Better backhand: Sampras or Lendl?

[krosero]

I've got some highlights on YT in which Lendl's chip BH return is working to perfection: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3q9Y5fAdMo

[getbusyliving]

No contest. Lendl by a mile.

[darthpwner]

Lendl had one of the best one handers of all time. You cant compare him with Pete.

[Gemini]

Lendl.....

[Paul Murphy]

Lendl ahead in the best backhand category and best running forehand.

[ROBOPTI]

Originally Posted by scootad.

Lendl - this one is not even close

100% COMPLETELY agree !!!

And I am a fan of both

[jrepac]

Originally Posted by timnz

Serve - Sampras - both 1st and 2nd (though Lendl's serve was good)

Backhand - Lendl drove with more pace and variety, backhand slice was better to.

Volley - Both backhand and forehand - Sampras. Lendl's weakest part of his entire game was his forehand volley. Mainly because of the grip he used.

Forehand - Lendl in all departments. As good as Sampras' running forehand was, Lendl's was even better. In fact probably the greatest running forehand of all time. Lendl could hit the inside out forehand, down the line everything.

Transition from Serve to the Net - Sampras. This was Lendl's flaw. He didn't make appropriate transitions to the net. He was good. But not great, like Sampras at this.

This is totally spot on; forehand and backhand, Lendl was a better ball striker than Pete. Lendl's serve a bit less effective than Pete, but not by a tremendous amount. Lendl's biggest issues were dealing with the midcourt and the net. He also had problems with unpredictable players/situations...for instance, rallying toe-to-toe w/Connors on hard courts he was fine and often superior to Jimmy. On grass, Connors was far more unpredictable (and dangerous to Lendl), as he'd opportunistically attack. At least w/Mac, he ALWAYS knew that Mac was coming in. Lendl had similar problems w/Wilander, who became quite the net rusher on grass. (at least for mats)

But, Lendl's groundies were to die for...his backhand was impressive as he could drive it with top or slice it right by you...you never knew which he'd use. I think the slice was very effective, particularly when he played Connors or Agassi, as he'd take the pace right off the darn ball and they loved nothing more than pace.

Eh, gotta respect Ivan; I loathed him back in the day, but looking back can only appreciate his skills.

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by jrepac

This is totally spot on; forehand and backhand, Lendl was a better ball striker than Pete.

More consistent, for sure. But better striker is debatable. Lendl's strokes were more consistent but that was his game, he was a steady, brutally efficient power baseliner. That was NOT Sampras's game at all. Sampras was more explosive, looking to end points quickly, attack the net, and his strokes were designed more for that. So yes, less consistent, and maybe even if he wanted to match Lendl's consistency, he didn't have the technique and mindset to pull it off, but Pete was a better ball striker in my opinion. He could hit winners and attack in ways Lendl couldn't.

Wilander said when he first saw Sampras, he couldn't believe what he was seeing, and he never could have predicted he would become a GOAT nominee. He would hit a screaming winner out of nowhere than launch a ball into the stands the next. But somehow he won and it just seemed unsustainable to Mats.

Basically, I feel like if Pete and Lendl played groundstroke games up to 11, if Lendl wins a game, he wins 11-9, or 11-8, but Pete could win games 11-6 or 11-5 if he's feeling it.

[Zimbo]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Basically, I feel like if Pete and Lendl played groundstroke games up to 11, if Lendl wins a game, he wins 11-9, or 11-8, but Pete could win games 11-6 or 11-5 if he's feeling it.

I totally disagree. If they played points from the baseline, without serving and volleying was not allowed, Lendl would dominate Pete.

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by Zimbo

I totally disagree. If they played points from the baseline, without serving and volleying was not allowed, Lendl would dominate Pete.

That wasn't really my point though. What I was trying to point out is that they are different types of ball strikers, and that Lendl was more consistent off the baseline than Pete, but Pete's highs were much higher than Lendl's highs, and if he was feeling it, he could just rip winners off his forehand from all over the place. At their peak, just in baseline games, Lendl might have won 6 out of 10, but I think Pete had the potential to beat Lendl in game by a much wider margin if he was feeling it.

[Zimbo]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

That wasn't really my point though. What I was trying to point out is that they are different types of ball strikers, and that Lendl was more consistent off the baseline than Pete, but Pete's highs were much higher than Lendl's highs, and if he was feeling it, he could just rip winners off his forehand from all over the place. At their peak, just in baseline games, Lendl might have won 6 out of 10, but I think Pete had the potential to beat Lendl in game by a much wider margin if he was feeling it.

Ok, I get your point now. I tend to agree with you here. Yes Pete is capable of doing this cause he does have a big game. But you must admit, anyone with a big game could do this. (Safin, DelPo, etc...) The point I was making was I don't think Pete could consistently do it. Plus, giving Lendl only a 6 out of 10 edge is a little disrespecting one of the greatest baseline player in the history of the game.

[lendlmac]

overall Lendl had the slice suited for clay which was deadly, which Sampras could never duplice or replicate...then the heavy topspin cross court, or topspin down the line...

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by Zimbo

Plus, giving Lendl only a 6 out of 10 edge is a little disrespecting one of the greatest baseline player in the history of the game.

I think it's a reasonable edge. 7 out of 10 seems borderline extreme, after all, Pete could hang with and even outdo Agassi from the baseline.

On clay, I'll give Lendl 7 out of 10 edge.

[Zimbo]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

I think it's a reasonable edge. 7 out of 10 seems borderline extreme, after all, Pete could hang with and even outdo Agassi from the baseline.

On clay, I'll give Lendl 7 out of 10 edge.

Fare enough, no need to argue. Lets move on. Did you see and are you going to comment on the other Lendl backhand thread that I posted?

[lendlmac]

Here is is with his Mizuno all leaded up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zma9...eature=related

[Panic492]

I loved Ivan when I was a kid. Used to wish ill on Mac all the time when they play. Maybe be had a better backhand than Pete, maybe not. In terms of total game and winning, Pete was on another level. And I am a Lendl fan.