D
Deleted member 25923
Guest
Pretty much what the title says.
Pretty much what the title says.
He has a solid backhand, but not as good as his forehand of course. I'd say his backhand is more reliable than Federer's.
How well could handle the high ball and what grip did he use? Eastern bh grip?
He has a solid backhand, but not as good as his forehand of course. I'd say his backhand is more reliable than Federer's.
How well could handle the high ball and what grip did he use? Eastern bh grip?
Agreed.
Semi western(extreme eastern) I believe, but not 100%. Somebody will confirm or deny it. Lendl was tall (6'2" and lean) and also had long limbs, so that helped with high balls
Better than solid, IMO. Big topspin. Good crosscourt, even better down the line--earned him many winners.
Later he even developed an effective slice backhand.
I have a copy of his book "Power Tennis," and it's semi-western. I don't recall Lendl having trouble with high backhands, though he did have a great slice backhand which was the result of having no topspin backhand to speak of when he emerged on the scene. ;-)
I thought Lendl originally only used to hit topspin backhands and then learned to use the slice with Roche. Does the book speak to this at all?
Obviously it has been a long time since I saw one of his matches (and I do miss them).
How well could handle the high ball and what grip did he use? Eastern bh grip?
Incredible how weak the field must have been to be dominated by someone who couldn't hit a backhand until he was out of the juniors.
It's funny how people say that Lendl developed a slice backhand. Lendl started off with a slice backhand, prior to becoming good. He had no topsin backhand and had to come to net to hide his weakness. Working with Wojtek Fibak, a decently good Polish player, Lendl learned how to hit a topspin backhand and make it a weapon. He hit it quite a bit before he started adding slice to his backhand and added a good crosscourt slice passing shot.
Wait, was his BH grip semiwestern?
See the FO '87 finals against Wilander. Mats was continuously passing Ivan high looping balls to his backhand, and Lendl was returning very nicely.
Lendl's backhand is one of the best of all times I would say. Probably behind Edberg.
Lendl reminds me a lot of Roger Federer. Both are/were competent but not great volleyers. Federer has won most of his points at Wimbledon playing from the baseline and hitting winners. Lendl probably came to the net more than Federer does today while playing on the faster grass at Wimbledon 20 years ago. If Lendl had played on the slower grass this decade, he might also have dominated Wimbledon.
Both players rely/relied on their magnificent forehands to dominate their opponents and finish points. Lendl had the best forehand of the 80s and Federer has had the best forehand this decade.
Both men had strong serves that won them many points outright and setup the forehand weapon.
Both men had very solid backhands that could keep them in a rally and also hit the passing or open court winner when needed. Both have/had very useful sliced backhands, too... very accurate.
Both men are/were very fit, had few injuries in their careers. Both could grind with the best grinders when necessary, yet both prefered to hit power shots from baseline and dominate with power.
Both men move/moved well on the court: fast with good balance and court sense and excellent stamina.
Both men played well on all surfaces. Luckily for Lendl, Borg was older than him and retired from the game early in the 80s. Had Borg been younger than Lendl, he might have prevented Lendl from winning at the French much the way Nadal has Federer. To my eye, Borg and Nadal are very much alike.
Both men dominated their respective decades with very similar games built around a good serve and spectacular forehand.
Lendl appeared to hit his topspin backhand drive with something between an Eastern and semi-western grip to me, almost pulling the racquet through the stroke rather than pushing it through the way one would with a semi-western to Western grip. I think this was the only weakness in the shot. It could have been even better
As great and dominate as Lendl was in the 80s, I believe Becker had an even better game: an equally good forehand, a better backhand, a better serve and much better volleys. Becker just wasn't as consistent as Lendl because he just never seemed as focused and dedicated.
I believe the tennis matches that Becker and Lendl played against each other were among the best tennis ever played, especially the matches on fast indoor surfaces. But their matches on clay were also good. Lendl's two US Open finals against Wilander were also great matches.
Becker, Sampras, Borg, Federer and Lendl are my top five all-time.
Lendl reminds me a lot of Roger Federer. Both are/were competent but not great volleyers. Federer has won most of his points at Wimbledon playing from the baseline and hitting winners. Lendl probably came to the net more than Federer does today while playing on the faster grass at Wimbledon 20 years ago. If Lendl had played on the slower grass this decade, he might also have dominated Wimbledon.
Both players rely/relied on their magnificent forehands to dominate their opponents and finish points. Lendl had the best forehand of the 80s and Federer has had the best forehand this decade.
Both men had strong serves that won them many points outright and setup the forehand weapon.
Both men had very solid backhands that could keep them in a rally and also hit the passing or open court winner when needed. Both have/had very useful sliced backhands, too... very accurate.
Both men are/were very fit, had few injuries in their careers. Both could grind with the best grinders when necessary, yet both prefered to hit power shots from baseline and dominate with power.
Both men move/moved well on the court: fast with good balance and court sense and excellent stamina.
Both men played well on all surfaces. Luckily for Lendl, Borg was older than him and retired from the game early in the 80s. Had Borg been younger than Lendl, he might have prevented Lendl from winning at the French much the way Nadal has Federer. To my eye, Borg and Nadal are very much alike.
Both men dominated their respective decades with very similar games built around a good serve and spectacular forehand.
Lendl appeared to hit his topspin backhand drive with something between an Eastern and semi-western grip to me, almost pulling the racquet through the stroke rather than pushing it through the way one would with a semi-western to Western grip. I think this was the only weakness in the shot. It could have been even better
As great and dominate as Lendl was in the 80s, I believe Becker had an even better game: an equally good forehand, a better backhand, a better serve and much better volleys. Becker just wasn't as consistent as Lendl because he just never seemed as focused and dedicated.
I believe the tennis matches that Becker and Lendl played against each other were among the best tennis ever played, especially the matches on fast indoor surfaces. But their matches on clay were also good. Lendl's two US Open finals against Wilander were also great matches.
Becker, Sampras, Borg, Federer and Lendl are my top five all-time.
Wait, was his BH grip semiwestern?
I'm not a big Lendl fan, so I won't tell you about that sort of details as I could be wrong. Perhaps you should ask Borgforever. He seems to be the biggest Lendl fan around here.
UGH!!!
GUYS, Lendl used a CONTINENTAL grip on the backhand (slightly towards the eastern).
Edberg used a full Eastern.
I don't know where you guys are getting this. TRUST ME.
Yes, Lendl's backhand was lethal. He could hit it a heavy but flatter ball than most of the guys today. His passing shot up the line was GOLD. He later developed devastating cross court shots. I think it was to his detriment that he started slicing again more later in his career. Tony Roche had a lot to do with this, he wanted Lendl to have the option of a "chip" backhand and it did help round out the repertoire but Lendl probably started using it too much. In any case, Lendl could roll it with a lot of spin or drive it out very hard, in part BECAUSE he was using a modified continental.
I think you are correct about Lendl's backhand grip. What I am calling a semi-western backhand grip is probably considered Eastern by today's standards. At any rate, I always felt that Lendl's backhand grip -- even on his topspin drive -- was not that far past Continental. That's why, as I noted in my previouis post, Lendl seemed to come close to pulling the racquet through the stroke rather than pushing it through the way one would with the hand twisted further around the racquet grip toward sem-western. It amazed me that he got the topspin he did with this grip and also was able to hit the heavy ball that he did with lots of pace whenever he needed it. His contact point for the shot was not as far in front of the lead foot as one sees today. In comparison Becker's backhand drive was more like what we see today abd to my eye was the better shot.
But we have to remember that Lendl learned to play the game with a wooden racquet as a junior, and most pros rarely hit a topspin backhand drive before Lendl's time. Most pros were content to slice the backhand and just keep it in play until they had the chance to get to the net and finish the point. Probably nobody before Lendl used any grip beyond Eastern on the one-handed backhand.
Stroke production has really advanced in men's tennis over the last 20 years. You see so many players today with spectacular one-handed backhands... and these are just journeyman players. I was just watching a DVR recording of Tommy Robredo playing Phillip Kolshrieber at Hamburg this year. Both hese guys have flawless technique on the backhand, with high takeback and perfect preperation and footwork, and long flowing strokes with high follow throughs and able to generate great topspin when neededd.
Really, any player today with a one-handed backhand who wants to crack into the top 100 must have a techniqually sound backhand. Anything less than flawless technique will not get you out of the minor leagues.
The bolded sentences seem contradictory. I could take a guess as to what you are trying to say, but maybe you should be more specific in the chronology so that it makes sense.
The backhand was Lendl's weaker side, but it was still damn good!
The book on Lendl used to be: chip low to his backhand, rush the net, and watch for the passing shot down-the-line. Lendl then added a crosscourt backhand passing shot to his arsenal. Matt Riordan's link shows a great example.
When Roche became Lendl's coach Lendl added a nice chip backhand to his game. While this shot wasn't lethal, it was great setup shot. To me it was like a boxer developing a nice stiff jab.
I saw it numerous times. Lendl would chip the ball off his backhand. The low, skidding bounce would force his opponent to hit up, and this gave Lendl time to run around the pound the next shot with his sledgehammer forehand (scary!).
I've often thought that it would serve Roddick well if added a similiar chip backhand to his game.
Hey AC (AlpineCadet), is this you? :twisted:
With his grip and technique, he would have more problems with Nadal's forehand than Federer.He has a solid backhand, but not as good as his forehand of course. I'd say his backhand is more reliable than Federer's.
On regular shots in his wheelhouse, he has a simpler motion, so it would be more "reliable." But Federer can hit his harder and create more angles. clay.
If you look at the thread, I took great pains to say that I thought Agassi hit harder groundstrokes than Lendl. Backhand and forehand combined and averaged out. At 100%, in my first post I said Lendl's forehand may have been harder. Another poster reminisced that Lendl flat out said Agassi hit harder than him. Of course, hitting the ball and playing tennis are two different things, and in the beginning Lendl was the superior player for sure.Just as I argued with you that Agassi could NOT his his forehand harder than Lendl,
Fed has more power off both sides. Lendl has hit some crazy angles (watched a point recently where he took Mecir way off the court) but Fed can do it more routinely and with more pace.Federer most definitely does NOT have more power than Lendl on the backhand. Furthermore, Lendl has hit every angle that Federer has.
See the FO '87 finals against Wilander. Mats was continuously passing Ivan high looping balls to his backhand, and Lendl was returning very nicely.
Lendl's backhand is one of the best of all times I would say. Probably behind Edberg.
If you look at the thread, I took great pains to say that I thought Agassi hit harder groundstrokes than Lendl. Backhand and forehand combined and averaged out. At 100%, in my first post I said Lendl's forehand may have been harder. Another poster reminisced that Lendl flat out said Agassi hit harder than him. .
.Fed has more power off both sides. .
I think "I saw" is the problem. There are videos all over the internet, yet a lot of people rely solely on their recollections and will explain away all the footage online. I said Lendl's hardest forehand might have been faster than Agassi's hardest, but no way with Federer. Federer's biggest forehands are among the very fastest ever hit.One thing that is almost certain is that he doesn't serve harder than Lendl, if you think his maximum power off both forehand and backhand is greater...well....uh....sure....I saw something quite different.
And:"Unbelievable talent," Roche said. "Some of the stuff he can do is just mind-boggling. Nobody else can do that kind of stuff. You think, 'Wow, did that happen?'. We let him know [when he does something amazing].
Hey, Datacipher, so you think Lendl hits and serves harder than Federer, so what exactly does Roger do better than Lendl? What does he have that makes him GOAT to many whereas Lendl is never mentioned?"He'd love to win the French. If he can achieve that, he's definitely the greatest player that's ever lived," said Roche. "He's played some good matches against Nadal on clay.
lendl hit virtually only topspin backhands on clay and only slice (unless it was a passing shot) on grass. he mixed it up on hard.
lendl's backhand is better than federer's in all aspects (except the volley). off the ground, there isn't one part of federer's backhand that is better (and i'm a huge fed fan): power, consistentcy, topspin, slice, flat, handling high balls, etc.
lendl's edges are consistency and handling of high balls, fed's slice is better, power on an average is more or less the same, I'd say fed's is very slightly higher , fed's variety on the BH side is pretty much more than anyone and he has clearly more variety when compared to lendl
disagree. lendl is certainly ahead in power. federer rarely drives the ball with extreme power off the backhand. one-handers like gasquet, haas, calleri, ljubicic, etc have more sheer power on their backhand.
variety? lendl hit the slice and topspin extremely well. he could do it all off the backhand. not sure how you argue variety.