PDA

View Full Version : pro with the best forehand technique


dherring
01-19-2009, 01:05 PM
I am curious which current male pro has the closest to "textbook" technique on there forehands.

nalbyvsfed
01-19-2009, 01:09 PM
nalbandian... perfect wiper motion. but somethimes not consistent.

BU-Tennis
01-19-2009, 01:13 PM
I think the simplicity of Andy Murray's forehand makes it very easy to imitate. Simple take back, racquet moves through the ball, and the finish is around the shoulder. His technique is very similar to Federer's but federer uses a straight arm at contact which can create some timing problems if you don't have very good footwork or racquet head speed.

Element54
01-19-2009, 02:41 PM
I think the simplicity of Andy Murray's forehand makes it very easy to imitate. Simple take back, racquet moves through the ball, and the finish is around the shoulder. His technique is very similar to Federer's but federer uses a straight arm at contact which can create some timing problems if you don't have very good footwork or racquet head speed.

I agree. He has a simply motion, nothing particular or characteristic to deem it "his" - so easier to emulate because its more textbook.

Racer41c
01-19-2009, 02:45 PM
I think the simplicity of Andy Murray's forehand makes it very easy to imitate. Simple take back, racquet moves through the ball, and the finish is around the shoulder. His technique is very similar to Federer's but federer uses a straight arm at contact which can create some timing problems if you don't have very good footwork or racquet head speed.

Agree on Murray, I think Fed's forehand is very different. He hits a lot flatter and with more pronation, not easy for the average player to imitate.

Jackie T. Stephens
01-19-2009, 02:51 PM
Lleyton Hewitt technique is simple and easy.

Element54
01-19-2009, 02:58 PM
Lleyton Hewitt technique is simple and easy.

imo huge take-back though, so would be difficult for beginners to adjust to the ball and surface

tennisguyak
01-19-2009, 02:59 PM
What about Federer. I also really like del Potro's forehand motion.

But if we are looking for the "easiest to imitate" then I would probably say Murray or Djokovic. Its hard to keep the shoulders closed as long as federer does and have the timing to hit with an eastern grip like del Potro.

Recon
01-19-2009, 03:44 PM
Just because it's the easiest doesn't mean it is textbook. But oh how quickly forgotten the talented ones are. FERNANDO VERDASCO. Smooth forehand, full extension, just beautiful. Theres the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIT3PzVlRx8

BU-Tennis
01-19-2009, 03:50 PM
Agree on Murray, I think Fed's forehand is very different. He hits a lot flatter and with more pronation, not easy for the average player to imitate.

Fed's is definitely different, its just similar in take back and how they initiate the stroke which is really where the difference in most strokes comes from as follow throughs are dictated how we start the stroke. Murray's stroke can easy be hit flatter just as Federer can hit with tremendous topspin as well. The pronation comes from the fact that he uses a straight instead of bent arm at contact.

oneguy21
01-19-2009, 03:53 PM
Why don't ya'll watch some tennis. Federer has the absolute best forehand technique. Watch his slo mo videos on youtube.

John McEnroe doesn't call it the greatest shot ever in tennis for nothing.

BU-Tennis
01-19-2009, 03:55 PM
Just because it's the easiest doesn't mean it is textbook. But oh how quickly forgotten the talented ones are. FERNANDO VERDASCO. Smooth forehand, full extension, just beautiful.

Verdasco's forehand is very similar to fed's. And fed's forehand isn't that textbook. the straight arm is very difficult to accomplish correctly and isn't used as much as a bent arm.

oneguy21
01-19-2009, 04:25 PM
Verdasco's forehand is very similar to fed's. And fed's forehand isn't that textbook. the straight arm is very difficult to accomplish correctly and isn't used as much as a bent arm.

Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.

Recon
01-19-2009, 04:34 PM
Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.

Haha, agreed. This guy is cool. lol.

[osu]ilovecows
01-19-2009, 05:27 PM
Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.


You're kidding me right? There's a major difference between textbook and best. The definition of best depends on the context. Federer's forehand may be the most effective on the tour, giving him the best forehand, but it's definitely not the best to be taught or emulated. In a way, textbook means 'least unique' if you will. Which means there's nothing quirky or out of the ordinary about their technique. Federer's forehand is DEFINITELY not ordinary. Get off your high horse.

m27
01-19-2009, 05:29 PM
Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.

Sorry, you're entirely wrong. Federer's forehand is anything but textbook.

edit: his serve, for instance, is textbook. His forehand is about as "textbook" as Roddick's serve.

BU-Tennis
01-19-2009, 05:31 PM
Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.

I didn't say Fed's forehand wasn't the best. I agree it is. But the question is which one is most textbook. If forehands were college courses, his would a 700 graduate level advanced course. Almost anyone could go out and emulate Murray's forehand and be pretty successful within an hour or less.

BullDogTennis
01-19-2009, 05:42 PM
nalbandian... perfect wiper motion. but somethimes not consistent.

obviously not textbook then..


i like fed's

dherring
01-19-2009, 05:58 PM
Ive always heard that Safin had great Technique on his forehand, Im surprised to see Murray mentioned so many times.

m27
01-19-2009, 06:05 PM
the problem with this thread is that the starter poses two distinct questions: who has the "best" forehand and who has the more "textbook" forehand. These are not the same thing.

Noveson
01-19-2009, 06:06 PM
Fed's forehand is absolutely textbook. You're wrong I'm right.

Discussion over.

Don't reply because you are wrong. Simple as that.

You don't win 13 GS titles or stay 237 consecutive weeks at number 1 w/o a textbook shot.

I'll bet you my left nut every tennis commentator out there will say Fed's forehand is the most textbook.

Why can nobody replicate Federer's forehand? I'll answer for you. Because he is more talented than all of us. And it takes the kind of amazing fluidity he has to be able to hit a forehand like that. Textbook? Not at all. No one has ever hit it like he does, so how can it be textbook? No one ever said his forehand has bad technique. Good =/= textbook. You are wrong simple as that.

Your left nut is mine now;) Anyway no reason to be such an *** about this.

dherring
01-19-2009, 06:28 PM
the problem with this thread is that the starter poses two distinct questions: who has the "best" forehand and who has the more "textbook" forehand. These are not the same thing.
I didnt ask who had the best forehand, i asked who had the best forehand technique, sorry if i wasnt being clear

Mansewerz
01-19-2009, 07:35 PM
Isn't Safin's pretty textbook. His looks similar to Murray's.

Mansewerz
01-19-2009, 07:40 PM
Safin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqhIPxVWrVw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bOEUnA90dA&feature=related
(at :50 secs on the second one)

Murray
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZZzU-VvQQk

Also, an interesting Federer Borg comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31IYa7VsZYg

jasoncho92
01-19-2009, 07:45 PM
oneguy21 is such a tool. Doesnt even know the meaning of the thread but flames others for their opinions that actually belong in this thread. But is there really a "textbook" forehand. Whether or not a pull stroke is better than a push isnt really known (although it is used more in the ATP), and im sure there are more characteristics in a forehand that are similarly unknown as to their effectiveness compared to others.

tennisguyak
01-20-2009, 04:10 AM
I still say Del Potro. I mean the guy hits with an eastern grip. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe its just classic and not textbook

phoenicks
01-20-2009, 06:39 AM
Can some 1 tell me what's the definition of a modern forehand??? Double bent technique??? straight arm??? follow through to the side of ur head??? shoulder finish??? WW swingpath??? straightening ur swingpath?? or Fanning the ball swingpath???

phoenicks
01-20-2009, 06:46 AM
I think the simplicity of Andy Murray's forehand makes it very easy to imitate. Simple take back, racquet moves through the ball, and the finish is around the shoulder. His technique is very similar to Federer's but federer uses a straight arm at contact which can create some timing problems if you don't have very good footwork or racquet head speed.

I agree with Andy Murray being the easiest to copy, because I initially Emulate my forehand after James Blake, but now I end up swinging it like Andy murray, can pull the trigger anytime I want, and my shot is very deep and with great penetration and pace. Only thing is that, it barely clears the net, hence my timing, feeling and footwark have to be exceptionally precise.

Also about federer straight arm, I hit with a straight arm, problem is, when you're exhausted from previous tennis session, your footwork and timing can be off, hence you cant create enough spacing between you and the ball to execute a straight arm FH and end up hitting with the elbow close to the body. Again the timing, footwork and feel have to be very good and precise.

Petekbladetour1
01-20-2009, 06:53 AM
I am curious which current male pro has the closest to "textbook" technique on there forehands.

djockovic by far. Also my fh looks a bit like his :-D

Petekbladetour1
01-20-2009, 06:54 AM
me fh looks a bit like davydenko and nalbandiana too

Noveson
01-20-2009, 03:37 PM
djockovic by far. Also my fh looks a bit like his :-D

Just thought I should bold that;)

Anyway Jokers is not exactly simple. Especially the takeback with the weird way he pronat...twists his wrist.

herosol
01-20-2009, 05:04 PM
nadal.....no?

Nellie
01-21-2009, 08:57 AM
I watch Djokovich as being one of the easiest of the current male pros to emulate - textbook strokes. I like Safin's a lot too. To my eye, Agassi had the best before he retired. Funny thing because I don't think that many of the newer players out of Florida look that great.

Federer's forehand is definately not a stroke I would teach (the rest of the game, however, is a different matter).

I think if you look at the Spanish academies, I think that the their players have the best "looking" strokes, especially on the two handed backhand.

Bungalo Bill
01-21-2009, 09:04 AM
the problem with this thread is that the starter poses two distinct questions: who has the "best" forehand and who has the more "textbook" forehand. These are not the same thing.

No kidding? So why would you tell everyone that Blakes backhand sucks? you posted a bunch of nonsense regarding his left and right foot and implied "he was doing it wrong."

Why would you then provide inapproritate evidence to support your "claim" which was easily rendered useless?

The main thing about strokes is to seperate the focus on what is common and review with a grian of salt what is largely style or preference.

The bottom-line is all the forehands possess common characteristics which can be viewed and analyzed.

skiracer55
01-21-2009, 10:14 AM
...ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I'm gonna put in one more vote for Andy Murray because, again, I think he's got a simple, reliable swing pattern that isn't likely to break down (result: fewer errors) and yet allows him to create a lot of different looks, have a lot of variety, which is one of the strongest aspects of Andy's game...

Jonny S&V
01-21-2009, 10:17 AM
No kidding? So why would you tell everyone that Blakes backhand sucks? you posted a bunch of nonsense regarding his left and right foot and implied "he was doing it wrong."

Why would you then provide inapproritate evidence to support your "claim" which was easily rendered useless?

The main thing about strokes is to seperate the focus on what is common and review with a grian of salt what is largely style or preference.

The bottom-line is all the forehands possess common characteristics which can be viewed and analyzed.

You don't need to troll m27, he knows that he's an idiot at times...

I personally like Safin's forehand, a little muscled but it looks "human," lol... :)

tiebraek
01-21-2009, 11:07 AM
Best FH and the more textbook...
Hard to choose between these 2 players..
Djokovic...
Davydenko

balance, control and beautiful motion!

NamRanger
01-21-2009, 11:12 AM
Davydenko is probably one of the most textbook FHs on the tour. Very simple, nothing fancy, and no extreme wiper motion.

Mansewerz
01-21-2009, 11:14 AM
You don't need to troll m27, he knows that he's an idiot at times...

I personally like Safin's forehand, a little muscled but it looks "human," lol... :)

Agreed, Safin= beast. His backhand has very good extension as well. A great backhand to emulate (it is a bit flat though, a more topspin one would be Nalbandian)

1st Seed
01-21-2009, 11:16 AM
Best ,Davenport,Gonzo

Deadly

crappyBackHand
01-21-2009, 12:04 PM
fabrice santaro

kimbahpnam
01-21-2009, 12:07 PM
yes, santoro

dherring
01-24-2009, 04:58 PM
I wouldn't think that Murray would be considered to have a "textbook" forehand, it is simple and effective but it looks kind of awkward IMO. I would think it would be somebody like Safin, personaly tho, ive always liked Davydenko. Im no expert, thats just my opinion

Noveson
01-24-2009, 11:09 PM
No kidding? So why would you tell everyone that Blakes backhand sucks? you posted a bunch of nonsense regarding his left and right foot and implied "he was doing it wrong."

Why would you then provide inapproritate evidence to support your "claim" which was easily rendered useless?

The main thing about strokes is to seperate the focus on what is common and review with a grian of salt what is largely style or preference.

The bottom-line is all the forehands possess common characteristics which can be viewed and analyzed.

No if it wasn't you, and you weren't knocking on m27, I would probably tell you off for bagging on another guy in a totally unrelated thread. But hey, what do you know:twisted:

Dreamer
01-24-2009, 11:49 PM
I would consider "textbook" as james blake or gonzalez. Rafa and Roger have the best forehands in my opinion, but their techniques are quite unique.

halalula1234
01-25-2009, 12:22 AM
retired : Steffi Graf

5263
01-25-2009, 09:03 AM
didn't read all the posts, but did anyone say Agassi?

I think his is compact, simple and high level. What more could a textbook ask for?

I guess he is not a current pro, but still plenty of vid to look and emulate.

Jackie T. Stephens
01-25-2009, 09:06 AM
I say Del Portro, very simple.

Bottle Rocket
01-25-2009, 10:29 AM
I am curious which current male pro has the closest to "textbook" technique on there forehands.

Besides the debate between the "best" and the most "textbook" forehand, I think there is something else being overlooked.

There are a lot of guys with "textbooK" forehands that are not as effective with it as they probably could be, and this is often due to footwork (or lack thereof).

Federer and Nadal, for example, do not have "textbook" forehands. In some situations, maybe, but they change their form and their swing depending on the situation. Federer makes this more obvious than Nadal as he modifies his swing more. These guys have incredible footwork, which allows them to hit some of the best forehands in the game, but you're not going to find anyone calling Nadal's forehand textbook.

The Federer/Berdych match is a decent example. Federer's inability to get out of the way of the ball and get in position (mostly due to the depth of shot by Berdych, if you ask me) was forcing Federer into all of those unforced errors off his forehand. He was doing too much with his swing without having proper footwork (obviously there was more going on here, I know). At the same time, a guy like Berdych who is normally inconsistent as hell, was moving his feet incredibly well in the first set and most of the second. That is about the best footwork you'll ever see. It was incredible what he was doing to Federer, and it was all about his feet.

I think too many people give too much credit to the shape of a players actual swing and not enough to their Footwork.

Another issue is confidence. I find that the players with the more unconventional shots, those that are not so "textbook", can start misfiring like crazy with a lack of confidence. They have more ups and downs. This has been happening to Federer a little bit recently, as an example.

As far as most "textbook" goes for the guys at the top, my pick is Djokovic. He also has incredible footwork and would probably qualify as having one of the "best" forehands as well. He does occasionally get too tentative with his forehand, but when he is aggressive, his forehand is incredible.

I am no coach or teaching pro, but I would love to hear thoughts from those that are. Am I nuts?

Bungalo Bill
01-26-2009, 08:20 AM
No if it wasn't you, and you weren't knocking on m27, I would probably tell you off for bagging on another guy in a totally unrelated thread. But hey, what do you know:twisted:

I know a lot more than you! I know that. And as far as "bagging" on me? Please do, just expect me to "bag" back. :evil:

junbug
01-26-2009, 08:22 AM
Here We Go Again!!! btw, john carpenter did say hello

Cnote
01-26-2009, 09:16 AM
I agree that Agassi had the most "textbook" forehand and that mantle has been taken up by Murray.

Bungalo Bill
01-26-2009, 09:25 AM
Here We Go Again!!! btw, john carpenter did say hello

LOL, John Carpenter? Oscar's Leutienant? Is this the same guy?

If it is, his little email trying to get me to buy into the "Father of Tennis" stuff was a laugher. It was almost as funny as the Jumpulse stuff. Not quite but almost.

junbug
01-26-2009, 10:02 AM
he did want to say hello. why do you hold such a grudge? and why is there a former in front of your title.
i agree with a lot of your teachings/insturction and i mix it up with what i learned from other instructors here.
but dude, relax. there are teaching pros here on this forum that are just as good as you. and they don't berate rookies who want to learn.

Bungalo Bill
01-26-2009, 10:38 AM
he did want to say hello. why do you hold such a grudge? and why is there a former in front of your title.

Grudge? I dont know if that is the right word. I dot have a "grudge" against him. I simply have a differing view and opinion regarding his take on "Oscar." I also laughed. Laughing is a response on something you find humorous in case you didnt know.

As far as former? It is because I dont teach on court for fee anymore. I also dont keep up my USPTA membership. I dont call teaching for free the same. I also dont call teaching here the same as well. Even though maybe I could. Maybe I shouldnt differentiate the two. Afterall, I am still teaching tennis.

i agree with a lot of your teachings/insturction and i mix it up with what i learned from other instructors here.

Absolutely, that is good. I felt John was trying to somehow justify why Oscar's way was a better way and why I should accept his idea that he is the Father of Tennis. He is not the Father of Tennis and I do not agree with everything Wegner says.

but dude, relax. there are teaching pros here on this forum that are just as good as you. and they don't berate rookies who want to learn.

Did I ever say there wasnt? Many times I have asked other coaches to respond or if I have a question to help me understand. However, I find more nonsense on this site than anything else.

Well, geee, I am also a player. If something doesnt make sense to me, or if I think it is laregely false, I cant help if they take my challenge personally.

Many times, I simply say "prove it" or this is "not true" only to find them berating me for challenging them. Do you ever say anything about that?

You need to understand something clearly, if anyone, anyone, comes on this site and speaks nonsense or about something that I find peculiar, you can bet I will challenge it. Even if they resort to name calling, bashing, belitting, slandering, discrediting, or anything else, I will continue my challenge until the nonsense they spoke about is proven as nonsense or if they end up admitting they misspoke.

Geeez, man, I cant help what I know about tennis. I suffered through the 5am workouts. Not being able to have beer, ice cream, or anything like that. I suffered through the extrenuous workouts, tough coaching, the extra push-ups, sit-ups, laps for doing something wrong. I have read all I can read about tennis, the good and the bad. I have sat down with good coaches and talked to them about what they know about certain areas (and I dont agree with everything they say). I have sat down with top junior coaches and learned. I have studied film, and have reviewed other coaching videos. I have verified things on technique and have taken the time to learn the fundamentals in a stroke.

Geeez man, I cant help it that I learned all of this stuff and challenge people when they come up with nonsense. I may not have the tact you would like me to have, but I also dont care. This is my personality like it or leave it.

You can think all you want about me. You can think I am the biggest know-it-all a-hole alive. However, one thing you can't say about me is "that I don't care."

junbug
01-26-2009, 11:59 AM
you know one day i wouldn't mind coming out to see you and show me some techniques. everybody has their unique stlye. perhaps that you can demonstrate in person.

Bungalo Bill
01-26-2009, 12:07 PM
you know one day i wouldn't mind coming out to see you and show me some techniques. everybody has their unique stlye. perhaps that you can demonstrate in person.

My style is pretty plain vanilla and is evident right here.

If I provided a video on forehand technique, I would say the exact same things I do here. Why would there be a difference?

Is there something else you really trying to get at? What is your real motive? Why settle for me when you have Oscar. As far as you are concerned, he does it for you. So why would you pay money to see some "former" coach? Is there something else? Are you holding a grudge about something I said?

Noveson
01-26-2009, 07:53 PM
I know a lot more than you! I know that. And as far as "bagging" on me? Please do, just expect me to "bag" back. :evil:

:confused:I am missing out here I think. We went from, "I respect your tennis knowledge and not m27's" to "I know more than you! For sure"

Ian Stewart
01-27-2009, 08:03 PM
:confused:I am missing out here I think. We went from, "I respect your tennis knowledge and not m27's" to "I know more than you! For sure"

Once in a while BB provides some good stuff in his posts but mostly he comes across as self-aggrandizing. His main project is to promote himself.

Bungalo Bill
01-28-2009, 06:59 AM
:confused:I am missing out here I think. We went from, "I respect your tennis knowledge and not m27's" to "I know more than you! For sure"

I was kidding! Like you were kidding! Right? Or were you kidding? :shock:

junbug
01-28-2009, 12:08 PM
i just gave my opinion about bill on another post. i've had enough of this FORMER teaching professional who can't seem to let go of the baggage he carries against other teaching pros who try and help make the game easy and fun to learn.

Bungalo Bill
01-28-2009, 03:21 PM
i just gave my opinion about bill on another post. i've had enough of this FORMER teaching professional who can't seem to let go of the baggage he carries against other teaching pros who try and help make the game easy and fun to learn.

LOL, can you take something more out of context? I dont know how many times I said I could care less if you learn Wegners methods. It is his claims I am not jiving with. I also grow tired of people like you that think he is some angel from heaven in regards to teaching tennis. He is not and to put it in your words or beleifs, people learn from different people.

You just labelled me with "baggage", however, I have said that my coaching knowledge is a hodge podge of instruction from various coaches including Wegner!

Bungalo Bill
01-28-2009, 03:24 PM
Once in a while BB provides some good stuff in his posts but mostly he comes across as self-aggrandizing. His main project is to promote himself.

Once in awhile huh? LOL!

Have you provided anything? Maybe you can do better? Or maybe you forgot I dont make a dime off of this. If I am promoting myself, then I would be already gone making money.

There is only one thing I care about at this site...providing the best possible tennis instruction - for free.

Djokovicfan4life
01-28-2009, 07:45 PM
you know one day i wouldn't mind coming out to see you and show me some techniques. everybody has their unique stlye. perhaps that you can demonstrate in person.

Of course all good technique differs slightly, but what you don't understand is that there are certain reference points that all the great players achieve at some point during their stroke. The difference in style is simply how a certain player "connects the dots", so to speak.