Originally Posted by pc1
No I didn't mean that. I mean more balance on both sides as far as the overall strokes. Laver and Federer both had explosive forehand weapons that can hit winners from anyone. Federer's forehand may very well be better than Laver's. It probably is. However I do think that Laver's backhand is probably better than Federer's so I think he's more solid on both sides, meaning forehand and backhand. Laver's backhand was almost the equivalent of forehand because of his huge left wrist and arm. He was known for using backhand flicks almost like ping pong and hitting it for winners. Federer tends to run around his backhand often.
I think Federer's forehand is by a decent margin stronger than his solid backhand. I think Laver's backhand and forehand were about equal. That's what I mean. I think Krosero has charted matches in which Laver's backhand winners surpass his forehand winners. I don't know if that was the norm or not.
Fair enough, I thought this is what you might have meant.