Take a look at the very beginning of this video. It looks like Laver, waiting to serve, is bouncing the ball off the court with the EDGE of his racquet.!?
Federer's backhand came up on page five. He was shouted down.I'm suprised no one has Fed in their lists, it may not be the best backhand but its definitely one of the most diverse. I would put Roger in front of someone like Becker for sure.
With that being said I have to go with Gasquet and Agassi as the best backhands I have ever seen, pure strikers of the ball and some of the best timing.
Federer's backhand came up on page five. He was shouted down.
Umm, unless I missed something, nowhere in this thread was he really shouted down. I don't think anyone has said that they definitely don't think his bh deserves to be listed, and the reasons why. But I have seen some posters saying they think it should be on the list, and I might agree.
I think a strong case could be made for Fed's backhand being in the top 20. Becker is at #12. Was Becker's backhand really one of the best backhands ever? If his backhand is that high, and Fed is nowhere near the list, then that means his backhand must be MUCH better than Fed's. I find that hard to believe. I know I would take Fed's backhand in a heartbeat (better slice, better passing shots, more variety, and more dangerous).
Here's a quote from Becker himself on Fed's bh: "The low knee bend, the follow through on the backhand...now, any child watching this, this is the way you're supposed to hit a single handed backhand" - Boris Becker
In Brad Gilbert's "Winning Ugly" he made it clear that, other than his serve, Becker's big weapon was his fh. His strategy against Becker was to hit to his fh, and try to break it down. If he did that, then the rest of Boris's game would suffer. He would often like to make Becker run to his fh side, and then approach to Becker's bh side, and he would often end up winning the pt.
At no point did Gilbert mention the strength of Becker's bh. I would find it a bit odd, that, if Becker's bh was SO strong (#12 on an ALL-TIME list!) Gilbert made no mention of it, except that he liked to approach to that side.
Can you give strong evidence that Becker's bh was one of the greatest of all-time?
Considering the racket technology and most of the stats I've seen, Federer's backhand doesn't seen to hit many winners in a match even in comparison to some of the top backhands of recent years, like Nalbanian, Djokovic, Kuerten and some other Gasquet and some others. He still shanks it and make errors off it compared others recent times also. These are players just off the top of my head. Tennis has been around a LONG TIME and we must not think that every stroke of a great player like Federer has to be in the top twenty ever. It's a fine backhand and it fits in with his great game but just because he's a great player doesn't mean his backhand is one of the all time great backhands. If I can name a few off the top of my head that is better than Federer in recent years, how can Federer's backhand be better over the long period of tennis history. Oh yeah, I like Nadal's backhand better also and Agassi's just a few years ago. Murray's too. This is just in the last 5 to 10 years.
Concerning Becker's backhand compared to Federer's. I'm not sure which one is better. Becker's backhand could hit more offensive return winners from what I've seen but I'm not sure if Becker's backhand was as consistent as Federer's.
I do think Becker's backhand is too high and it just compare to a backhand like for example Arthur Ashe in my opinion.
becker had a more offensive backhand and was able to flatten his backhand out more than federer. federer has never had all that much pace (compared to the greats) on his backhand. plus, it has been exposed numerous times by nadal on clay.
Here you go.Umm, unless I missed something, nowhere in this thread was he really shouted down. I don't think anyone has said that they definitely don't think his bh deserves to be listed, and the reasons why. But I have seen some posters saying they think it should be on the list, and I might agree.
Federer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
uh, no. not even close.
As for the FedExpress, I do like his backhand. But, how many times has it let him down? I don't think it ever was his "go-to" shot, but it was a weapon on a good day.
I beg to differ. This thread is not about how many slams Fed has won. It is entirely possible, from a logical point of view, that someone could have a better backhand than Fed and have won no slams. One could argue easily that Fed has won 16 slams because his forehand and serve are so good, not because of his backhand.In my opinion Federer`s backhand should be at least in the top 20 just the variations that he has on this shot its awesome, yes he does shank it sometimes but that does not mean that Haas, Rios, Mancini and the other players on that list that who have not win even a slam have a better backhand than Federer`s.
I beg to differ. This thread is not about how many slams Fed has won. It is entirely possible, from a logical point of view, that someone could have a better backhand than Fed and have won no slams. One could argue easily that Fed has won 16 slams because his forehand and serve are so good, not because of his backhand.
Nevertheless, I thought Fed's BH looked much better in the 2010 AO: not a liability that others could attack, no shanks, more variety, more consistent, more power even. More of a weapon.
federer has never had all that much pace (compared to the greats) on his backhand
I beg to differ. This thread is not about how many slams Fed has won. It is entirely possible, from a logical point of view, that someone could have a better backhand than Fed and have won no slams. One could argue easily that Fed has won 16 slams because his forehand and serve are so good, not because of his backhand.
Nevertheless, I thought Fed's BH looked much better in the 2010 AO: not a liability that others could attack, no shanks, more variety, more consistent, more power even. More of a weapon.
I think he's been working on it, and definitely improved it. I agree with Becker: I always thought it had excellent form, and I never understood why he shanked that many.
Alright, let's see what happens.
4th Edition:
1. Laver
2. Rosewall
3. Connors
4. Edberg
5. Budge
6. Borg
7. Agassi
8. Kuerten
9. Lendl
10. Vilas
11. Lacoste
12. Ashe
13. Nalbandian
14. Kovacs
15. Rios
16. Mancini
17. Becker
18. Safin
19. Mecir
20. Tilden
21. Kodes
22. Gasquet
23. Wilander
24. Nadal
25. Haas
26. Kafelnikov
27. Orantes
28. Federer
Federer doesn't have that kind of backhand he has more of a finesse/angle backhand like Rod Laver, but he can also rip it down the line like Hass or Gasquet. If you you think big pace on the backhand makes you the best then were his Blake, no one hits with more pace than him with a one-hander. Federer does things on his backhand I've never seen any other human do, he deserves at least a top 20 spot.
Fed's backhand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhaxKLMDW7s&feature=related
Hoodjem,
I know you'll doing this as a consensus of opinion but I can't see Federer's name on this list.
Just for kicks I will name other backhands in my opinion better than Federer's outside of the listed ones. Trabert, Nastase-super variety, topspin, slice, consistent, could hit topspin lobs off this side at will and a wonderful backhand drop shot, HL Doherty, Santana-great topspin backhand and great variety of spin. I have a friend who can talk about his backhand for hours, Bobby Riggs-very consistent, great off return of serve, great lob, Roy Emerson-Known for his great backhand, Ted Pell-an ancient name but before Budge, he was considered to be perhaps having the greatest backhand, Hans Nusslein-He never missed and used to win tournament after tournament in the Pros at his best. Nusslein was a dominant player in the late 1930's along with Perry, Vines and Budge, John McEnroe-can hit the ball on the rise, infinite variety, drop shots, lobs, great angles and superb on the return. Now that I think of it McEnroe's backhand is one of those that may belong on this list. McEnroe also had a great sliced backhand approach that set himself up of his volley winners.
I'm sure with a little thought I can name others.
My point here is that Federer has a fine backhand but you can see by the standards of our time that it's not a great weapon and really shouldn't be considered among the greatest backhand's list. He runs around it constantly and even more so when he's in trouble. It works with his super game because he keeps the ball in play with it (with occasion winners) and sets up his great forehand. Stats show (from what I've seen) that he has very low numbers for winners on the backhand compared to many others. If Federer is here, than Djokovic and Murray should be above him and I don't see them on the list.
My point here is that Federer has a fine backhand but you can see by the standards of our time that it's not a great weapon and really shouldn't be considered among the greatest backhand's list. He runs around it constantly and even more so when he's in trouble. It works with his super game because he keeps the ball in play with it (with occasion winners) and sets up his great forehand. Stats show (from what I've seen) that he has very low numbers for winners on the backhand compared to many others. If Federer is here, than Djokovic and Murray should be above him and I don't see them on the list.
Some of you are selling Roger's backhand real short.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2A9ymMER0Y
The flick bh is the shot that Sampras said he NEVER seen it before. You ranking him behind many players with a one-handed bh is a complete joke!
I beg to differ. This thread is not about how many slams Fed has won. It is entirely possible, from a logical point of view, that someone could have a better backhand than Fed and have won no slams. One could argue easily that Fed has won 16 slams because his forehand and serve are so good, not because of his backhand.
Nevertheless, I thought Fed's BH looked much better in the 2010 AO: not a liability that others could attack, no shanks, more variety, more consistent, more power even. More of a weapon.
I think he's been working on it, and definitely improved it. I agree with Becker: I always thought it had excellent form, and I never understood why he shanked that many.
Alright, let's see what happens.
4th Edition:
1. Laver
2. Rosewall
3. Connors
4. Edberg
5. Budge
6. Borg
7. Agassi
8. Kuerten
9. Lendl
10. Vilas
11. Lacoste
12. Ashe
13. Nalbandian
14. Kovacs
15. Rios
16. Mancini
17. Becker
18. Safin
19. Mecir
20. Tilden
21. Kodes
22. Gasquet
23. Wilander
24. Nadal
25. Haas
26. Kafelnikov
27. Orantes
28. Federer
Absolutely YES!And was Edberg's bh really that good? I mean, for it to be one of the top 5 backhands of ALL-TIME, it has to be pretty darn special, to say the least. But does it deserve to be that high? Was it really better than, say, Agassi or Nalby's backhands?
Thousands of players set up shots with their backhands. Yes Federer's good at it but so was John Newcombe, Jack Kramer, Pancho Gonzalez, Tony Roche, and lots of others. Some of these guys had excellent backhands.In my opinion having a great backhand does not mean just only hitting winners but just as you said it helps Federer to set up points also no one mentions the defensive side of the backhand and i think Federer is pretty good in it.
Everything you said about Mac's bh here, you could say about Fed's bh, perhaps even more so. And Fed's bh passing shots are absurdly good. Heck, I think Mac himself might trade his backhand for Fed's!
And was Edberg's bh really that good? I mean, for it to be one of the top 5 backhands of ALL-TIME, it has to be pretty darn special, to say the least. But does it deserve to be that high? Was it really better than, say, Agassi or Nalby's backhands?
I know Nastase's BH pretty well, and Santana's, and Emerson's and Trabert's. Riggs only a little; Nusslein's, Pell's, and Doherty's not all.Just for kicks I will name other backhands in my opinion better than Federer's outside of the listed ones. Trabert, Nastase-super variety, topspin, slice, consistent, could hit topspin lobs off this side at will and a wonderful backhand drop shot, HL Doherty, Santana-great topspin backhand and great variety of spin. I have a friend who can talk about his backhand for hours, Bobby Riggs-very consistent, great off return of serve, great lob, Roy Emerson-Known for his great backhand, Ted Pell-an ancient name but before Budge, he was considered to be perhaps having the greatest backhand, Hans Nusslein-He never missed and used to win tournament after tournament in the Pros at his best. Nusslein was a dominant player in the late 1930's along with Perry, Vines and Budge
McEnroe could do more with his backhand. I don't think McEnroe would trade his backhand for Federer's any more than he would trade his volley for Federer's. And yes Edberg's backhand was superb. It was a brilliant stroke. Very smooth and elegant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He81C9YjNJk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC3-0YX0m8U
You keep saying how Edberg's bh was so smooth and elegant, and while it certainly was, Federer's is even more so. I think Fed has the most beautiful bh ever, and I know many, many people would agree.
Could McEnroe REALLY do more with his backhand? While that first clip is certainly an incredible shot, it's nothing Fed can't do. Here's a Fed bh that's similar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTk6MDZ4TBU
And in that second clip, I didn't see anything that special from Mac's backhand.
Could you show me evidence that Edberg's backhand is deserving of his top 5 spot? And how about Becker? Was his backhand really better than Fed's? Some evidence please.
Meanwhile, here's Fed's bh:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX7CcDIkMhE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC3uI-A8fGM
Federer doesn't get enough respect for his backhand I feel. He can guide the ball with it very well down the line or crosscourt, he is a tremendous shotmaker on the backhand side in awkward positions and comes up with all varieties of brilliance from it after the ball has barely bounced or on the full stretch with a flick of the wrist and such. He can sometimes shank it but whenever he plays these guys who people speculate have a better backhand such as Gasquet or Wawrinka or Murray or whomever, he more often than not gets the better of them in the backhand to backhand exchanges. I think the fact Federer sometimes shanks the ball a bit actually distorts peoples view of his forehand.
Perhaps somebody like Gasquet or Haas do have a better backhand than Federer, but I do not see it. They lack the ability to neutralize a rally they are behind in with backhand defense, which Federer does uncannily. Gasquet is explosive and potent with his stroke, but partly due to the mechanics of his stroke he ends up camping out too far behind the baseline in order to make the best use of his stroke, it's a bigger backhand than Federer's but not as 'vast'. If pressed to choose a backhand to possess out of these 3 guys, I would probably choose Federer's. Other great contemporary backhands would include the backhands of Wawrinka, Kohlschreiber, Murray, Nadal, Nalbandian.
From watching the AO I can say that his basic rally shot had excellent depth and he consistently made tough and excellent shots with the backhand all tournament long. Against Murray his backhand was actually a wand, he often murdered Murray with precision hitting with the backhand, exploiting the spaces of the court effortlessly and brilliantly.
Federer can hit over the ball very well, hit it flat or knife the slice, he has tremendous backhand defense with the slice lob, can hit the top lob and also has an excellent drop shot. He has a super strong wrist, clearly one of the strongest in the history of the sport, which allow him to guide the ball with amazing precision very often when stretched out on the backhand side, or to control half volleys even with the ball rattling at him at 100 mph. He also has that consistent, powerful and excellent backhand overhead/smash/whatever that nobody else on the tour seems to be able to produce with the same effectiveness or venom as Federer.
Federer's backhand isn't close to being one of the most brutal shots in history like say Kuerten's or Laver's were but it is the backhand with the most versatility I have seen since watching tennis more seriously from the mid 90's onwards -- so that is 15 years. Basically, when Federer is flowing the 'vastness' of his options trump the vast majority of other players and of course when he is on song his possibly 'GOAT' forehand allows the space and freedom for his backhand to be even better.
In Federer's prime also he had such confidence in his backhand pass that he constantly made the play to bring other players in on short cross-court slices in order for him to have the opportunity to make a pass that he was sure he would make.
It's a tremendous shot and I believe markedly better than Sampras' backhand, which was also good.
You keep saying how Edberg's bh was so smooth and elegant, and while it certainly was, Federer's is even more so. I think Fed has the most beautiful bh ever, and I know many, many people would agree.
Could McEnroe REALLY do more with his backhand? While that first clip is certainly an incredible shot, it's nothing Fed can't do. Here's a Fed bh that's similar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTk6MDZ4TBU
And in that second clip, I didn't see anything that special from Mac's backhand.
Could you show me evidence that Edberg's backhand is deserving of his top 5 spot? And how about Becker? Was his backhand really better than Fed's? Some evidence please.
Meanwhile, here's Fed's bh:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX7CcDIkMhE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC3uI-A8fGM
My point here is that Federer has a fine backhand but you can see by the standards of our time that it's not a great weapon and really shouldn't be considered among the greatest backhand's list. list.
How good was Bjorn Borg's backhand passing shot, those who have seen a lot of him? I was watching numerous highlights of him on youtube once again the other day and his backhand passing shot seems practically inhuman; it's like a homing missile or some sort of laser.
I agree completely. Fed does have a pretty good backhand.My point is that the backhand is foundamental shot in tennis and you can not win 16 slams without having a pretty good backhand, also in my opinion having a good backhand does not mean just only hitting winners, Federer uses it pretty well to set points up also he is very good in defense on the backhand side.
I'd have to rate Petr Korda in the top five of backhands. Just see some video's of his backhand and you will conclude you have never seen such a relaxed natural stroke. He could hit with pace, angle, disguise and hit winners at will.
There is NO way. I would seriously question the judgment or breadth of knowledge of anyone who would put Federer in the top 20 of all time. I'm not at all sure, that he would qualify for top 20 backhand CURRENTLY on tour. If we could eliminate serve and forehand from the game of tennis, and all the players out there had to rely on their backhands, I doubt very much that Federer would be winning slams. In fact, I think he'd be a middling player, with an occasional big win, on a day when his backhand starts firing....and that's even given his great movement. I think this is even worse than suggesting Federer's serve should be considered one of the geatest....
I'd have to rate Petr Korda in the top five of backhands. Just see some video's of his backhand and you will conclude you have never seen such a relaxed natural stroke. He could hit with pace, angle, disguise and hit winners at will.
There is NO way. I would seriously question the judgment or breadth of knowledge of anyone who would put Federer in the top 20 of all time.
I'm not at all sure, that he would qualify for top 20 backhand CURRENTLY on tour.
If we could eliminate serve and forehand from the game of tennis, and all the players out there had to rely on their backhands, I doubt very much that Federer would be winning slams. In fact, I think he'd be a middling player, with an occasional big win, on a day when his backhand starts firing....and that's even given his great movement. I think this is even worse than suggesting Federer's serve should be considered one of the geatest....
I think Korda on his best day had one of the most impressive BHs I've ever seen,when on he was a winner machine off that wing(didn't have that much variety though,it was just a flat cannon).
As much as I like Edberg's BH he should not be ahead of Guga,Agassi and Nalbo IMO.
Well, Pete was prob. slightly exaggerating there, of course that sort of shot had been bit before Fed's time. But, i don't think anyone in history has hit that shot as well as Fed has, or as consistently.
And I agree, I seriously doubt that a lot of guys with one-handers, such as Edberg, Lendl, and Becker, have bhs much better than Fed's. For example, the list here has Edberg top 5 ALL-TIME! That means, according to the list, Edberg's backhand was MUCH, MUCH better than Fed's. But was it???
Fed's backhand has obviously contributed a ton to his unmatched success, since he spends, by far, most of his time at the baseline. Unlike, say, Sampras, who can get away with a mediocre backhand because he spends so much time at the net, Fed needs to have a supreme backhand to deal with guys from the baseline, even despite having perhaps the greatest weapon in tennis history, his forehand.
For those reasons, Fed's backhand deserves SERIOUS consideration. Not just, "well, his backhand's not that great against Nadal, so it can't be that good." Well, none of the other one-handers like Edberg and Becker had to deal with a heavy assault from one of the greatest lefty forehands in history, so you can't make that judgement. Plus, they played on faster courts, unlike today, which suits one-handers better. They also played with less topspin, which again, is easier for one-handers to handle than heavier shots.
those BHs of retired players, which were better than fed's ( open era only )
laver
rosewall
ashe
vilas
connors
borg
wilander
agassi
kafelnikov
guga
rios
safin
more or less the same level
lendl
edberg
better BHs now:
nalbandian
djokovic
murray
gasquet
nadal
delpo
stan
haas, umm,maybe, but I'd take federer
Man,still ain't use to looking at Safin as a former player.
I forgot about Davydenko,would you say his BH is better than Fed's?
those BHs of retired players, which were better than fed's ( open era only )
laver
rosewall
ashe
vilas
connors
borg
wilander
agassi
kafelnikov
guga
rios
safin
more or less the same level
lendl
edberg
better BHs now:
nalbandian
djokovic
murray
gasquet
nadal
delpo
stan
haas, umm,maybe, but I'd take federer
Edit: add davydenko to the list !
For those who think Federer can not hit a hard flat backhand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAze6rSmVFI