abmk
Bionic Poster
He has a darn good backhand smash ( and overall smash )
The best backhand ever?
- Thread starter theagassiman
- Start date
He has a darn good backhand smash ( and overall smash )
abmk
Bionic Poster
Seriously ? Do you even read what you write ? Every respect ? No doubt connors' BH is better than fed's, but in every respect ?
Could he use the slice/short slice to change up and disturb the player's rhythm as fed does ? Recent example being the semi vs djoker. Plenty of others like safin, davydenko, nalbandian,soderling etc etc have all struggled atleast once against that
abmk
Bionic Poster
mental toughness - in the past 6 months or so, yeah, but not before that ..How many better backhands are better than djoker's in the past 20 years or so ? Agassi, Safin, Nalbandian .. who else ? you could argue kuerten, gasquet, murray as well, but who else ?
World Beater
Hall of Fame
You know, everyone talks about the meetings between Federer and Nadal when discussing how tough they are mentally. But when you said this the first thing that I thought of, for Fed's mental toughness, was the 2009 French, when they didn't meet.
From a mental point of view that was one of his toughest tests, because whenever a player has one missing title in his resume it becomes the most talked about Thing. A monkey on your back. It gets into your head -- or could easily get into your head enough to trip you up.
Plus in this case, specifically, after Nadal lost, Federer was expected to win. Which he did, though he had to fight out of two five-setters.
Last edited:
no, he wouldn't have. kuerten stands no chance against nadal on clay.
you overrate Kuerten's BH. A ball over the shoulder is something no one hander can handle.
in that case, me thinks it's time for new glasses for you. And watching something live is not basis for absolute truth. you could be watching todays tennis with a pre-judged opinion that today's -------- (fill in the blanks) is not as good as the laver era; in which case, no amount of watching anything live is going to change your opinion. so please stop citing live tennis as corroborating evidence for every claim that you make.
i'm not so sure about the volleys, but his bh smash is arguably the best that i've seen -- even better than rafters.
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
i maintain that Feds backhand holds its own. Its on clay and against an onslaught by the like of Nadal or Djoko that it can missfire but overall its a fantastic shot. If one has the objectivity to weigh in what he does with it on grass , hard court and indoors , well... enough said.
Who on tour today has better slice that he does for example?
Who on tour today has better slice that he does for example?
I agree with you. I've agrued along similar lines in the past-- given that Fed has won 16 slams, with a vast majority of shots directed to his BH, there must be something right that he's doing with that wing? But hey, what do I know -- the "consensus" on this forum is that a predominantly S &V player like Edberg apparently has a much better BH than arguably the best baseline player of all time, where the shots he hits the most are off the BH wing.
Well there's no way he has the best backhand volley ever. He looks pretty doing it, but it's only good, better than most on tour at the moment, nothing more.
Agreed on the backhand smash. As good as Rafter. Maybe better.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Of course. However a backhand that is effective on clay but is not that great on fast surfaces probably wouldn't be considered on the top backhands list.
I loved the played of Manuel Orantes and I thought his backhand was terrific on clay surfaces. He had all the shots with his backhand. However while he had a number of successes on faster surfaces I don't think it was nearly as effective. An example of this was his match on har tru against Connors at the 1975 US Open and his later challenge match against Connors. He beat Connors easily on the har tru and got crushed by Connors on the faster surface. Yet on a clay surface in 1977 against Connors (Indianapolis I believe) he against destroyed Connors in straight sets.
Last edited:
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Ignoramus post of the month!
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Hahahahaha! Classic use of strawmen when you have no other basis to argue from. But, I won't hold your lack of critical thinking skills against you. OK, I will. Let's count the strawmen shall we:
(1) I need new glasses.
Except, I don't wear glasses.
(2) Seeing something live is not a basis for absolute truth.
Oh, but not seeing something live is a better basis for truth? That's what you are implying. Don't you feel silly now? And, I never said "absolute truth," I said in my opinion, which I have a rational basis to have since I've actually had the privilege to see many of the all time greats live. I'm sorry if it hurts your tender feelings to have your hero dujour put in perspective of the all time greats. But, it works like this - all time great means "all time." Not merely in your limited experience.
(3) I could be watching todays tennis with a pre-judged opinion that todays era is not as good as the Lave era.
I never said that either. In fact, you have no idea how many times my opinion has changed from watching live tennis.
Next time, try arguing from facts instead of strawmen and unsupportable implications.
Last edited:
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Federer's BH volley, like his BH slice, is a hard chop. Both are low percentage shots with a low margin for error. And it shows. He also lacks the depth control that the great BH volleyers and slicers had because of his hard chop technique. I don't know what Nalbandian is doing these days, but, IMO, he probably had the best volleys, and the best overall net game, over the past 6-7 years. I can't think of anyone else who's volleys and ability to play net I think was better in that time frame.
But, the best BH smash I've ever seen was Stan Smith's. In my mind, that's not very debatable to anyone who's seen it. In the 72' Wimbledon final, Nastase tried many times to lob over Smith's backhand with his great topspin BH lob, and Smith smashed it away with a flick of the wrist, over and over again, leading Nastase to refer to Smith as Godzilla. I never thought much of the rest of Smith's game. I thought he was a major overachiever. But, his BH smash was great.
Last edited:
Good call on Nalbandian. While I'm not sure his volleys are the best from that time frame (although I can't say he'd have all that many rivals in this area) his net game probably is. He was lightning at the net.
Never seen any of Smith's matches.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
I really like Nalbandian's volleying technique. He looks more comfortable and competent at net than anyone else today. And his ground game is one of the best I've ever seen. If he had a bigger serve, and better health, he'd be an all timer, IMO. In fact, if he only had better health he might have been an all timer.
Smith's game was actually quite disappointing to me. He was slow footed and seemed almost lethargic compared to the intensity of other greats like Laver, Nastase, etc. What he did well was serve and blanket the net. And, of course, he had a great smash on either side.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
I've seen Stan Smith's backhand overhead many times and I agree with you, it's the best I've seen. It was almost always a putaway.
Sorry, wrong again. Your only claim to "rational" basis is watching matches live. I never implied that "not watching live" is basis for anything. you're forming a corollary that wasn't there to begin with.
If watching matches live is the primary criterion for one to give opinions, then TV commentators are best suited to give one -- and guess what, there are many that think Djoker's BH and return of serve is among the best ever, which flies contrary to your claim of "no shot" of Djoker can be in the top 10 or 20.
So you've watched a lot of live matches? i envy you, and you're surely among the privileged few in the world to have done it. good for you. But it ends there. Please don't claim that your opinions are more "rational" than those of others. They're just opinions. Actually, your opinions are only as "rational" as you claim of Rosewall's 80 mph slice.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
LOL! Once again you resort to manufacturing strawmen to argue against, since you have no basis to argue against my premises. I never said my only claim to having a "rational basis" for my opinions is watching live matches. I never said that my opinions are more rational than others. I just ask, what is your opinion about past greats based on? There are a lot of potential factors, in addition to witnessing live play, that form a rational basis to support an opinion. Written history from an eye witness would be one. Video would be another.
But yes, I do think watching a tennis player live in World class competition is the best basis to have an opinion about that player's abilities. It also helps a lot if the watcher happens to be tennis player who can more appreciate what he/she is looking at. (Except for Mary Carillo. Nothing can help Carillo!). Although, as many have pointed out, sometimes former pro commentators make some pretty preposterous comments when they're making a live call.
But, apparently, you have no bases to have any opinion about past greats whatsoever. Because if you did, you'd have proffered them by now. Accordingly, all you are left with is to attack my bases for having an opinion. WEAK! It just tears you to pieces that your hero is being compared negatively to the greats of the past by someone who has seen both present day greats, and former greats, live, and you have no rational basis to dispute it, doesn't it? Fess up! Kinda leaves you unarmed and out of the debate, don't it! Oh well! LMAO!
Last edited:
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
The comment is pretty well known so yes I have hear about the comment but I've never seen Nastase play Smith in person. I have seen both play numerous times but not against each other.
Smith's overhead in general was fantastic in my opinion. I was watching Smith play one time at Forest Hills and he easily put away every lob. Many in the Grandstand were saying why even try to lob Smith? The reasoning was that if you lob him he'll just smash it away and the opponent will lose the point.
It's funny in retrospect but in 1973 when Smith won the WCT Championship many were saying Smith was the heir to Laver. I think at the end of the year Smith was tied with Jimmy Connors for co-United States number one.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
Only because of Tony Roche's TE problems. To my recollection, Smith was one of the few who had a winning record against Laver. Of course, it was during Laver's decline. But, Laver did seem to struggle with Smith more than anyone else.
PS: Sadly, there's very little of Stan Smith video to find online as far as I can find. But, here are 2 short videos of Smith playing at the FO. You can get a feel for his heavy, ponderous movement and strokes, and his poetic service motion. You can also see how big Smith was compared to others of his day.
Singles against George Goven:
http://www.ina.fr/video/CAF95051528/tennis-goven-smith.fr.html
Doubles - Stan Smith/Tom Gorman vs. Arther Ashe/Marty Riessen:
http://www.ina.fr/sport/tennis/vide...oland-garros-victoire-ashe-et-riessen.fr.html
Last edited:
Post like this I doubt about you ever watch Guga, and Federer today. If Guga's bh was that good he shouldn't be losing to lesser players on clay. Nadal just doesn't lose to anyone, especially to a 1 handed bh. Also, the 1 handed today is a much, much more challenging than during Guga's time. The surface is slow, it's a baseline oriented game, and it benefit for the 2 handed bh.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
According to the ITF website Laver and Smith are tied at 7. Laver had some injury problems during the 1973 WCT season which explains some of his problems with Smith at that time. To be fair to Smith, he was playing the best tennis of his career. I think Laver had back problems which affected him on serve and overhead.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
I think, the ATP doesn't count 3 Laver wins over Smith at the Aetna World Cup and two at Hilton Head, which were big money events then. So imo it is more 10-7 to Laver. But PC 1 is right. Smith played extraordinary tennis in the spring of 1973. I saw him at Munich and Brussels on the WCT tour, where he looked very agile and technically solid, even on the backhand side. When he played Newk at Wimbie 1971, he still looked a bit wooden and sometimes sluggish. Newk didn't like his grin, which he sometimes showed after an opponents miss.
Yes his movement was sluggish and his S/V was very good. that was all predictable. I was impressed with his thoughtful play. He was quite the tactiician from the matches I saw. He knew where to put the volleys and hit the passes to most compromise his opponent. he wasn't just a 2 stroke rally genius a la Becker.
Fearsome Forehand
Professional
Peter Korda!
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
Yes. What a weapon, especially against Sampras at the 1997 US Open. 7-6 in the fifth. The BH passes were just exploding from his Volkl like rockets that day.
What ever happened with the drug scandal and Korda? Did he really use PED's? Or is that a dubious and disputed claim?
What ever happened with the drug scandal and Korda? Did he really use PED's? Or is that a dubious and disputed claim?
Fearsome Forehand
Professional
My recollection is that Korda was in trouble for use of a banned steroid. Something his doc gave him to help a foot injury heal faster. Don't think he knowingly took a banned substance.
Korda was the skinniest guy on tour so it was laughable if he got gigged for steroid use.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/tennis-korda-failed-wimbledon-drug-test-1193969.html
http://www.tennis-ontheline.com/99/99korda.htm
http://www.3dchem.com/molecules.asp?ID=2
As best I can tell, Korda escaped a suspension but had to repay his 1998 Wimby winnings and points.
This was the same substance (nandrolone) that was involved in a 2003? ATP scandal where many players tested positive and the subsequent investigation led the ATP to conclude that an electrolyte supplement given to players by ATP trainers was the source.
Korda was the skinniest guy on tour so it was laughable if he got gigged for steroid use.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/tennis-korda-failed-wimbledon-drug-test-1193969.html
http://www.tennis-ontheline.com/99/99korda.htm
http://www.3dchem.com/molecules.asp?ID=2
As best I can tell, Korda escaped a suspension but had to repay his 1998 Wimby winnings and points.
This was the same substance (nandrolone) that was involved in a 2003? ATP scandal where many players tested positive and the subsequent investigation led the ATP to conclude that an electrolyte supplement given to players by ATP trainers was the source.
Last edited:
Datacipher
Banned
Korda did take steroids and he was a rotten dirty cheater. As far as I'm concerned his whole career should be wiped from the books. I also suspect he took it to heal faster and/or prevent further injury, nevertheless, that is NOT a valid reason, of course.
If you want to pretend he didnt' know, then the alternative is: Korda is one of the biggest morons on the planet, and lacked the basic common sense to find out what his Dr. was giving him. UNLESS you go even further and say...Korda's Dr. doped him with steroids and lied to him about what it was, because he SECRETLY wanted to help Korda succeed. LOL
No, it's not the same investigation as the 37 players who tested positive for Nandrolone (Rusedski was the poster boy), who then used a completely fake excuse (the mysterious tablets...), that made no sense whatsoever (the timing wasn't even correct) to have the charges dropped, while tennis tried to quietly sweep those results under the rug.
Datacipher
Banned
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
choke . . . cough . . . I'm speechless!
Henin had a wonderful backhand. It was fluid with tons of pop and very reliable. She had a fine slice and topspin. But there certainly are other candidates. Evert for one. There was no situation that backhand could not handle and master.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
speechless because his backhand would be that much more lethal?
Speechless because, apparently, you think Korda didn't use a modern racquet.
Evert is the ancestral EVE of the two-hander and definitely belongs in the mix.
And it was proven better in so many ways better than other twohanders. Steady enough for clay is rather routine, but to it's effectiveness as a grass court stroke on FAST grass puts it a league above, Austin, Seles, Sanchez, Hingis, etc. No backhand was put under the same pressure round after round as Evert's at those Wimbledons, early Opens and Australians.
By a modern racquet, I meant a 2011 racquet with those Poly strings. Not a carbon graphite.
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
2011 racquets aren't made out of carbon graphite?
I don't remember if poly was available during Korda's career. But, IMO, unless you hit with heavy topspin, you're better off playing with gut. Korda didn't hit heavy topspin.
Last edited:
Limpinhitter
G.O.A.T.
I don't think today's racquets are sufficiently different from those of the late 90's to make any palpable difference in Korda's shot making. I also think that poly strings would be more of a detriment than a benefit to Korda's stroke production.
Datacipher
Banned
You're 100 percent correct. Racquet would essentially be NO different. Strings....any adjustment would be minor.
1997 was one of my peak tennis years. Boy it was wonderful, using those Prince CTS racquets. 12.2 ounces, solid, stable and buttery. Now I use the Fischer M. Pro 1, at 12.2 ounces, solid, stable and buttery. Wait, nothing's changed... Yep, that's right, the only difference is racquets start off a bit lighter and the feel isn't the same anymore.
Fearsome Forehand
Professional
Volkl C-10 Pro or TR-25, I believe in his latter days on tour. Before that, Puma BB Super?.
Senior's Tour maybe the Tour 10 V Engine?
Not sure of his string setup when he was on tour. Probably all gut, or gut and syn gut mix.
Have no idea if he knew he was taking a banned steroid. Foolish thing to knowingly do as he was aware of the testing program. I think the ATP investigation concluded he did not knowingly take a banned substance which s why he was fined but not suspended.
Last edited:
