Originally Posted by always_crosscourt
Gulbis's forehand may be ugly and unconventional, but he seems to get pace and spin with it.
The commentators of Delray Beach have done nothing but make fun of it.
I wonder if the American fixation with making all of their players carbon copies of each other, and ironing out all idiosyncrasies to technique (which may produce great or at least different results) is hurting them in the long run.
Huh? "American fixation with making all of their players carbon copies" - I'm American and I don't see your point.
Gulbis' forehand is ugly and not all that good for an ATP pro. Do you really believe he has a high quality forehand for an ATP pro? To me, it is no where as near as good as the rest of his game and needs work. It is an enourmous swing and he makes more unforced errors on the forehand. He also does not get the depth and consistency that he gets on his backhand. I think the commentators were amused at his forehand because it is butt ugly and not very good.
Jim Courier, Pete Sampras, Andy Roddick, Andre Agassi, Michael Chang and many other Americans all have very different games. Chang dropped the racket head early on his 2 HBH while Agassi did not. Sampras lead back with the elbow and kept his racket head pointing forward on his FH while Courier kept the racket in front on his FH. Agassi has compact simple swings and could not volley very well while Sampras had longer swings and had an excellent volley. Lots of differences to those that are not biased.