PDA

View Full Version : Federer's sideways movement to his right?


monfed
03-16-2012, 01:32 AM
Don't you find it a little puzzling that Federer's movement to his right to cover for his relatively weaker BH(when it gets exposed) isn't the greatest?
Shouldn't it be almost automatic for him to be extremely swift to his right to help in situations where his BH is exposed?
This is one part of Fed's game that I find a bit difficult to digest if you will. Do you feel he misses a lot of running FHs that he ought to be making?

kimbahpnam
03-16-2012, 01:42 AM
Don't you find it a little puzzling that Federer's movement to his right to cover for his relatively weaker BH(when it gets exposed) isn't the greatest?
Shouldn't it be almost automatic for him to be extremely swift to his right to help in situations where his BH is exposed?
This is one part of Fed's game that I find a bit difficult to digest if you will. Do you feel he misses a lot of running FHs that he ought to be making?

this is what i find puzzling

joeri888
03-16-2012, 01:43 AM
Don't you find it a little puzzling that Federer's movement to his right to cover for his relatively weaker BH(when it gets exposed) isn't the greatest?
Shouldn't it be almost automatic for him to be extremely swift to his right to help in situations where his BH is exposed?
This is one part of Fed's game that I find a bit difficult to digest if you will. Do you feel he misses a lot of running FHs that he ought to be making?

I don't get it. Do you mean to his forehand (to his right?) or to his backhand (to his left?). First of all his defensive backhand is probably one of the very best there is around. He's got a great slice and a one handed backhand which gives him that extra few feet of reach. I don't think his movement to his backhand side is lacking.

If you mean that he leans to his left to defend his backhand and thus his movement to his right and FOREHAND should be better, I come closer to agreeing with you. However, don't forget that Federer is about to turn 31. Just watch some matches from 2003 and 2004, and you will see what insane movement he had towards both sides.

joeri888
03-16-2012, 01:43 AM
this is what i find puzzling

Lol. Yeah, beat me to it in fewer words.

Rozroz
03-16-2012, 01:45 AM
oops? what's wrong with you monfed?

kimbahpnam
03-16-2012, 01:52 AM
Lol. Yeah, beat me to it in fewer words.

Brevity is the essence of wit ;)

monfed
03-16-2012, 01:59 AM
Federer's movement to his FH side, I thought that was obvious, I guess not.

Let me explain -

When Fed's taken out of court position by hitting to his BH and THEN the opponent hits to his FH, I often find Fed struggles to hit a good running FH . Do you find this puzzling SINCE his movement to his FH side should be absolutely sublime to COVER for his relatively lesser BH wing WHEN IT DOES GET EXPOSED.

joeri888
03-16-2012, 02:01 AM
Federer's movement to his FH side, I thought that was obvious, I guess not.

Let me explain -

When Fed's taken out of court position by hitting to his BH and THEN the opponent hits to his FH, I often find Fed struggles to hit a good running FH . Do you find this puzzling SINCE his movement to his FH side should be absolutely sublime to COVER for his relatively lesser BH wing WHEN IT DOES GET EXPOSED.

Okay, than I understood your question correct. I think most is due to age actually. In his prime, he hit a very good running forehand.

monfed
03-16-2012, 02:03 AM
Okay, than I understood your question correct. I think most is due to age actually. In his prime, he hit a very good running forehand.

It never was as good as Pete's, was it?

joeri888
03-16-2012, 02:13 AM
It never was as good as Pete's, was it?

Nope. But it wasn't that far off. Never saw it as a weakness, only the last few years it has been. Not sure why. Maybe one of his legs isn't as strong as the other one? Federer always tended to be a bit lazy when it came to working out and physical training until 2002 or something. Might have never completely made up for that.

monfed
03-16-2012, 02:18 AM
Nope. But it wasn't that far off. Never saw it as a weakness, only the last few years it has been. Not sure why. Maybe one of his legs isn't as strong as the other one? Federer always tended to be a bit lazy when it came to working out and physical training until 2002 or something. Might have never completely made up for that.

True, it's not a weakness but i wish it was his his biggest strength along with his GOAT FH. I wish he dashed to his FH side faster than Usain Bolt and made a scorching FH DTL pass EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. :)

Nathaniel_Near
03-16-2012, 02:27 AM
True, it's not a weakness but i wish it was his his biggest strength along with his GOAT FH. I wish he dashed to his FH side faster than Usain Bolt and made a scorching FH DTL pass EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. :)

His explosive movement to that side and general instantaneous reactions have declined somewhat. He used to cut across so impressively. Roger slides more than he used to these days and can't immediately spring back into action as easily when he changes directions. To me this sliding is NOT impressive, it merely goes to show that he's had to make adaptations as his natural explosive athleticism and lightness have somewhat decreased.

Bobby Jr
03-16-2012, 02:29 AM
Federer's movement to his FH side, I thought that was obvious, I guess not.

Let me explain -

When Fed's taken out of court position by hitting to his BH and THEN the opponent hits to his FH, I often find Fed struggles to hit a good running FH . Do you find this puzzling SINCE his movement to his FH side should be absolutely sublime to COVER for his relatively lesser BH wing WHEN IT DOES GET EXPOSED.
You obviously struggle to explain things clearly.

I'll do it for you:
- Federer covers his backhand by standing a little into the left side of the court.
- This leaves a bigger gap on his forehand side, the right side of the court.
- Ergo, he should be better at covering the forehand side - especially since he favours his forehand.
- Why isn't he?

Nathaniel_Near
03-16-2012, 02:32 AM
On the backhand side, Federer has a reliable slice which functions efficiently even on the full stretch. He doesn't have an equivalent forehand shot. His movement to his BH side to slice the ball is ab-so-lute-ly divine and I could watch it all day!

fed_rulz
03-16-2012, 04:15 AM
It never was as good as Pete's, was it?

Pete's running FH is wayyy overrated. He missed many more than he made, but the ones he made did appear spectacular, because it was a rarity then. Not anymore.

Wilander Fan
03-16-2012, 04:15 AM
Its hard to say whether he is actually slower to his right or its just that he leaves that side exposed since everyone basically hits to his BH anyway and he is always looking to run around the BH.

wangs78
03-16-2012, 04:16 AM
Fed's special skill has always been hitting sublime shots when his feet are in position. A running forehand, by definition, is when you are still running and I don't think Fed has ever been that good at that.

And whenever he is caught running (both to his left or right), he generally hits a defensive slice, which is very normal expected. Pete did something very special and rare which is hitting his running forehand with topspin which would earn him great passing shot winners, both cross court and down the line. It was what he was known for, along with the serve and the leaping overhead.

kragster
03-16-2012, 04:53 AM
Pete's running FH is wayyy overrated. He missed many more than he made, but the ones he made did appear spectacular, because it was a rarity then. Not anymore.

C'mon dude , Fed does a lot of things better than Pete but the running forehand is one area where it's hard to touch Pete. The thing with Fed is that he is rarely out of position and that's why he doesn't NEED the running FH as much as say Rafa. Overall obviously Fed has the goat FH but his running FH isn't even as good as Rafa's, forget Pete.

kragster
03-16-2012, 04:54 AM
Fed's special skill has always been hitting sublime shots when his feet are in position. A running forehand, by definition, is when you are still running and I don't think Fed has ever been that good at that.

And whenever he is caught running (both to his left or right), he generally hits a defensive slice, which is very normal expected. Pete did something very special and rare which is hitting his running forehand with topspin which would earn him great passing shot winners, both cross court and down the line. It was what he was known for, along with the serve and the leaping overhead.

Hit the nail on the head.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-16-2012, 05:20 AM
In what sense was Pete's running FH better than Fed's? I like how people pull things out of nowhere and assume it's a given fact :)

helloworld
03-16-2012, 05:23 AM
In what sense was Pete's running FH better than Fed's? I like how people pull things out of nowhere and assume it's a given fact :)

The answer should be as clear as comparing Pete's serve to Federer's serve if you actually know tennis. :?

BeHappy
03-16-2012, 05:30 AM
Becker, Lendl and Nadal are [the only] three players whose running forehands are as good as Pete's in my opinion.

above bored
03-16-2012, 06:03 AM
It never was as good as Pete's, was it?
It doesn't have to be as good as Sampras' to still be good. Anyhing less than Sampras' does not mean it's bad.

In any case, a large part of the reason why Sampras was able to hit the running forehand so well was because he played with an eastern grip (I'm not one of those who believes Federer uses the same grip).

With an eastern grip you hit the ball more to your side (less in front), so if you are on the run you can take the ball later without losing power, which means you have more time. In fact, you get better leverage to the side than you do in front, that's where the best strike zone is for an eastern grip, which also happens to accentuate the forward momentum of the racket more than a semi-western or western grip (which means more power, less spin). Add the fact that you are also running into the ball (even more momentum) and you get Sampras' running forehand.

monfed
03-16-2012, 06:20 AM
It doesn't have to be as good as Sampras' to still be good. Anyhing less than Sampras' does not mean it's bad.

In any case, a large part of the reason why Sampras was able to hit the running forehand so well was because he played with an eastern grip (I'm not one of those who believes Federer uses the same grip).

With an eastern grip you hit the ball more to your side (less in front), so if you are on the run you can take the ball later without losing power, which means you have more time. In fact, you get better leverage to the side than you do in front, that's where the best strike zone is for an eastern grip, which also happens to accentuate the forward momentum of the racket more than a semi-western or western grip (which means more power, less spin). Add the fact that you are also running into the ball (even more momentum) and you get Sampras' running forehand.


Great analysis. Too bad a *********** won't admit it. :lol:

Talker
03-16-2012, 06:25 AM
So many running shots he makes goes straight into the net again and again.
I don't know why he wouldn't put a little more air under it, maybe not a good shot but he still would have a chance.

kragster
03-16-2012, 06:29 AM
It doesn't have to be as good as Sampras' to still be good. Anyhing less than Sampras' does not mean it's bad.

In any case, a large part of the reason why Sampras was able to hit the running forehand so well was because he played with an eastern grip (I'm not one of those who believes Federer uses the same grip).

With an eastern grip you hit the ball more to your side (less in front), so if you are on the run you can take the ball later without losing power, which means you have more time. In fact, you get better leverage to the side than you do in front, that's where the best strike zone is for an eastern grip, which also happens to accentuate the forward momentum of the racket more than a semi-western or western grip (which means more power, less spin). Add the fact that you are also running into the ball (even more momentum) and you get Sampras' running forehand.

Excellent analysis. By absolute standards, I don't think a shot exists that Fed can't hit well so I don't think we are talking absolutes. I think in the relative world though, when comparing with possibly the best running FH in the game, Fed is not as good. But he doesn't need to because more often than not, Fed is making the opponent do the running!

Dark Victory
03-16-2012, 06:43 AM
It doesn't have to be as good as Sampras' to still be good. Anyhing less than Sampras' does not mean it's bad.

In any case, a large part of the reason why Sampras was able to hit the running forehand so well was because he played with an eastern grip (I'm not one of those who believes Federer uses the same grip).

With an eastern grip you hit the ball more to your side (less in front), so if you are on the run you can take the ball later without losing power, which means you have more time. In fact, you get better leverage to the side than you do in front, that's where the best strike zone is for an eastern grip, which also happens to accentuate the forward momentum of the racket more than a semi-western or western grip (which means more power, less spin). Add the fact that you are also running into the ball (even more momentum) and you get Sampras' running forehand.
This basically sums it up. And his athleticism of course.

Pete never stutter-stepped when he hit a running forehand. He didn't need to square up either. He was always moving laterally and "with the ball" when he hit the shot.

Funnily enough, I recently rewatched Baby Fed vs Agassi in Basel 1998.

Fed hit a couple of running forehands in that match with Pete's eastern grip and form-wise, it really showed. But yeah, back then, he was more of an imitator and was still trying to find his own game.

nadalwon2012
03-16-2012, 06:44 AM
In what sense was Pete's running FH better than Fed's? I like how people pull things out of nowhere and assume it's a given fact :)

The answer should be as clear as comparing Pete's serve to Federer's serve if you actually know tennis. :?

http://i1156.photobucket.com/albums/p574/olivezbucket/burn.gif

Well said, very well said.

Dark Victory
03-16-2012, 06:57 AM
On Eastern grip btw...

It's not difficult to see how easily many people today can believe that Fed is into the same kind of Eastern grip that Sampras used. Which I don't believe.

Federer uses semi-western. Incredibly varied semi-western. But still essentially semi-western nonetheless.

Nobody really uses Eastern grip anymore. It's a difficult grip for consistent groundstrokes. It's by-and-large obsolete. Very few players now have experience using it. Which is also the reason why folks today turn to video to see what it looks like and to be able to say that yes, Fed does use Eastern.

Unfortunately and misguidedly, quite often, the stroke results don't really show it.

Even with close-ups and slow-mo, videos can only tell you so much.

fed_rulz
03-16-2012, 07:13 AM
C'mon dude , Fed does a lot of things better than Pete but the running forehand is one area where it's hard to touch Pete. The thing with Fed is that he is rarely out of position and that's why he doesn't NEED the running FH as much as say Rafa. Overall obviously Fed has the goat FH but his running FH isn't even as good as Rafa's, forget Pete.

are you disputing that Sampras missed a lot more running FHs than he hit winners off?

in any case, I disagree that Sampras is the GOAT of running FHs; it was spectacular during his time, now the top athletes routinely do it.

ultradr
03-16-2012, 07:46 AM
Don't you find it a little puzzling that Federer's movement to his right to cover for his relatively weaker BH(when it gets exposed) isn't the greatest?
Shouldn't it be almost automatic for him to be extremely swift to his right to help in situations where his BH is exposed?
This is one part of Fed's game that I find a bit difficult to digest if you will. Do you feel he misses a lot of running FHs that he ought to be making?


Yes, it's been like that for all of his career. It is one of the thing exploited by Nadal's game.

It's combination of things:
1. It's a modern forehand. You need to plant right foot. Modern forehand is
not exactly optimal when you wanna hit it on the run. You have to plant
your feet and jump. Federer ha extreme modern forehand with very violent
swing path. It's not really optimized for scooping up wide stretched shots.

2. Federer is fast enough and has graceful and stout mover. But he isn't
exactly the most fluidic, explosive mover you'll ever seen. He makes up
for it with the greatest anticipation ability I've ever seen. His running
ability gets revealed when he chases very much "expected" wide stretched
shots.

kragster
03-16-2012, 08:00 AM
are you disputing that Sampras missed a lot more running FHs than he hit winners off?

.

I am disputing that Sampras missed a higher % of running FH's than Fed or for that matter Rafa, who I consider to have the best running FH in the game currently.

BeHappy
03-16-2012, 08:01 AM
It doesn't have to be as good as Sampras' to still be good. Anyhing less than Sampras' does not mean it's bad.

In any case, a large part of the reason why Sampras was able to hit the running forehand so well was because he played with an eastern grip (I'm not one of those who believes Federer uses the same grip).

With an eastern grip you hit the ball more to your side (less in front), so if you are on the run you can take the ball later without losing power, which means you have more time. In fact, you get better leverage to the side than you do in front, that's where the best strike zone is for an eastern grip, which also happens to accentuate the forward momentum of the racket more than a semi-western or western grip (which means more power, less spin). Add the fact that you are also running into the ball (even more momentum) and you get Sampras' running forehand.


Becker and Nadal use Western grips and hit their running forehands as good as Pete. Lendl used a semi western.

nadalwon2012
03-16-2012, 10:43 AM
Federer is a lot more error-prone than Sampras ever was.

purge
03-16-2012, 11:00 AM
i think fed has always had a sublime on the run FH. :?

fed_rulz
03-16-2012, 11:05 AM
I am disputing that Sampras missed a higher % of running FH's than Fed or for that matter Rafa, who I consider to have the best running FH in the game currently.

we can agree to disagree then.

kragster
03-16-2012, 12:33 PM
we can agree to disagree then.

That is in essence the definition of democracy :).

timnz
03-16-2012, 01:00 PM
Its not age - its just that his inside out forehand was always better than his running forehand. His running forehand was never in the league of lendls or sampras. Its a technique issue.

jackson vile
03-16-2012, 01:52 PM
Fed's special skill has always been hitting sublime shots when his feet are in position. A running forehand, by definition, is when you are still running and I don't think Fed has ever been that good at that.

And whenever he is caught running (both to his left or right), he generally hits a defensive slice, which is very normal expected. Pete did something very special and rare which is hitting his running forehand with topspin which would earn him great passing shot winners, both cross court and down the line. It was what he was known for, along with the serve and the leaping overhead.

This is true, Pete was amazing in this regard. I think that Federer's fans simply desire to add to the myths.

Bobby Jr
03-16-2012, 02:50 PM
Pete hit great last ditch/go-for-broke running forehands for dead winners, especially against people at the net. Pete rules the last 10% of on-the-stretch running forehands. Other than that Federer's forehand is superior on the run.

Pete hit many, many amazing winners with his but, if you watched him play a lot and not just youtube highlight reels (like the vast majority of posters), his forehand has nothing on Federer's other than the above and taking swings on return of serve.

ultradr
03-16-2012, 03:06 PM
This discussion depends on how much "on the run" we are talking about.
As long as he can load on his legs, Federer hits it like GOAT.

But for true strokes on the run, classic stroke is just better than modern
stroke. classic strokes are also a bit better on cross-court while modern
fore handers hits inside-out almost more powerful than cross-court.

another thing is approach shots. modern forehand needs one hop and approach
while classic forehand is easier to run thru it.

above bored
03-16-2012, 10:44 PM
Becker and Nadal use Western grips and hit their running forehands as good as Pete. Lendl used a semi western.
Becker had a semi-western grip and neither Lendl, Nadal or Becker hit a running forehand as well as Sampras.

abmk
03-16-2012, 10:49 PM
Federer is a lot more error-prone than Sampras ever was.

you wouldn't know considering you've been watching only 2008. Now time to go back to your Nadal shrine, create another profile which you can use after this one gets the banhammer

abmk
03-16-2012, 10:51 PM
C'mon dude , Fed does a lot of things better than Pete but the running forehand is one area where it's hard to touch Pete. The thing with Fed is that he is rarely out of position and that's why he doesn't NEED the running FH as much as say Rafa. Overall obviously Fed has the goat FH but his running FH isn't even as good as Rafa's, forget Pete.

I actually think rafa's running FH is better than pete's. Pete hit more "spectacular" shots, but missed quite a bit more ..... Both obv better than fed's. But fed doesn't have to hit that many running FHs as these two considering he's in position more often than these 2

abmk
03-16-2012, 10:54 PM
federer's movement to the right was excellent at his prime. It is one area that has declined remarkably, probably the 2nd most after his return .....

Love all
03-16-2012, 11:01 PM
you mean when he turns around his back hand and then rushes to his forehnd side to cover open court?

Love all
03-17-2012, 12:14 AM
Djokovic's running forehand is a lot better than than that of either Nadal or Sampras.

BeHappy
03-17-2012, 12:21 AM
Becker had a semi-western grip and neither Lendl, Nadal or Becker hit a running forehand as well as Sampras.

Becker used a western grip and Nadal, Becker and Lendl all hit their running forehands just as well as Sampras.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

above bored
03-17-2012, 01:28 AM
Becker used a western grip and Nadal, Becker and Lendl all hit their running forehands just as well as Sampras.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
Okay, whatever you say dude. :lol:

BeHappy
03-17-2012, 02:17 AM
Okay, whatever you say dude. :lol:

That's right ;)

nadalwon2012
03-17-2012, 02:25 AM
you wouldn't know considering you've been watching only 2008. Now time to go back to your Nadal shrine, create another profile which you can use after this one gets the banhammer

You aren't representing India very well (or you are, and shame on India).

Nathaniel_Near
03-17-2012, 02:28 AM
Nadal's running forehand is the best in history, in my opinion. Defensively it is practically infallible and its consistency is outstanding. His ability to turn the rally around on the back of a running forehand or two and win extra points this way is more significant probably than Pete's Lendl's or Federer's contributions, truth be told.

nadalwon2012
03-17-2012, 02:34 AM
Nadal's running forehand is the best in history, in my opinion. Defensively it is practically infallible and its consistency is outstanding. His ability to turn the rally around on the back of a running forehand or two and win extra points this way is more significant probably than Pete's Lendl's or Federer's contributions, truth be told.

True, and a lot of what Nadal does is on the run, so he certainly needed to perfect it in order to be a champion.

Notice how a lot of the wide ball Djokovic gets he gets by stopping partially and stretching with his upper-body. Meanwhile a lot of the wide balls Nadal gets is by actually running full-on in that direction and not stopping.

dannykl
03-17-2012, 02:57 AM
Nobody really uses Eastern grip anymore. It's a difficult grip for consistent groundstrokes. It's by-and-large obsolete.


Steffi Graf used Eastern grip and her forehand is still widely considered as the best ever in women's tennis history. Player can use Eastern forehand but still have high consistent groundstrokes like Steffi.

Nowadays female players use semi-western or western forehand, but their consistency generally is terrible.

As for running forehand, Steffi has the best in women's tennis. She has the best movement in WTA and the best forehand in women's tennis, so it is logical for her to have the best running forehand in WTA as well.

I think Federer's side movement limits his ability to hit top running forehands.
Nadal's side movement is better than Federer's so Rafa's running forehand is also better than Federer's.

Same in the case of Steffi. It is because Graf can move very well side way that enables her to create the best women's running forehand. Without her excellent side movement, she would not be able to make her running forehand so great.

Another reason why Steffi, Nadal and Pete are so great on running forehands is they are all experts of reverse forehand. They know the skills of reverse forehand very well. A top class reverse forehand is essential for a top running forehand. Their reverse forehands are just the best in the game.

Wilander Fan
03-17-2012, 04:03 AM
I think people are confused about this. Sampras hit his running FH full stretch with a wrist flick for crazy winners. Players today take this ball and either pop it up in the air for a defensive lob or slice it back. Nadal has a great FH on the run but he opens it up and hits off the back foot. If he doesnt have time to do this, it becomes a defensive shot. Maybe the only guy that actually has something similar to a running fh today is Fed who has this odd looking squash shot which is kind of a hard slice off the FH from the full stretch.

I am no Sampras fan and I kind of gave up on tennis after seeing that running FH. It looked like the game had been completely nerfed by racket technology where you could hit screaming winners from the full stretch with a wrist flick. However, I did not give Sampras enough credit. He may be one of the most underrated players of all time and was probably the best pure athlete the sport has ever seen. His speed and explosive movement was on par with top tier NFL defensive backs and he had incredible leaping ability. Its not just the running FHs but those leaping overheads where he would jump into lobs like a slam dunk were insane. I think he simply could do things because of pure athleticism that no one even tries anymore.

nadalwon2012
03-17-2012, 04:24 AM
Nadal's running forehand is the same type of shot as Sampras', it is hit hard. Nadal's defensive lob is a different shot altogether.

abmk
03-17-2012, 04:29 AM
You aren't representing India very well (or you are, and shame on India).

You consider a person's comments as a representation of his/her country ? Lulz :)

TopFH
03-17-2012, 04:48 AM
You aren't representing India very well (or you are, and shame on India).

You are getting racist. What a person says does not represent the feeling of the other few million people in his country. Remember that this is a tennis forum, not a political one in which to discuss issues of countries and governments.