PDA

View Full Version : Nadal's forehand = most under rated shot in tennis


Messarger
06-13-2011, 11:56 PM
While his critics attribute his success to modern tennis equipment, i think that equipment alone would not have Nadal at 10 majors. His strategy of attacking his opponents backhand relentlessly may seem boring and some may even call it cheating, but they dont realize how difficult it is to pull that off consistently.

We are talking about Nadal going up against argubly the best forehand ever in Roger Federer. This means that Nadal's cross court forehand has to be extremely precise, or else Federer has a chance to hit his own inside out forehand. And the fact that Nadal is able to find Federer's backhand so frequently is a testament to his control of that fuzzy yellow ball. Think about it...

aphex
06-14-2011, 12:02 AM
While his critics attribute his success to modern tennis equipment, i think that equipment alone would not have Nadal at 10 majors. His strategy of attacking his opponents backhand relentlessly may seem boring and some may even call it cheating, but they dont realize how difficult it is to that off consistently.

We are talking about Nadal going up against argubly the best forehand ever in Roger Federer. This means that Nadal's cross court forehand has to be extremely precise, or else Federer has a chance to hit his own inside out forehand. And the fact that Nadal is able to find Federer's backhand so frequently is a testament to his control of that fuzzy yellow ball. Think about it...

It's awesome.
I think the biggest advantage it has is that you never know if he's going CC or DTL.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-14-2011, 04:06 AM
Isn't crosscourt FH the easiest shot in the game since you have the greatest amount of court to hit into (i.e. diagonal) and the lowest part of the net to hit over and no need to run around anything.

Djokolate
06-14-2011, 04:10 AM
It is amazing, but I don't think it's underrated. I hear people going on about it like it's the second coming of Jesus.

Messarger
06-14-2011, 06:40 AM
It is amazing, but I don't think it's underrated. I hear people going on about it like it's the second coming of Jesus.

You serious? There are many calling his forehand a moonball. just have to look around.

Clay lover
06-14-2011, 06:44 AM
Dude man, didn't we all know that Federer's forehand is a piece of art and a gift from god whereas Nadal's forehand is just a product of modern racquets, hard work and some muscles? Sorry man but that's the truth like it or not, dispute this and you're labelled a *******.

So basically, a guy with only moonballs for forehands, arms the ball, relies only on tweener racquets, poly strings and muscles was able to get ten slams through dirt-balling with minimal talent. Didn't you know?

He's an inspiration to me, seriously, he lets me know that if I hit the gym, buy a babolat, hit with some poly strings and practice hard enough, I can be a grand slam winner one day too with minimal talent. (Well. Maybe I also need to see a psychiatrist to beast up my mental strength as well.)

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 06:56 AM
It's awesome.
I think the biggest advantage it has is that you never know if he's going CC or DTL.

I think the biggest advantage it has is that you never know if he's going CC or CC or CC or CC or CC again or CC or...

CC or CC or...

CC or...

Clay lover
06-14-2011, 07:00 AM
I think the biggest advantage it has is that you never know if he's going CC or CC or CC or CC or CC again or CC or...

CC or CC or...

CC or...

Because in reality he should hit a floater DTL and let Federer kill him with his forehand. Totally makes sense dude.

Ralph
06-14-2011, 07:01 AM
It is amazing, but I don't think it's underrated. I hear people going on about it like it's the second coming of Jesus.

This.

6,000 RPMers.

Messarger
06-14-2011, 07:03 AM
Dude man, didn't we all know that Federer's forehand is a piece of art and a gift from god whereas Nadal's forehand is just a product of modern racquets, hard work and some muscles? Sorry man but that's the truth like it or not, dispute this and you're labelled a *******.

So basically, a guy with only moonballs for forehands, arms the ball, relies only on tweener racquets, poly strings and muscles was able to get ten slams through dirt-balling with minimal talent. Didn't you know?

He's an inspiration to me, seriously, he lets me know that if I hit the gym, buy a babolat, hit with some poly strings and practice hard enough, I can be a grand slam winner one day too with minimal talent. (Well. Maybe I also need to see a psychiatrist to beast up my mental strength as well.)

And besides, it reflects badly on Federer if he can be defeated just by moonballing.:oops:

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 07:09 AM
Because in reality he should hit a floater DTL and let Federer kill him with his forehand. Totally makes sense dude.

the fact that he CAN'T do it means that maybe his forehand isn't good enough? since he has to keep working a point out by hitting his fh CC all the time before he can try an outright winner into the open court, IMO his forehand is way overrated, it's his mental ability and endurance that lets him win matches, not his forehand

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 07:11 AM
And besides, it reflects badly on Federer if he can be defeated just by moonballing.:oops:

Dude, out of 10 forehand to forehand rallies Federer wins the vast majority, even on clay, it's the fact that Nadal keeps pounding Fed's backhand in every rally that gives him the W in the end

Tmano
06-14-2011, 07:15 AM
Dude man, didn't we all know that Federer's forehand is a piece of art and a gift from god whereas Nadal's forehand is just a product of modern racquets, hard work and some muscles? Sorry man but that's the truth like it or not, dispute this and you're labelled a *******.

So basically, a guy with only moonballs for forehands, arms the ball, relies only on tweener racquets, poly strings and muscles was able to get ten slams through dirt-balling with minimal talent. Didn't you know?

He's an inspiration to me, seriously, he lets me know that if I hit the gym, buy a babolat, hit with some poly strings and practice hard enough, I can be a grand slam winner one day too with minimal talent. (Well. Maybe I also need to see a psychiatrist to beast up my mental strength as well.)


I don't totally agree with you......right, Federer is pure talent and can hit the ball with so much power, gentleness offertless at the same time above everyone else anytime he wants, but you can't say that Nadal has no talent and he is only the result of massle+racquet and string. He for sure had to work harder to get where he is now but minimal talent is reductive.

Clay lover
06-14-2011, 07:19 AM
the fact that he CAN'T do it means that maybe his forehand isn't good enough? since he has to keep working a point out by hitting his fh CC all the time before he can try an outright winner into the open court, IMO his forehand is way overrated, it's his mental ability and endurance that lets him win matches, not his forehand

I never even implied that his forehand is good "enough". It's definitely not a better forehand than Federer's, nor is it a more powerful forehand than a bunch of guys known for their forehands on the pro tour. I just feel like guys these days value power and winners too much and undermine consistency and forehands on the run, both which Nadal is highly competent at. And yes, Nadal does hit inside out and DTL forehands ever since he first came on tour.

Most people just can't be bothered to watch his matches because they stereotype him as being Fed's nemesis and only watch his matches against Federer and therefore they know Nadal just by their limited knowledge of him being a moonballer crosscourt, if you watch his matches against different types of player, you see much more...his matches against Coria, for example, were EPIC, and you can't say Nadal's forehand is underrated after you see those, man.

Clay lover
06-14-2011, 07:20 AM
I don't totally agree with you......right, Federer is pure talent and can hit the ball with so much power, gentleness offertless at the same time above everyone else anytime he wants, but you can't say that Nadal has no talent and he is only the result of massle+racquet and string. He for sure had to work harder to get where he is now but minimal talent is reductive.


It was sarcasm, but you'd be surprised to find on this board people who genuinely believe in that.

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 07:21 AM
I don't totally agree with you......right, Federer is pure talent and can hit the ball with so much power, gentleness offertless at the same time above everyone else anytime he wants, but you can't say that Nadal has no talent and he is only the result of massle+racquet and string. He for sure had to work harder to get where he is now but minimal talent is reductive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umG5XdBAsHo

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 07:38 AM
Dude, out of 10 forehand to forehand rallies Federer wins the vast majority, even on clay, it's the fact that Nadal keeps pounding Fed's backhand in every rally that gives him the W in the end

Yeah but whats the point, he shouldnt be allowed to blitz Feds BH??

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 07:44 AM
Yeah but whats the point, he shouldnt be allowed to blitz Feds BH??

Of course, if it helps him win in the end, why not use it? It doesn't make his forehand all that great if he has to rely on a forehand-to-backhand advantage over Federer, though

Messarger
06-14-2011, 08:01 AM
Dude, out of 10 forehand to forehand rallies Federer wins the vast majority, even on clay, it's the fact that Nadal keeps pounding Fed's backhand in every rally that gives him the W in the end

My point still stands. It reflects badly on Federer if his backhand cant handle 'moonballs'.

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 08:04 AM
Of course, if it helps him win in the end, why not use it? It doesn't make his forehand all that great if he has to rely on a forehand-to-backhand advantage over Federer, though

I never thought his BH was underrated it´s one of the best on the Tour in my book. Not that error prone as Fed´s but Feds still has the edge.

bluetrain4
06-14-2011, 08:10 AM
It's not underrated at all. It's noted for its incredible spin and "work" which makes it difficult for the opponents to hit consistently against it. It's noted for good disguise in regards to where Nadal is going to go with it. It's noted for producing consistently good to unbelievable passing shots.

How is it underrated?

I'm not saying this necessarily applies to OP, but "underrated," as used in online forum discussions, often simply means "people don't think exactly the same way as I do about something, and/or are not as excited to discuss something as I am." I see it all time. Basically, everything on earth is "underrated" according to someone.

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 08:12 AM
My point still stands. It reflects badly on Federer if his backhand cant handle 'moonballs'.

Yep, it reflects on his backhand not on his general game. That's a huge difference.

Messarger
06-14-2011, 08:15 AM
It's not underrated at all. It's noted for its incredible spin and "work" which makes it difficult for the opponents to hit consistently against it. It's noted for good disguise in regards to where Nadal is going to go with it. It's noted for producing consistently good to unbelievable passing shots.

How is it underrated?

Well, for the reasons i mentioned in my first post. He has to get the angle spot on every time he tries to hit to Federer's backhand, or he risk engaging Federer's inside out forehand. And then there are some who thinks his forehand is merely a moonball.

I'm not saying this necessarily applies to OP, but "underrated," as used in online forum discussions, often simply means "people don't think exactly the same way as I do about something, and/or are not as excited to discuss something as I am." I see it all time. Basically, everything on earth is "underrated" according to someone.

responses in bold.

Lsmkenpo
06-14-2011, 08:16 AM
What is over rated is his topspin, I read post after post of people who think the more RPMs of spin the better, this is pure ignorance. When Nadal puts too much spin on the ball it drops short and allows players to step into the court and take control of the points.

This is one of the reasons Djokovic handled him on clay this season. His max topspin forehands were bouncing around the service line which allowed Djokovic to step into the court and hit angled winners cross court.

Over rated = topspin Under rated = consistent depth.

TheNatural
06-14-2011, 08:57 AM
What is over rated is his topspin, I read post after post of people who think the more RPMs of spin the better, this is pure ignorance. When Nadal puts too much spin on the ball it drops short and allows players to step into the court and take control of the points.

This is one of the reasons Djokovic handled him on clay this season. His max topspin forehands were bouncing around the service line which allowed Djokovic to step into the court and hit angled winners cross court.

Over rated = topspin Under rated = consistent depth.

over rated= his hollow toy babolat racket

Defcon
06-14-2011, 10:44 PM
Nadal's game and success is a textbook example of how relentless defense will beat offense most of the time. His stamina, speed, mental strength and ultra consistent shots with 100% safety margin are the reason he's Nadal.

If he was less of a physical specimen, he wouldn't have this success.

If he wasn't left handed, there would be no Fed vs Nadal conversation.

None of which takes away from his accomplishments and mental strenght, but lets not go overboard attibuting it to his forehand.

Messarger
06-15-2011, 12:34 AM
Nadal's game and success is a textbook example of how relentless defense will beat offense most of the time. His stamina, speed, mental strength and ultra consistent shots with 100% safety margin are the reason he's Nadal.

If he was less of a physical specimen, he wouldn't have this success.

If he wasn't left handed, there would be no Fed vs Nadal conversation.

None of which takes away from his accomplishments and mental strenght, but lets not go overboard attibuting it to his forehand.

Who is attributing what to his forehand? All i'm saying is that it is under rated.

TheNatural
06-15-2011, 12:56 AM
Its only underated by those who dont have a clue about tennis.

I think Nadal's 2004 forehand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)was faster. Now he ussually follows through up above his head. He used to follow through across hs body more often.

1/ 2004 v Hewitt AO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)- 17 years of age
2/ 2004 v hewitt (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeabrKndlUs&feature=related)
3/ 2004 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEJJpfcxHAM)
4/ 2011 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iyATmKMWmk)
5/ 2011 v Djoko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AesaDCV6W6o&feature=related)

Polaris
06-15-2011, 04:38 AM
Who is attributing what to his forehand? All i'm saying is that it is under rated.

Sigh! Nadal's forehand is the only reason he has all those Grand Slam Final wins over Federer.

Everyone knows this, (even those who describe it as a moonball), except you apparently. 4 years and nearly 1600 posts later, you still remain clueless. Sorry, but this is cluelessness that rivals Bud calling a professional player a 4.0.

Underrated? You are just getting your knickers in a twist over the fact that some people describe Nadal's FH as a moonball.

TennisFan3
06-15-2011, 01:53 PM
Its only underated by those who dont have a clue about tennis.

I think Nadal's 2004 forehand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)was faster. Now he ussually follows through up above his head. He used to follow through across hs body more often.

1/ 2004 v Hewitt AO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)- 17 years of age
2/ 2004 v hewitt (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeabrKndlUs&feature=related)
3/ 2004 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEJJpfcxHAM)
4/ 2011 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iyATmKMWmk)
5/ 2011 v Djoko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AesaDCV6W6o&feature=related)

True. He used DEAD strings in 2004 and still got mighty power. The reason: his stroke was the conventional across the body finish and much flatter in general. In fact, he regularly hit 100 mph+ forehands on rally shots, and he never does that now - only once in a blue moon. It's funny to see a baby Nadal cranking up BIG forehands, bigger than he does now. His forehand also used to penetrate the court much better then. If he had kept on with it, he probably would have had more slams, done much less running and wouldn't have been injured. Not to mention more people would like his playing style.

For whatever reason, starting late 2005-early 2006, Toni made Nadal switch to a exaggerated reverse finish close to his head. This enabled him to get more spin, but at the expense of pace and penetration. Without doubt this was a great tactic against Federer, but it hurt Nadal's HC game, especially against the rest of the field. I recall Nadal getting blown of the court by big hitters before 2008, and I used to think that the 2004 Nadal wouldn't have lost to these guys.

Whereas in 2004 Nadal TRULY an aggressive player (who relied on his forehand to hit winners at every opportunity) from 2006 Nadal became a counter-puncher whose first instinct was to defend. It was not until 2008 that Nadal flattened out his forehand (a little), improved serve + backhand - that he was able to win outside clay. Of course with these improvements he won 3 slams in 8 months, but then he got injured and lost momentum.

I think Nadal took a big step back when he modified his 2004 forehand. Back in 2004 all the variations of his forehands were deadly. Because the stroke had so much penetration, even if he hit it short, it was not a big deal.

Now.however, his cross court forehand is useless, unless he get GOOD depth on it. It's basically just spin with little penetration. So if he hits it short, guys like Djoker, Delpo, Murray take him to the woodshed with their backhands. Given his hollow stick, Nadal relies 100% on racquet head acceleration and arm speed to generate depth. So whenever he is tight or tired, he cannot brush the ball enough, and it become a short moonball which is obliterated by his opponent.

The only way for Nadal to attack is to use his off-forehand i.e Inside out or DTL. By their nature, these are flatter strokes (than cc fh) and penetrate through the court better. Plus Nadal has great disguise on them. The only problem is that Nadal doesn't hit them enough. And when he's not confident, he hits 95% cross court, which makes him one-dimensional and predictable.

Outside of going back to the 2004 forehand , for Nadal to counter the big hitters, he needs to use a heavier stick (with some more juice in the frame) so that he doesn't hit short and the ball penetrates the court better. That, and use the off-forehand much more. That will be the key to Nadal in the tail-end of his career in the near future..

Defcon
06-15-2011, 08:53 PM
Nadal's forehand, by itself (i..e. take away the rest of his game) will never place in the top 10 in the game, like say Sampras or Federer. Its not a fearsome stroke by any means.

Every player knows what he can do with it and no one tries to avoid hitting to it like they would to someone with a killer forehand.


So no, it is not underrated.

gold soundz
06-15-2011, 08:55 PM
Nadal's forehand, by itself (i..e. take away the rest of his game) will never place in the top 10 in the game, like say Sampras or Federer. Its not a fearsome stroke by any means.

Every player knows what he can do with it and no one tries to avoid hitting to it like they would to someone with a killer forehand.


So no, it is not underrated.

I'd rate Nadal's forehand well above Sampras. Sure he might not be able to hit cold winners as much, but when you take into consideration all the factors, it's better.

MichaelNadal
06-15-2011, 09:02 PM
Nadal's forehand, by itself (i..e. take away the rest of his game) will never place in the top 10 in the game, like say Sampras or Federer. Its not a fearsome stroke by any means.

Every player knows what he can do with it and no one tries to avoid hitting to it like they would to someone with a killer forehand.


So no, it is not underrated.

http://michaeljacksonanimatedgifs.com/images/others/mjgif303.gif

Lsmkenpo
06-15-2011, 09:09 PM
I'd rate Nadal's forehand well above Sampras. Sure he might not be able to hit cold winners as much, but when you take into consideration all the factors, it's better.

Yes, for the slow era of tennis we are in now, it is better, winners are over rated, lets run around the court for 20-30 shots standing 10 foot behind the baseline and wait for the UE like a real man.

Bud
06-15-2011, 09:54 PM
Nadal's forehand, by itself (i..e. take away the rest of his game) will never place in the top 10 in the game, like say Sampras or Federer. Its not a fearsome stroke by any means.

Every player knows what he can do with it and no one tries to avoid hitting to it like they would to someone with a killer forehand.


So no, it is not underrated.

:lol::lol::lol:

Federer tried his best to continually find Nadal's BH during the FO final and failed.

namelessone
06-15-2011, 10:20 PM
Stupid thread.

I've never heard Nadal's forehand being under rated in any discussion.

Lsmkenpo
06-15-2011, 11:08 PM
(Is Soderling a real man? Or an unskilled man? I say unskilled. He can't hit 10 shots in a row on one wing without making an error)

A player has to play the game that best suits him, why would he want to hit
10-20 shots and try to outlast someone else running around the court, his movement isn't his best weapon, his best weapon is his power. Faster the court the more offense wins over defense.

If Nadal didn't have great movement he would have to take more risk and make more UEs. That day will come soon, Nadal loses a half step he is a slightly better version of Igor Andreev.

Cesc Fabregas
06-15-2011, 11:17 PM
Nadal has the best forehand of all time.

Ray Mercer
06-15-2011, 11:20 PM
Nadal has the best forehand of all time.

Haha then why has he won only two hardcourt slams if he's got the greatest forehand and movement? Nadal's forehand is not the most effective on hardcourts and his serve is average at best.

Viking_Golfer
06-15-2011, 11:27 PM
Dude, out of 10 forehand to forehand rallies Federer wins the vast majority, even on clay, it's the fact that Nadal keeps pounding Fed's backhand in every rally that gives him the W in the end

This ^^^^^^^ IS SPOT ON !!!!!

Best effective forehand in 'modern' tennis belongs to Federer, Lendl and Graf !!!

Not Verdasco, Del Potro, Söderling, Nadal nor Gonzalez !

tenniselbow1
06-16-2011, 12:19 AM
(Give Rafa time, he's only just reached his peak on hardcourts, so watch the next 3-5 years for more hardcourt slams. Rafa equaled Roddick's US Open service record last year for fewest breaks, beat Djokovic and Murray at the Indoor World Tour Finals, and took a set off Federer [Federer is undefeated 4-0 vs Rafa Indoors, while Rafa leads Federer 4-1 on outdoor hardcourts]. And Rafa hadn't dropped a set at the Australian Open until the injury in QF)

Its 3-1 Rafa on outdoor courts. Get your facts right. Hope your around when Rafa is 29:) as Fed was in his last loss against him. He's able to get wins off Fed (who has bad days often) for once in his career because Fed is 3-4 years into his decline.

Back to the forehand issue which is a total joke. Forehand to forehand , Rafa left or right handed, Federer destroys Rafa 80 to times out of 100.

ViscaB
06-16-2011, 12:53 AM
Haha then why has he won only two hardcourt slams if he's got the greatest forehand and movement? Nadal's forehand is not the most effective on hardcourts and his serve is average at best.

He doesn't win more hardcourts exactly because of the serve. In contrast to others he has to win most points from scratch. Most players get the majority of forehand winners right off the serve.

zagor
06-16-2011, 01:19 AM
Nadal's FH isn't underrated,most people realize it's a great shot.If anything what's underrated about Nadal is his fighting spirit,never-say-die attitude and his willingness to fight for every point like it's the very last point in his career.

mcr619619
06-16-2011, 03:38 AM
Dude man, didn't we all know that Federer's forehand is a piece of art and a gift from god whereas Nadal's forehand is just a product of modern racquets, hard work and some muscles? Sorry man but that's the truth like it or not, dispute this and you're labelled a *******.

So basically, a guy with only moonballs for forehands, arms the ball, relies only on tweener racquets, poly strings and muscles was able to get ten slams through dirt-balling with minimal talent. Didn't you know?

He's an inspiration to me, seriously, he lets me know that if I hit the gym, buy a babolat, hit with some poly strings and practice hard enough, I can be a grand slam winner one day too with minimal talent. (Well. Maybe I also need to see a psychiatrist to beast up my mental strength as well.)

you're almost right, but mininimal Talent? you gotta be kiddin' me...though im not a fan of Nadal, give him some respect..and i youre right, you have minimal talent

mandy01
06-16-2011, 03:41 AM
Nadal's FH isn't underrated,most people realize it's a great shot.If anything what's underrated about Nadal is his fighting spirit,never-say-die attitude and his willingness to fight for every point like it's the very last point in his career.you've got to be the best troll I've seen.You're taking the art of trollery to new heights,teaching the pretenders how it's done.

mcr619619
06-16-2011, 04:02 AM
(Is Soderling a real man? Or an unskilled man? I say unskilled. He can't hit 10 shots in a row on one wing without making an error)

^

A player has to play the game that best suits him, why would he want to hit
10-20 shots and try to outlast someone else running around the court, his movement isn't his best weapon, his best weapon is his power. Faster the court the more offense wins over defense.

If Nadal didn't have great movement he would have to take more risk and make more UEs. That day will come soon, Nadal loses a half step he is a slightly better version of Igor Andreev.

BULLZ1LLA, you just made yourself AGAIN looks like a *******..said Soder is unskilled because he can't do a long rallies where your Idol is the Best.. it's all about playing within your strength, so why does Nadal always target Fed's BH? so is Nadal too unskilled to be afraid of Fed's FH? no, because that's how he can win,that's his strategy, and for Soder, it's his strategy to shorten the points, hit flat shots(which have way higher risk than Topspin) and win by doing winners, not wearing out the opponent, and grind like Nadal..why play a game you ain't suit to or you can't play.. it's common sense, but as much as i've read your post, you don't have that..

mcr619619
06-16-2011, 04:05 AM
(Rafa has the best backhand passing shot in tennis)

that's the only true among all you've posted...

Tmano
06-16-2011, 04:16 AM
Its only underated by those who dont have a clue about tennis.

I think Nadal's 2004 forehand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)was faster. Now he ussually follows through up above his head. He used to follow through across hs body more often.

1/ 2004 v Hewitt AO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)- 17 years of age
2/ 2004 v hewitt (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeabrKndlUs&feature=related)
3/ 2004 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEJJpfcxHAM)
4/ 2011 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iyATmKMWmk)
5/ 2011 v Djoko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AesaDCV6W6o&feature=related)

You bet, it was faster more penetrating and his was hitting the ball with much less spin...maybe due to he was playing with a different racquet..was it the pure drive II generation? Definitely his return forhend looked a bit like Agassi's FH

bluetrain4
06-16-2011, 07:05 AM
True. He used DEAD strings in 2004 and still got mighty power. The reason: his stroke was the conventional across the body finish and much flatter in general. In fact, he regularly hit 100 mph+ forehands on rally shots, and he never does that now - only once in a blue moon. It's funny to see a baby Nadal cranking up BIG forehands, bigger than he does now. His forehand also used to penetrate the court much better then. If he had kept on with it, he probably would have had more slams, done much less running and wouldn't have been injured. Not to mention more people would like his playing style.

For whatever reason, starting late 2005-early 2006, Toni made Nadal switch to a exaggerated reverse finish close to his head. This enabled him to get more spin, but at the expense of pace and penetration. Without doubt this was a great tactic against Federer, but it hurt Nadal's HC game, especially against the rest of the field. I recall Nadal getting blown of the court by big hitters before 2008, and I used to think that the 2004 Nadal wouldn't have lost to these guys.

Whereas in 2004 Nadal TRULY an aggressive player (who relied on his forehand to hit winners at every opportunity) from 2006 Nadal became a counter-puncher whose first instinct was to defend. It was not until 2008 that Nadal flattened out his forehand (a little), improved serve + backhand - that he was able to win outside clay. Of course with these improvements he won 3 slams in 8 months, but then he got injured and lost momentum.

I think Nadal took a big step back when he modified his 2004 forehand. Back in 2004 all the variations of his forehands were deadly. Because the stroke had so much penetration, even if he hit it short, it was not a big deal.

Now.however, his cross court forehand is useless, unless he get GOOD depth on it. It's basically just spin with little penetration. So if he hits it short, guys like Djoker, Delpo, Murray take him to the woodshed with their backhands. Given his hollow stick, Nadal relies 100% on racquet head acceleration and arm speed to generate depth. So whenever he is tight or tired, he cannot brush the ball enough, and it become a short moonball which is obliterated by his opponent.

The only way for Nadal to attack is to use his off-forehand i.e Inside out or DTL. By their nature, these are flatter strokes (than cc fh) and penetrate through the court better. Plus Nadal has great disguise on them. The only problem is that Nadal doesn't hit them enough. And when he's not confident, he hits 95% cross court, which makes him one-dimensional and predictable.

Outside of going back to the 2004 forehand , for Nadal to counter the big hitters, he needs to use a heavier stick (with some more juice in the frame) so that he doesn't hit short and the ball penetrates the court better. That, and use the off-forehand much more. That will be the key to Nadal in the tail-end of his career in the near future..

How heavy is Nadal's frame? I wouldn't be surprised if it's lighter than a lot of other frames that top players have used and still use, such as the 14.2 oz beheamoth used by Sampras, given his game style.

BUT, I'd have to assume that it's considerably heavier than a stock 11.3 oz AeroPro Drive. I'm guessing mid to upper 12 oz range: 12.4-12.9 oz

BeHappy
06-16-2011, 07:50 AM
Its only underated by those who dont have a clue about tennis.

I think Nadal's 2004 forehand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)was faster. Now he ussually follows through up above his head. He used to follow through across hs body more often.

1/ 2004 v Hewitt AO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CvCxCnOC7Q&feature=related)- 17 years of age
2/ 2004 v hewitt (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeabrKndlUs&feature=related)
3/ 2004 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEJJpfcxHAM)
4/ 2011 v Freddy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iyATmKMWmk)
5/ 2011 v Djoko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AesaDCV6W6o&feature=related)

Yeah but he lost those matches. He thought he had to play that way because he had no idea how to play on hard court. His first victory against Federer on hardcourt way back around that time he was hitting his incredible loopy forehand.


I have never heard anyone ever under rate Nadal's forehand by the way. It's one of the absolute best forehands in history.

Sneezy
06-16-2011, 08:03 AM
Its only underated by those who dont have a clue about tennis.



Underrated by people who have no clue about tennis, and are FISHING for COMPLIMENTS of Nadal's forehand. If anything, I think because Nadal's groundstrokes are so good his net game is underrated.

pabletion
06-16-2011, 09:07 AM
While his critics attribute his success to modern tennis equipment, i think that equipment alone would not have Nadal at 10 majors. His strategy of attacking his opponents backhand relentlessly may seem boring and some may even call it cheating, but they dont realize how difficult it is to pull that off consistently.

We are talking about Nadal going up against argubly the best forehand ever in Roger Federer. This means that Nadal's cross court forehand has to be extremely precise, or else Federer has a chance to hit his own inside out forehand. And the fact that Nadal is able to find Federer's backhand so frequently is a testament to his control of that fuzzy yellow ball. Think about it...

whoa.... I think you are very very wrong in your assumption, cause I've heard and read numerous times about how great a shot Nadal's FH is, one of the best in the game. Roger Federer himself has said that, and I can recall Fed talking about it once when asked what the perfect player would be like, and he mentioned he would have Nadal's forehand.

Why would anyone who knows about tennis consider playing to an opponents weakest side (in Nadal's case, Federer's backhand) as cheating? bogus....

Bottom line, Nadal's forehand, to me, is an amazing shot, specially when he has enough time to set his feet and go for it, something he's developed a lot in the last 3-4 years and the reason he's no. 1 and won 10 majors. Its scary how much power he's got and even more scary how it seems sometimes hes got no shot and you see him running like hell to not just hit a decent parallel down the line FH, but an absolute rocket of a shot his opponent can hardly see. His forehand has come a long way since I first saw him on tour, which was much more defensive and/or conservative, with more spin and almost always finishing up on top of his head.

Its not an orthodox shot, and in my opinion not to be taught or imitated, cause it clearly takes a gifted athlete like Nadal to be able to generate such pace and spin. His forehand is definitely one of my favorite shots in the ATP right now.