PDA

View Full Version : Is Nadals topspin forehand the greatest Topspin forehand ever?


King of Aces
04-20-2009, 04:41 AM
Is Nadals topspin forehand the greatest Topspin forehand ever? It looks like a trick shot....I do not think it can even be taught.

bladepdb
04-20-2009, 04:46 AM
It probably is.

What is so formidable about the shot is the fact that it has so much topspin yet is hit with such pace as well, especially when Nadal guns it.

I think if you quantify this question, though, Bruguera has been able to get more RPMs on the forehand than Nadal. That said, Bruguera never was as dominant as Nadal is with their respective forehands.

breadstick
04-20-2009, 04:47 AM
Yes, but pro's have never been able to get as much spin as they can today.

bladepdb
04-20-2009, 04:51 AM
Yes, but pro's have never been able to get as much spin as they can today.

Except Bruguera!

Gosh imagine Bruguera with an APDC & poly strings...ick. Possibly the only thing that would rival Nadal on clay (but movement of Nadal would probably win out at the end).

pc1
04-20-2009, 05:11 AM
Pancho Segura thinks it's the best lefty forehand ever. I don't know what he thinks overall.

cknobman
04-20-2009, 06:08 AM
It certainly has the most "spin" ever but I dont know if its the "greatest" ever.

King of Aces
04-20-2009, 06:10 AM
It certainly has the most "spin" ever but I dont know if its the "greatest" ever.

Well I said the greatest "Top SPIN" ./...emphasis on the word SPIN.

I would says Agassi has the greatest flat shot in the history of tennis.

King of Aces
04-20-2009, 06:12 AM
oooooops

....

RalphNYC
04-20-2009, 06:21 AM
Let's see how many titles he wins with it. I think the answer will be YES

drakulie
04-20-2009, 06:36 AM
No, it is not.

pc1
04-20-2009, 06:39 AM
Actually it occurs to me that Segura himself may have a better forehand than Nadal's even though he said Nadal had the best lefty forehand ever. Segura is a righty. He may think that he (Segura) has a better forehand. lol.

Many do think that Segura's forehand was the best ever.

sureshs
04-20-2009, 06:42 AM
Is Nadals topspin forehand the greatest Topspin forehand ever? It looks like a trick shot....I do not think it can even be taught.

It looks like a trick shot because of a couple of reasons - his long and fast swing makes it look like the ball will go out, but it lands in - and he can go dtl or crosscourt with a similar motion.

He is helped by his racquet. No one can hit topspin like this with a smaller head.

35ft6
04-20-2009, 08:20 AM
One of the best forehands ever. When Fed was killing everybody, his forehand was about the best I'd ever seen. He could rip more winners our of nowhere than just about anybody I've ever seen.

jelle v
04-20-2009, 08:28 AM
It probably is.

What is so formidable about the shot is the fact that it has so much topspin yet is hit with such pace as well, especially when Nadal guns it.

I think if you quantify this question, though, Bruguera has been able to get more RPMs on the forehand than Nadal. That said, Bruguera never was as dominant as Nadal is with their respective forehands.

Bruguera didn't play the attacking game Nadal does.. In my opinion, Bruguera's defensive game was just as good as Nadal's and I actually have the opinion that Bruguera's passing shots were better.. slightly though..

Nadal_Freak
04-20-2009, 08:28 AM
One of the best forehands ever. When Fed was killing everybody, his forehand was about the best I'd ever seen. He could rip more winners our of nowhere than just about anybody I've ever seen.
The emphasis was on topspin. Fed has a regular forehand.

bluetrain4
04-20-2009, 08:31 AM
Not only is it heavy and spinny, but he has the ability to flatten it out slightly, as well as stick with his loopier arc.

He hits it so incredibly high over the net (the majority of the time) that he has a huge margin for error, which helps his consistency and makes it very difficult for opponents to do anything against it.

drakulie
04-20-2009, 08:36 AM
The emphasis was on topspin. Fed has a regular forehand.

Uhmmmmmm, he was exhausted.

jelle v
04-20-2009, 08:46 AM
Yes, but pro's have never been able to get as much spin as they can today.

I wonder about Berasategui though.. who knows what forehand he would have had with a Babolat (A)PD(C)..

David_Is_Right
04-20-2009, 09:56 AM
He is helped by his racquet. No one can hit topspin like this with a smaller head.

Sorry to derail the thread, but is this a general rule of thumb please, Sureshs? I'm fairly new to racquet selection by means other than colour!

sureshs
04-20-2009, 10:47 AM
Sorry to derail the thread, but is this a general rule of thumb please, Sureshs? I'm fairly new to racquet selection by means other than colour!

It is pretty certain that the larger head size of Nadal's racquet, along with the not-very-heavy range of weight, allows him to achieve high swing speed and good ball contact. Some of his shots go off the middle, while others leave from the lower end of the racquet (held sideways) and deceive the opponent - he uses the whole racquet face. The Babolat racquet + poly strings makes his game possible. Players with traditional small-headed and heavier frames lose to him on a regular basis, even when they employ the same strings technology.

maverick66
04-20-2009, 11:01 AM
i was under the impression he doesnt use new string technology. that he uses 15g whatever it is that he grew up with.

sureshs
04-20-2009, 11:08 AM
i was under the impression he doesnt use new string technology. that he uses 15g whatever it is that he grew up with.

He uses poly (Duralast) isn't it? Practically everyone uses poly these days.

maverick66
04-20-2009, 11:17 AM
im aware of poly. you cant say he gets the spin he does because of racket or strings. if that was the case everyone would use the same racket.

Serendipitous
04-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Andreev also has a sick topspin forehand but it isn't as consistent as Nadal's.

pennc94
04-20-2009, 11:36 AM
Bruguera didn't play the attacking game Nadal does.. In my opinion, Bruguera's defensive game was just as good as Nadal's and I actually have the opinion that Bruguera's passing shots were better.. slightly though..

Nadal's attacking game?

vndesu
04-20-2009, 11:38 AM
i think nadal has alot of his spin, mostly due to his swing, weight of racqet and the strings. iono if its the greatest, but i will say it has alot of spin

paulorenzo
04-20-2009, 11:39 AM
Nadal's attacking game?

maybe he meant "aggressive baseline"
nadal may not be attacking nets, but he sure has gotten aggressive from the backcourt, i'll admit that.

rosenstar
04-20-2009, 11:40 AM
im aware of poly. you cant say he gets the spin he does because of racket or strings. if that was the case everyone would use the same racket.

Agreed. People need to credit Nadal, if you analyze his technique, it's not surprising that he hits the ball so well. The extreme spin and pace is a result of his powerful legs and hip turn. It's not a magical racket, but it does allow him to take advantage of his athleticism and strength.

wangs78
04-20-2009, 11:47 AM
You have to remember that Nadal is a lefty. The fact that his FH is so good PLUS that he is a lefty is what makes him so dominant. Most players, who are righty, are not used to having to deal with a high-bouncing, "spinny", and paced shot on their BH side very often. Nadal throws everyone out of their comfort zone because of this. You saw how much trouble Fernando Verdasco gave Nadal at the AO this year? Verdasco is a lefty too, so he was able to meet Nadal's lefty FH with his own lefty FH, effectively neutralizing it. Don't get me wrong, I think Nadal is a great player and deserving of all of his accolades, but the fact that he is a lefty is a HUGE advantage. Had he played righty, he would not be #1. Fed would be. And Fed would not have lost his confidence and would probably be up to GS #16 or so by now.

This is exactly why in baseball it is preferable to pitch lefty to a right-handed hitter, bc it puts the hitter at a natural disadvantage. God bless Nadal (or his uncle Toni, for that matter) for having been naturally righty but to have trained to be able to play lefty. Greatest training decision by anyone in the history of tennis. But mark my words, if Nadal did not play lefty, he would not be #1.

sureshs
04-20-2009, 11:47 AM
im aware of poly. you cant say he gets the spin he does because of racket or strings. if that was the case everyone would use the same racket.

Many players use the Babolats and poly strings. It is of course not due only to these, it is the hand holding the racquet and the body attached to it.

deltox
04-20-2009, 12:12 PM
here is what i could dig up on the google search
Average RPMS on forehand


Bruguera 3330
Nadal 3200
Muster 2880
Rios 2640
Federer 2500
Sampras 1840
Agassi 1710


So yes he generates alot of topspin allowing for more room for error on his forehand shot


for reference
top forehand speed for top pros are

Monfils 118.1
Gonzalez 112
Blake 109
P Gonzalez 108
federer 102


***EDIT*** found oen site quoting Nadals fastest forehand at 96mph, which with his spin is a nasty nasty shot to retrieve
cannot find anywhere nadals was measured but ill keep checking

deltox
04-20-2009, 12:16 PM
Many players use the Babolats and poly strings. It is of course not due only to these, it is the hand holding the racquet and the body attached to it.

actually its the reverse forehand he does that causes so much spin

sureshs
04-20-2009, 12:18 PM
actually its the reverse forehand he does that causes so much spin

Good point. I read somewhere that 40% of his FHs are reverse.

35ft6
04-20-2009, 12:20 PM
The emphasis was on topspin. Fed has a regular forehand.Fed hits with topspin. At this point, saying topspin forehand is kind of redundant on the men's tour. Everybody hits with topspin, when they say "flat forehand" they mean it in relative terms.

VivalaVida
04-20-2009, 12:22 PM
here is what i could dig up on the google search
Average RPMS on forehand


Bruguera 3330
Nadal 3200
Muster 2880
Rios 2640
Federer 2500
Sampras 1840
Agassi 1710


So yes he generates alot of topspin allowing for more room for error on his forehand shot


for reference
top forehand speed for top pros are

Monfils 118.1
Gonzalez 112
Blake 109
P Gonzalez 108
federer 102


***EDIT*** found oen site quoting Nadals fastest forehand at 96mph, which with his spin is a nasty nasty shot to retrieve
cannot find anywhere nadals was measured but ill keep checking
Novak slammed a 116 mph against tsonga earlier this year.

jelle v
04-20-2009, 01:21 PM
maybe he meant "aggressive baseline"
nadal may not be attacking nets, but he sure has gotten aggressive from the backcourt, i'll admit that.

That's exactly what I meant :)

deltox
04-20-2009, 01:28 PM
Novak slammed a 116 mph against tsonga earlier this year.

those numbers were just a generalized summary of the facts i could find in 5 mins of searching. i have no doubts novak hit one 116, but it didnt show up when i searched under forehand fastest mph on google.

if you can find it, feel free to list a link :)

egn
04-20-2009, 01:39 PM
Brugera might come close thats about it that comes to my find.

!Tym
04-20-2009, 01:48 PM
You have to remember that Nadal is a lefty. The fact that his FH is so good PLUS that he is a lefty is what makes him so dominant. Most players, who are righty, are not used to having to deal with a high-bouncing, "spinny", and paced shot on their BH side very often. Nadal throws everyone out of their comfort zone because of this. You saw how much trouble Fernando Verdasco gave Nadal at the AO this year? Verdasco is a lefty too, so he was able to meet Nadal's lefty FH with his own lefty FH, effectively neutralizing it. Don't get me wrong, I think Nadal is a great player and deserving of all of his accolades, but the fact that he is a lefty is a HUGE advantage. Had he played righty, he would not be #1. Fed would be. And Fed would not have lost his confidence and would probably be up to GS #16 or so by now.

This is exactly why in baseball it is preferable to pitch lefty to a right-handed hitter, bc it puts the hitter at a natural disadvantage. God bless Nadal (or his uncle Toni, for that matter) for having been naturally righty but to have trained to be able to play lefty. Greatest training decision by anyone in the history of tennis. But mark my words, if Nadal did not play lefty, he would not be #1.

It's funny you say that, because it once remarked by I think McEnroe, even leftys don't like playing lefty's. Statisitcally there just is a lot of lefty tennis players in this world, so when you play one it always feel a little weird. Lefty's are just as not used to playing against lefty's as anyone else since they're not a whole lot of them.

It's also funny, because when you look through tennis history, the ammount of lefty's in that last exceeds the "normal" ratio of lefty's to righty's in this world by far. I don't think it's just a coincidence.

Personally, I find it odd when I encounter a lefty too. Everything just feels "weird" to me. It's still a groundstroke sure, but it just feels slightly unsettling when it shouldn't.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 01:54 PM
here is what i could dig up on the google search
Average RPMS on forehand


Bruguera 3330
Nadal 3200
Muster 2880
Rios 2640
Federer 2500
Sampras 1840
Agassi 1710


So yes he generates alot of topspin allowing for more room for error on his forehand shot


for reference
top forehand speed for top pros are

Monfils 118.1
Gonzalez 112
Blake 109
P Gonzalez 108
federer 102


***EDIT*** found oen site quoting Nadals fastest forehand at 96mph, which with his spin is a nasty nasty shot to retrieve
cannot find anywhere nadals was measured but ill keep checking

Nadal has hit over 100 mph before. I don't remember the exact speed. Can someone confirm it?

!Tym
04-20-2009, 01:55 PM
Btw, regarding old vs. new generation polys, the difference isn't spin; it's that the newer ones are engineered to keep their tension much better, are more comfortable, have better feel (to most, not all since some still prefer the rawer, crisper feel of first gen polys), and more power. The main thing though from a performance aspect though is tension maintenance. The first gen polys lose tension like a stuck pig. Ok for Nadal who has the money and resources to restring on a whim. But to the average dude? Today's modern co-polys are a better choice.

deltox
04-20-2009, 01:58 PM
Nadal has hit over 100 mph before. I don't remember the exact speed. Can someone confirm it?

not saying your not telling the truth but nadal doesnt hit as hard as the flat hitters and his spin makes up the difference without doubt. i think that 96 might well be very accurate.


if nadal hit 110+ and with his spin he would knock racquets outta pros hands

/shiver

usually more spin = less speed

for example nadals serve is an average of 116mph,, very low by todays standards but the spin.. that spin is whats brutal to reply

egn
04-20-2009, 01:59 PM
not saying your not telling the truth but nadal doesnt hit as hard as the flat hitters and his spin makes up the difference without doubt. i think that 96 might well be very accurate.


if nadal hit 110+ and with his spin he would knock racquets outta pros hands

/shiver

stop giving me goosebumps. 110 killer topsin forehands. Thats it nobody would want to play the guy.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:00 PM
But mark my words, if Nadal did not play lefty, he would not be #1.

How can you say that? You don't know what kind of serve he would have had if he played righty. Let him keep the same FH and same BH but his FH is now his BH and vice-versa. Also give him a better serve because he is a natural righty. DOn't you think the better serve could have made up for him not being lefty?

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:07 PM
here is the world record forehand for reference and comparison

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJ5fS0EHr9Q

monfils 118.1 mph

thats one destructive shot and flat as a pancake ;)

egn
04-20-2009, 02:07 PM
How can you say that? You don't know what kind of serve he would have had if he played righty. Let him keep the same FH and same BH but his FH is now his BH and vice-versa. Also give him a better serve because he is a natural righty. DOn't you think the better serve could have made up for him not being lefty?

I don't think he would have the same backhand. His backhand is only as strong as it is because he switched hands..it is kind of like a forehand to him.

drakulie
04-20-2009, 02:08 PM
How can you say that?


becuase how the heck would he be able to hold the racquet in his right hand and do this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4jUGufaJek at the same time??????

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:09 PM
usually more spin = less speed

Yes, this is 100% true BUT you are assuming everyone gives the same energy to the ball. Some of the total energy that you impart on the ball is converted to rotational energy and that's why the ball has less pace. Nadal has one of the fastest swing speed ever, if not the fastest, so I don't see why he can't hit over 100mph while still hitting with good topspin.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:09 PM
becuase how the heck would he be able to hold the racquet in his right hand and do this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4jUGufaJek at the same time??????

He would need you to do it for him.

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:14 PM
Yes, this is 100% true BUT you are assuming everyone gives the same energy to the ball. Some of the total energy that you impart on the ball is converted to rotational energy and that's why the ball has less pace. Nadal has one of the fastest swing speed ever, if not the fastest, so I don't see why he can't hit over 100mph while still hitting with good topspin.

lemme go pull up swing speed numbers.. i can tell you its monfil, roddick as top 2 today because i found those numbers when searching the top mph. nadal doesnt use speed on the ball to make his points. gimme a bit to get the motivation to dig up the results.. or you COULD actually post them yourself instead of posting opinions.

****EDIT****
fastest backhand racquet head speed, (safin name keps coming up, nadal mentioned several times also)
fastest forehand racquet head speed, (monfils, blake, verdasco all listed in articles so far)
fastest racquet head speed on serve roddick (Karlovicalso named a couple times)

so far cannot find anyone listing exact numbers tho

still hunting for the exact numbers, all i can find are articles by sportswriters atm. ill get them though (Nevermind) to much research for one day for my small brain

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:14 PM
I don't think he would have the same backhand. His backhand is only as strong as it is because he switched hands..it is kind of like a forehand to him.

Ok...so let's say he has 2 forehands. He switches hands; doesn't he still end up with 2 forehands? lol
Anyway all this what-if analysis is useless. You can't know for sure what would have happened.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:16 PM
lemme go pull up swing speed numbers.. i can tell you its monfil, roddick as top 2 today because i found those numbers when searching the top mph. nadal doesnt use speed on the ball to make his points. gimme a bit to get the motivation to dig up the results.. or you COULD actually post them yourself instead of posting opinions.

They actually measure swing speed? I didn't know about that. I'm taking a short break at work; don't have time to look up all this info right now. lol
Thanks for the effort :D

Mada
04-20-2009, 02:18 PM
How can you say that? You don't know what kind of serve he would have had if he played righty. Let him keep the same FH and same BH but his FH is now his BH and vice-versa. Also give him a better serve because he is a natural righty. DOn't you think the better serve could have made up for him not being lefty?

I don't understand your logic for why he'd have a better serve..

But do you HONESTLY think a slightly better serve would make up for him being lefty? Not even close.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:20 PM
****EDIT****
fastest backhand racquet head speed, safin
fastest forehand racquet head speed, monfils, blake
fastest racquet head speed on serve roddick

still hunting for the exact numbers, all i can find are articles by sportswriters atm. ill get them though

I wonder how they measure racquet head speed lol. Where did u get this info?

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:21 PM
I wonder how they measure racquet head speed lol. Where did u get this info?

same place i always find my info... google.com search racquet head speed tennis and start clicking

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:22 PM
They actually measure swing speed? I didn't know about that. I'm taking a short break at work; don't have time to look up all this info right now. lol
Thanks for the effort :D

they measure everything in todays sports. bat speed is ultra important for baseball so i presume racquet head speed would be super important in tennis.

sadly most articles quote damn badmiton racquet speeds.

runningmann
04-20-2009, 02:26 PM
how would Nastaze's double strung racquet compare? I heard the spin was so extreme, but maybe it is similar to today's spin?

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:27 PM
how would Nastaze's double strung racquet compare? I heard the spin was so extreme, but maybe it is similar to today's spin?

lol gotta look it up, my research for the day is done, im here to gossip now :p

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 02:27 PM
they measure everything in todays sports. bat speed is ultra important for baseball so i presume racquet head speed would be super important in tennis.

sadly most articles quote damn badmiton racquet speeds.

I found this:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=507

The author of this article has calculated Nadal's racquet head speed to be about 115mph. I don't know how reliable this is. Even if the number was accurate, it's still not reliable because this calculation is based on one single shot. You would need a bigger sample.

deltox
04-20-2009, 02:29 PM
I found this:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=507

The author of this article has calculated Nadal's racquet head speed to be about 115mph. I don't know how reliable this is. Even if the number was accurate, it's still not reliable because this calculation is based on one single shot. You would need a bigger sample.

to much math for me, i need a chart -=p

apparently the racquet that provides the best head speed is the prince O3 due to the holes in the head of the racquet so theoretically, any prob not using a prince can swing faster with an o3. i gotta get outta this thread i was back to researching again.. sigh.. damn badmiton results everywhere to skim thru

King of Aces
04-20-2009, 02:29 PM
how would Nastaze's double strung racquet compare? I heard the spin was so extreme, but maybe it is similar to today's spin?

It created great spin but it had no power.

VivalaVida
04-20-2009, 02:54 PM
those numbers were just a generalized summary of the facts i could find in 5 mins of searching. i have no doubts novak hit one 116, but it didnt show up when i searched under forehand fastest mph on google.

if you can find it, feel free to list a link :)
absolutely! I started a thread on this earlier this year. here it is http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3155765&postcount=1 the link is in there. Forward to around 8 min and 30 secs please and enjoy!

wangs78
04-20-2009, 03:05 PM
How can you say that? You don't know what kind of serve he would have had if he played righty. Let him keep the same FH and same BH but his FH is now his BH and vice-versa. Also give him a better serve because he is a natural righty. DOn't you think the better serve could have made up for him not being lefty?

If Nadal became righty (with same FH and BH just reversed, as you say) and had a better save, I think he would be in the top 5, but definitely not #1. I really think so.

deltox
04-20-2009, 03:06 PM
absolutely! I started a thread on this earlier this year. here it is http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3155765&postcount=1 the link is in there. Forward to around 8 min and 30 secs please and enjoy!

thats an awesome forehand, wow, tons of pace.. but not to argue, just curious how one came up with its exact speed? i couldnt see the speed anywhere and they are speaking in another language so i cannot hear them saying it either.

egn
04-20-2009, 03:07 PM
Ok...so let's say he has 2 forehands. He switches hands; doesn't he still end up with 2 forehands? lol
Anyway all this what-if analysis is useless. You can't know for sure what would have happened.

He developed the strong lefty forehand by playing lefty all those years.. if he stays righty I don't think his backhand is as powerful as his current lefty forehand or backhand..I could be wrong, but I imagine it is still top notch but not as effective.

35ft6
04-20-2009, 03:09 PM
usually more spin = less speedThis depends on the angle, and, also, consider that the court is a finite space. More spin = more power in a lot of cases, just ask a ping pong player.

!Tym
04-20-2009, 03:23 PM
Bruguera didn't play the attacking game Nadal does.. In my opinion, Bruguera's defensive game was just as good as Nadal's and I actually have the opinion that Bruguera's passing shots were better.. slightly though..

...he could DEFINITELY flatten it out though. Make no mistake about that. When Bruguera decided to flatten it out, he "hurt the ball" and "you won't see forehands hit bigger than that ANYWHERE" are two of the things I've heard coming out of McEnroe's mouth when Bruguera decided to let it out on the ball. INCREDIBLE racket head speed when he got angry and wanted to send a message with a shot. Bruguera's hit forehands as hard as any I've ever seen when he wanted to, just draw-dropping, crowd gasps for a second kind of power when he wanted to.

It's a mistake to think Bruguera only laid back defensively. He mixed it up more with the spins, power, and angles than Nadal. He would go for soft cutesy, finesse angles as a semi-regular mixup play in his baseline rallys. He would also make sure to periodically flatten it out big time every so often to keep opponents honest. Then he would also try to throw up HUGE moon balls the heights of which I've not seen ANY modern pro hit. I mean literally MOON balls where'd he just try to hit it as high as he possibly could with a minimum of pace, the kind of moon balls that'd make Arantxa proud, even envious. Then there was the standard hard and heavy Muster like baseline groundy. Bruguera gave opponents a wider array of DEGREE of spin than any player I've ever seen. His OPEN stance forehand for clay is also probably the best ever, once coined the "greatest clay court forehand ever" by Vilas. The reason is that it was an incredibly *efficient& yet effective shot on clay when he was pressed. He didn't have to necessarily wind up corkscrew style to get his forehand off the way Berasategui or Ferrero or Moya style "circle 8" forehands do. He'd just slide into shots and plant his racket foot parellel to the baseline, lean that incredibly slinky back of his back, and still be able to "whip it good" (remember that song? Catchy.). His forehand was like an accordion, basically the closest approximation to a tennis specialized, metal slinky basically. Also a very difficult shot to read, because it was so flick reliant. McEnroe said it best during the French final with Courier, Courier can't read where he's gonna go.

It was VERY unique technique, that I've not seen ANY other pro emulate. It's imo BY FAR one of the most ideosyncratic and difficult to emulate techniques there is. It's one of those strokes where it works for one player only, but wouldn't work for anyone else like Becker's INCREDIBLE deep knee bend and rocking motion on his serve, or Muster's incredibly MUSCLY way of standing on his backfoot and still able to rocket launch topspin ONE-handed backhands. Other people that would rip their shoulders out, you've got to be built like an ox to be able to get away with the way Muster would *routinely* against pro level pace and spin. Berasategui's INSANE wrist snap and ridiculously absurdly western grip on his forehand is another. Most players try to copy that and every ball they hit will land in the bottom of the net or they'll swing and miss completely or they'll frame the ball so violently they're wrist would feel like it's gonna fall off any minute.

Bruguera's forehand was optimized to slide into balls open stance in a way that no one else's ever has been. It was a shot that was specialized for clay, but imo, a poor adaptation on a firm surface for obvious reasons.

Bruguera played defensive more on average, but I've also seen him take the role of agressive baseliner too. He steamrolled Berasategui in the last set of their French final doing just that. Very defensive before that, and then bam he just turned it on and ran away with it.

I saw him play Byron Black on hard once, and realizing who he was playing, he recognized the best strategy was to just try and overpower him...so? That's what he did. He simply went into more of the Agassi mindset. He did have it in him, but he more so than most any top pro I've seen would fine tune how much spin vs. pace or finesse he was going to go for on a given day according to the opponent. Against Agassi on clay for example, he tried to mix in all of these things without a set pattern or rhythm to throw off Agassi's rhythm. It was to me a very obvious conscious decision. Against Muster, he'd just forget the finess and just get into a slug fest...unfortunately for him, Muster was ALWAYS in better shape than him and ALWAYS had better focus and concentration than him. It was a losing proposition almost every time because of that.

In terms of passes, the reason Bruguera was effective was because he was able to give net rushers so many different looks, angles, spins, and varying amounts of power.

Nadal's passes on the other hand are just straight up visciousness...however, we also don't see Nadal have to pass all that often either. We don't really know when it comes to passes anymore, it's almost not even a "category" or skillset or player attribute commentators even discuss anymore. Players don't come in like they used to, surfaces are much slower world-wide outside clay, and players certainly don't volley like Stich, Krajicek, Sampras, Henman, Edberg, Rafter, etc. anymore either. When Mardy Fish is considered a maestro at net, you stop to think, oh my gosh, that means if Rusedski and in her prime right now he'd be considered a McEnroe like "genius" at the net, lol.

Put it this way, the Bryans are very good volleyers. The Woodies are GREAT volleyers. Leander Paes is a GREAT volleyer, etc.

deltox
04-20-2009, 03:55 PM
This depends on the angle, and, also, consider that the court is a finite space. More spin = more power in a lot of cases, just ask a ping pong player.

im completely confused?


so spin doesnt slow the ball down? i am to tired to look up a physic reference sheet, but i thought flat shots traveled faster all things being equal. the ball doesnt roll of the racquet instead it gets maximum area of contact.

sigh, i dunno anymore. to many opinions, not enough fact going on.

and if this is true, why do flat serve go 15-25% faster than top spin serves?

if you look at the videos linked here, monfils and djoker both hit very flat shots that are world record and a close second. i cannot find any topspin shots producing a pace near those.

Lsmkenpo
04-20-2009, 04:06 PM
The greatest thing about Nadal's forehand is his consistency, that is what has won him matches.

deltox
04-20-2009, 04:10 PM
The greatest thing about Nadal's forehand is his consistency, that is what has won him matches.

this i can definitely agree with. consistancy is the key to winning in any era of the game.

VivalaVida
04-20-2009, 04:17 PM
thats an awesome forehand, wow, tons of pace.. but not to argue, just curious how one came up with its exact speed? i couldnt see the speed anywhere and they are speaking in another language so i cannot hear them saying it either.
if you pause the video or view it carefully at around 9.08 and 9.09 you can see the see graphic that says 187 kph. Keep your eyes peeled you will see it.

sonicboi21
04-20-2009, 04:38 PM
The emphasis was on topspin. Fed has a regular forehand.

NadalFreak, you truly are an idiot. Federer's forehand is a topspin forehand. His RPM's are only 200 less than nadal's. Do your hw before writing stupid stuff

deltox
04-20-2009, 04:58 PM
if you pause the video or view it carefully at around 9.08 and 9.09 you can see the see graphic that says 187 kph. Keep your eyes peeled you will see it.

im blind lol i cannot see it anywhere.

35ft6
04-20-2009, 05:02 PM
im completely confused? Yes you are. I said depending on the angle. In the context of tennis, which is what's being discussed here, If you can hit straight down, or from high enough, yes, hitting completely through the ball results in more power. But for groundstrokes from the baseline, hitting with spin offers more speed and power in most instances because the tennis court is a finite space. To hit it completely flat, you are limited to how fast you can make the ball go hitting it from the baseline from waist high height and still keep it in the court. But add spin to keep the ball inside the court, you can add more speed. What Fed and Nadal are great at is hitting a super spinny forehand that follows a flat shot trajectory so they get the best of both worlds: though not a perfectly straight line a shorter distance between points A and B, and enough spin to allow a lot of speed going from A to B.

A simpler way to think about spin allowing more power on groundstrokes is to imagine a short, knee high bouncing ball at the service line. If you hit it flat, you will have to bunt it, but if you generate a lot of top spin, you can murder the ball. Anyway, nobody hits completely flat. Even Connors hit with a bit of top spin or side spin. Backspin is also useful for keeping the ball in play. When discussing groundstrokes in tennis, flat is a relative term. Even when you see a winner in tennis, and the commentator talking about how the player flattened out the shot, you'll see the ball rotating with top spin.

deltox
04-20-2009, 05:12 PM
Yes you are. I said depending on the angle. In the context of tennis, which is what's being discussed here, If you can hit straight down, or from high enough, yes, hitting completely through the ball results in more power. But for groundstrokes from the baseline, hitting with spin offers more speed and power in most instances because the tennis sport is a finite space. To hit it completely flat, you are limited to how fast you can make the ball go hitting it from the baseline from waist high height and still keep it in the court. But add spin to keep the ball inside the court, you can add more speed. What Fed and Nadal are great at is hitting a super spinny forehand that follows a flat shot trajectory so they get the best of both worlds, a shorter distance between point A and B, and the spin to keep the ball in play.

A simpler way to think about spin allowing more power on groundstrokes is to imagine a short, knee high bouncing ball at the service line. If you hit it flat, you will have to bunt it, but if you generate a lot of top spin, you can murder the ball. Anyway, nobody hits completely flat. Even Connors hit with a bit of top spin or side spin. Backspin is also useful for keeping the ball in play. When discussing groundstrokes in tennis, flat is a relative term. Even when you see a winner in tennis, and the commentator talking about how the player flattened out the shot, you'll see the ball rotating with top spin.

i understand what your saying now except backspin keeping the ball in play thing.

backspin causes the ball to float longer, thus making it more difficult to keep in play

Djokovicfan4life
04-20-2009, 05:18 PM
No, it is not.

Agreed, I find his topspin forehand very one dimensional. It always has topspin on it!

nadal for number1
04-20-2009, 05:20 PM
topspin forehand yeas flattest maybe not but is it the heaviest? id say yes

35ft6
04-20-2009, 05:34 PM
backspin causes the ball to float longer, thus making it more difficult to keep in playYeah, maybe there's no inherent benefit, but even though backspin causes pressure forcing the ball upwards, it seems to slow it down, too, so in my experience the net result is more control in terms of keeping the ball in the court.

King of Aces
04-20-2009, 06:06 PM
Agreed, I find his topspin forehand very one dimensional. It always has topspin on it!

LOL...what the hell else are you going to hit....a slice forehand???? The only other shot is flat....and virtually no one hits flat anymore....not even Roger Federer.

Djokovicfan4life
04-20-2009, 06:15 PM
LOL...what the hell else are you going to hit....a slice forehand???? The only other shot is flat....and virtually no one hits flat anymore....not even Roger Federer.

Respectfully disagree. He should vary his topspin forehand by mixing up the spins more often. Backspin can do wonders at times for the topspin forehand.

Federer_pilon
04-20-2009, 07:31 PM
here is what i could dig up on the google search
Average RPMS on forehand


Bruguera 3330
Nadal 3200
Muster 2880
Rios 2640
Federer 2500
Sampras 1840
Agassi 1710


So yes he generates alot of topspin allowing for more room for error on his forehand shot


for reference
top forehand speed for top pros are

Monfils 118.1
Gonzalez 112
Blake 109
P Gonzalez 108
federer 102


***EDIT*** found oen site quoting Nadals fastest forehand at 96mph, which with his spin is a nasty nasty shot to retrieve
cannot find anywhere nadals was measured but ill keep checking

"1-1 - Nadal somehow turns defence into offence, setting up a killer 102mph forehand winner from well behind the baseline." according to this match report at http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/tennis/livematch/240554.html

If they reported this, I'm pretty sure they must have seen it on their TV screen or something. They didn't just come up with a number.

!Tym
04-20-2009, 07:36 PM
Yeah, maybe there's no inherent benefit, but even though backspin causes pressure forcing the ball upwards, it seems to slow it down, too, so in my experience the net result is more control in terms of keeping the ball in the court.

Yup, exactly. Backspin may float longer, but who takes the same swing on slice or a chip as they do on a "herculean effort" topspin shot? No one. Steffi's slice backhand is as gaudy as it got in terms of excessive swing, and yet even that was considerably more mild comapred to the full-fledged sledgehammer cracks she'd take at her forehand.

The chip forehand return is one of the safest, low-risk, no reward shots in the game. Just ask Bruguera who made a career out of doing nothing with it. Just stick your racket out with a slightly tilted face, and wala, you've got a pro technique "chip" return. Of course, the hande-eye coordination to get it in the right place at the right time, does require just a weee bit more skill.

Guys like Edberg and Sampras regularly chipped backhands in and scooted in behind them. Use your opponents pace to get the depth, use the underspin to give you time to scoot up close, conserve energy over the course of a long match because there's no swing or effort expended in chipping a return.

The chip or slice is one of the safest shots in the game, because the specific point to executing it well is to be able to take a nice, *controlled* "swing" at the ball. Since player don't try to masacre the ball on a slice, the chances of a mishit or something going wrong during the swing are GREATLY reduced = hence "safe shot". It's like playing tennis in a vacuum, you eliminate the variables. That = safe.

deltox
04-20-2009, 07:39 PM
Yup, exactly. Backspin may float longer, but who takes the same swing on slice or a chip as they do on a "herculean effort" topspin shot? No one. Steffi's slice backhand is as gaudy as it got in terms of excessive swing, and yet even that was considerably more mild comapred to the full-fledged sledgehammer cracks she'd take at her forehand.

The chip forehand return is one of the safest, low-risk, no reward shots in the game. Just ask Bruguera who made a career out of doing nothing with it. Just stick your racket out with a slightly tilted face, and wala, you've got a pro technique "chip" return. Of course, the hande-eye coordination to get it in the right place at the right time, does require just a weee bit more skill.

Guys like Edberg and Sampras regularly chipped backhands in and scooted in behind them. Use your opponents pace to get the depth, use the underspin to give you time to scoot up close, conserve energy over the course of a long match because there's no swing or effort expended in chipping a return.

The chip or slice is one of the safest shots in the game, because the specific point to executing it well is to be able to take a nice, *controlled* "swing" at the ball. Since player don't try to masacre the ball on a slice, the chances of a mishit or something going wrong during the swing are GREATLY reduced = hence "safe shot". It's like playing tennis in a vacuum, you eliminate the variables. That = safe.

i must be weird because my slice backhands net themselves more than any of my other shots.. sigh another reason my game is the sux

atennisrand
04-23-2009, 07:10 PM
It quite simply is the best at top spin but it is impossible to judge it as the all time greatest forehand ever. I also believe that with such a shoulder straining and violent take back and follow through action on his forehand will render the greatness of this stroke of Nadal's limited to working for a certain amount of years

King of Aces
04-23-2009, 07:14 PM
It quite simply is the best at top spin but it is impossible to judge it as the all time greatest forehand ever. I also believe that with such a shoulder straining and violent take back and follow through action on his forehand will render the greatness of this stroke of Nadal's limited to working for a certain amount of years

Thats exactly what they said about Roddick and his serve.