great backhand as the ball was moving too fast for him to fully unwind.

yeah sure it's perfectly sound to compare strokes with wooden racquets with the modern pace of the game.

Kuerten's backhand is impressive and consistent, but I'd still give Federer the edge just by the fact that it was not only consistent but he has the edge in variation, slice and volleys, nto to mention his backhand's innate talent shown in block returns and half volleys.

I'm talking about the backhand of Federer at his prime, this is how you evaluate players, we don't judge Sampras's game by his 2002 game, you make him sound like he never was able to hit a topspin backhand consistently, was Rome 2006 or Hamburg 2007 a fluke then?

hitting a single-handed backhand consistently against Nadal's forehand topspin on clay is the ultimate challenge for the single handers, and Federer proved to be successful in it more than once.

it isnt just doing this, whenever nadal plays gasquet, his high-loop forehand to gasquet's backhand rarely ever works and gasquet wins about 90% of the points when nadal tries one of those forehands, it's about nadal's overall game and his mental strength..

The reason why Stan and Gasquets BH is better then Fed is cos it is their best shot and will never fall apart like Feds BH did. The fact that his BH fell apart means that there were cracks and they got exposed, however small they were. Gas and Stan have no cracks in their BH, its rock solid.

Someone like Habiko is way too clueless to see this.

you're a tennis rookie but if you gasquet's backhand is so good then why does federer completely dominate him whenever he plays against him? watch videos of federer's backhand outclassing gasquet's backhand in the matches they have played against each other

didnt think of that did you rookie?

same with wawrinka, who does not have a better bh than federer, can he volley, hit good passing shots, good slice, can he hit the best overhead backhand smash? no, federer has more variety and a better backhand overall... and fed's backhand has dominated wawrinka's in the matches they have played? why? because federer's backhand doesn't rely purely on topspin, his slice, volleys.. etc, all play a part in making the supposed "weakness" in his game very hard to attack - thats why on clay often his BH goes missing against nadal, because he cannot slice or volley, he is forced to hit topspin every time.

groundstroke
05-14-2009, 12:56 PM
Whoever is watching the Blake-Federer match will have noticed in the first set just how Roger's backhand is, pretty much all of his winners are from his backhand, he's been hitting stunning cross-court angles, down-the-line winners, even coming in on Blake's first serve and ripping the backhand return.