He'd be no better than the average 4.0 pusher. :shock:If Federer used a two-handed backhand instead of a one handed one, how do you think his career would have turned out? Would there be no difference, would he be even more dominant, or would he fail miserably at it and never win a slam?
What do you think?
If Federer used a two-handed backhand instead of a one handed one, how do you think his career would have turned out? Would there be no difference, would he be even more dominant, or would he fail miserably at it and never win a slam?
What do you think?
He would be a reasonably good player. But, his tennis would be far less distinctive; he would just blend in with the herd.
If Federer used a two-handed backhand instead of a one handed one, how do you think his career would have turned out? Would there be no difference, would he be even more dominant, or would he fail miserably at it and never win a slam?
What do you think?
If Federer used a two-handed backhand instead of a one handed one, how do you think his career would have turned out? Would there be no difference, would he be even more dominant, or would he fail miserably at it and never win a slam?
What do you think?
Fed already has a great backhand. The only reason your questioning it is Nadals forehand on slow surfaces....And really, forehand to backhand isn't fair on any surface, no?
Neither is it fair to Nadal, no?
If you mean Rogers forehand to Rafas backhand, then no, thats not a fair comparison either of course.
If you meant something else.....well I didn't follow you.
Yes, that.
I am also hearing that in the Simon match, Fed's BH once again retreated to its defensive mode. He ain't beating no Nadal this time.
I can agree with that. The only problem is when it's not on, it's not exactly an asset. And when someone can take it advantage of it (Well hi there Nadal) it doesn't end well.
I'd think with 2hbh it'd be more consistent, but not a weapon like it is at times now.
The problem is that Roger grew up and he was taught to play tennis in much faster courts than nowadays.
Yes, that.
I am also hearing that in the Simon match, Fed's BH once again retreated to its defensive mode. He ain't beating no Nadal this time.
Fed already has a great backhand. The only reason your questioning it is Nadals forehand on slow surfaces....And really, forehand to backhand isn't fair on any surface, no?
depends whose forehand and whose backhand. JMac's to Edberg's wasn't fair on either end (backhands would own).
Those whose strength is their backhand would eat a weak lefty FH up, and would stay even with a same strength lefty fh (presuming bh guy is righty)
This ^I think it is impossible to predict the results Federer would have gotten if he had a two-handed backhand....
a) Doubt his slice backhand would be as good. It is at least top 2 of all time (the other being Rosewall's).
Fed's BH >>>> Nadal's BH
Enough said.
has anyone seen federer try a two handed backhand just for fun?