2nd best FH of all time. Period!

[MichaelNadal]

What other reason can you think of him being so medicore there inspite of WTF being such a slow surface

Nadal can't push his opponents back and spread the court since his forehand doesn't kick up due to low bounce and opponents can easily take on the rise without making errors. Thats why his FH is not versatile compared to Federer. I am not sure why its so hard for you to understand. Yes Nadal has the most consistent FH of all time but versatile, no. Its not even in top 10 FHs indoors but good for him, indoor season is almost non existent.

Ok and Federer's forehand is less effective on clay so what's your point supposed to be? You realize you're just going on and on about your opinion and I have mine and my mind isn't changing no?

 

[cjs]

More effective equals better. So if Nadal hasn't got the best forehand of the open era (and neither has Federer) then who has?

You can debate this till the cows come home. IMHO Nadal's forehand is a better shot than Fed's FH. Consider how Nadal has dominated all of his rivals using one shot (the FH). Nadal's entire game revolves running around the BH to club inside out FH's. Fed's FH is beautiful but has low margins of error and is susceptible to pressure. Granted, I'm obviously not as good as either Fed or Nadal but I've watched and played tennis for over 30 years and was a nationally ranked junior. That's my humble opinion on how their two FH's compare.

 

[tennis_pro]

Ok and Federer's forehand is less effective on clay so what's your point supposed to be? You realize you're just going on and on about your opinion and I have mine and my mind isn't changing no?

Really? Take Nadal away and Federer dominates clay in 2005-2008 like every other surface.

You'd have to take the entire top 10 out for Nadal to dominate indoors and even then it's not a certainty.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I concede I did type this. However, I do believe in my statement. Fed shanks all over the place on both wings. Do you disagree? The problem for him is that entire game revolves around small margins of error. Now as he ages and the hand-eye coordination is not as good as it used to be he shanks all over the place.

If I could choose a FH, it would be Nadal's. Its more reliable, and he uses it to dominate all his contemporary opponents. It is the dominant shot in men's tennis. Nadal's FH will influence more up-and-coming juniors than Fed's FH. There is nothing revolutionary about Fed's FH - its a beautiful shot executed by an incredibly gifted player. Howver, the heavy top spin game is where tennis is headed. When I coach kids to serve, and I get them to imitate Fed's serve. His serve is simple, uncomplicated but incredibly effective. When it comes to the FH, the Nadal forehand is the future.

Perfect post and the same reasons I agree that Rafa has the edge. Dimitrov's motions are just like Federer's on the FH. What he lacks is the precision, not only is Nadal's forehand both reliable and devastating, but no one else can come anywhere close to copying it.

 

[tennis_pro]

You can debate this till the cows come home. IMHO Nadal's forehand is a better shot than Fed's FH. Consider how Nadal has dominated all of his rivals using one shot (the FH). Nadal's entire game revolves running around the BH to club inside out FH's. Fed's FH is beautiful but has low margins of error and is susceptible to pressure. Granted, I'm obviously not as good as either Fed or Nadal but I've watched and played tennis for over 30 years and was a nationally ranked junior. That's my humble opinion on how their two FH's compare.

I'm not arguing with you about whose forehand YOU THINK is better but whose forehand is the best of the open era if it's neither Federer's nor Nadal's (you said Nadal's is more effective than Federer's but still not the best in the open era)

 

[MichaelNadal]

Really? Take Nadal away and Federer dominates clay in 2005-2008 like every other surface.

And Federer hasn't kept Nadal from winning the WTF? We can do this all day. I think Nadal has the best FH of all time. Deal with it while I eat brownies with a smile.

 

[tennis_pro]

And Federer hasn't kept Nadal from winning the WTF? We can do this all day. I think Nadal has the best FH of all time. Deal with it while I eat brownies with a smile.

So it's Federer fault that Nadal won less than 50% of his matches at the WTF?

 

[cjs]

I'm not arguing with you about whose forehand YOU THINK is better but whose forehand is the best of the open era if it's neither Federer's nor Nadal's (you said Nadal's is more effective than Federer's but still not the best in the open era)

This is just a game of semantics then.

Let me clarify.

Nadal's FH is a better shot than Fed's FH. That's all I'm saying - nothing more, nothing less.

I don't know whose FH is the best of all time and neither does anybody else.

These silly arguments about GOATS and "best of all time" are IMHO are a waste of time. To be frank, as a new user on this forum I'm quite amazed by the childish arguing that goes on here at this forum.

I'm 38 years old and have been playing tennis since I was 7 years old. I grew up watching greats like Lendl, McEnroe, Sampras etc. IMHO Nadal's FH is the best FH I've ever seen. With an average serve, average BH, Nadal has already won 12 GS at 27 years age. For those 12 GS he can thank his FH.

I'm not a fan boy. Yes Nadal picks his butt and has OCD. I'm just trying to be objective. Nadal has the best FH I've ever seen in 38 years of life and I've ball boyed for greats like Lendl and Agassi.

 

[Sky Fire]

Ok and Federer's forehand is less effective on clay so what's your point supposed to be? You realize you're just going on and on about your opinion and I have mine and my mind isn't changing no?

Federer's FH is the 2nd best FH on clay.
So you are still claiming Nadal's FH is more versatile than Federer even after contradicting your own point and being proven wrong? God why am I arguing with such a fanboy

. Its not even close :lol:
Its like some Federer fan claiming Federer has better passing shots than Nadal which is clearly untrue. Enjoy your brownies bud.

 

[MichaelNadal]

So it's Federer fault that Nadal won less than 50% of his matches at the WTF?

He's beaten Nadal in both the final, and the semi's twice. Again, come off it lol.

 

[MichaelNadal]

This is just a game of semantics then.

Let me clarify.

Nadal's FH is a better shot than Fed's FH. That's all I'm saying - nothing more, nothing less.

I don't know whose FH is the best of all time and neither does anybody else.

These silly arguments about GOATS and "best of all time" are IMHO are a waste of time. To be frank, as a new user on this forum I'm quite amazed by the childish arguing that goes on here at this forum.

I'm 38 years old and have been playing tennis since I was 7 years old. I grew up watching greats like Lendl, McEnroe, Sampras etc. IMHO Nadal's FH is the best FH I've ever seen. With an average serve, average BH, Nadal has already won 12 GS at 27 years age. For those 12 GS he can thank his FH.

I'm not a fan boy. Yes Nadal picks his butt and has OCD. I'm just trying to be objective. Nadal has the best FH I've ever seen in 38 years of life and I've ball boyed for greats like Lendl and Agassi.

You are a great poster. I totally agree, but if you say Nadal is great at anything on here you can expect kerosene.

 

[mandy01]

Sorry guys, Nadal's forehand is revolutionary. No pun intended. Federer's forehand is copied by goofballs in tennis clubs all over San Diego courts. It's basically physically impossible to do what Nadal does, even if you're really darn good.

I've seen Federer hit reverse forehands in practice so it's definitely not impossible at least for some pros. I generally don't see people hitting reverse FHs where I live but I don't see them copying Fed either. I don't even think it's really possible at their level.

In ten years Nadal's game will have had way more influence on the pro game than Federer's ever will. That is, if anyone can adequately incorporate what he has done into their own game.

You just said everybody tries to copy Federer and not Nadal therefore the Federer forehand clearly has had more influence on the game. Besides, didn't you say it's impossible to copy Nadal so how can they incorporate it?

All these guys saying second best...you have no idea what you're saying. Nadal's forehand is a milestone in tennis.

The guys saying second best have all the idea what they're saying. Nadal has himself admitted during Roger's prime that if he attacked the Federer forehand he would basically get killed. Prime Fed could hit forehand winners from literally anywhere on the court and boy did he unleash those monsters.

 

[monfed]

Ok. Give me a LOGICAL argument to support your point of view.

Why can't a RIGHT HANDER hit cross court FH to the LEFT HANDER backhand?

Why is it an advantage for the LEFT HANDER?

NOW. THINK. BEFORE. YOU. TYPE.

I KNOW THIS WILL BE HARD FOR YOU.

BUT THINK. Pause. Take deep breath. Think..... Use brain..

THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE - just because there are more RH than LH doesn't make it easier for the LH.

So. AGAIN. Why can't a RIGHT HANDER hit cross court FH to the LEFT HANDER backhand?

How many left handers BHs do guys like Federer get to "abuse"? Ralph who's BH is basically quite stable, FLopez,Dasco,Melzer and some journeymen like Klizan. 3 of the Big 4 are right handers,infact only 1 of the top 20 is a lefty, advantage Nadal. Like I said, quit clutching on straws and it's you who needs to calm down clearly evident from your excessive use of capslock.

 

[mandy01]

I concede I did type this. However, I do believe in my statement. Fed shanks all over the place on both wings. Do you disagree? The problem for him is that entire game revolves around small margins of error. Now as he ages and the hand-eye coordination is not as good as it used to be he shanks all over the place.

You keep calling for logical arguments instead of name calling and stuff and yet there is not a shred of logic in your post. Do you realize Federer plays a more aggressive brand of tennis with a smaller frame? I'd like to see how Nadal does with Federer's racquet in terms of shanking. That doesn't by itself render his FH less effective than anyone's. It's a different brand of forehand, that's all (and one that was feared by many in his prime. There's a reason Connors called it the 'liquid whip').

If I could choose a FH, it would be Nadal's. Its more reliable, and he uses it to dominate all his contemporary opponents. It is the dominant shot in men's tennis. Nadal's FH will influence more up-and-coming juniors than Fed's FH. There is nothing revolutionary about Fed's FH - its a beautiful shot executed by an incredibly gifted player. Howver, the heavy top spin game is where tennis is headed. When I coach kids to serve, and I get them to imitate Fed's serve. His serve is simple, uncomplicated but incredibly effective. When it comes to the FH, the Nadal forehand is the future.

Federer's used his FH to dominate his contemporaries and give the younger generation a run for their money. Nadal's FH may be the dominant shot in the game NOW but over the long haul, it has been the Federer FH any day.

 

[monfed]

I have no idea why you have the tag of most objective Nadal fan on board. Your comments are so fanboyish its not even funny. Please answer me why Nadal Fh is so useless indoors if its so versatile? Djoker ate that forehand alive with his BH in 2011 and 2012 RG final 3rd set when it started raining heavy. Federer forehand on the other hand is effective on every single surface, slow hc, clay, you name it.

Nadal Fh at the moment is better than Federer but thats about it.

And yes Nadal's Fh is the second best FH of all time, no doubt about it.

Objectivity isn't MichaelRalph's forte. Guy's a crazed fanboy high on Ralph's recent wins.

 

[monfed]

According to who? You? Where is the consensus? Give me a list of names.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=304646

And the guy who made that list is a hardcore Laver fan. Show me one list/article which says Ralph has the greatest FH of all time. GO!

Typical moron fanboy TW argument. I point out weaknesses in your argument, you start calling people names.

I called you a Nadulltard and with every post you confirm it. :lol:

 

[The_Order]

we were talking about versatility of the fh. federer is brilliant at taking it on the rise. nadal isn't, miles away from it.

ability to take it on the rise is a part of versatility .

Fed can take it on the rise better than Nadal, but Nadal has more consistency, hits greater passing shots and can put wicked spin on the ball, how many times we see him hit that running banana FH UTL, Fed doesn't do this anywhere near as well as Nadal.

Not to mention, when Nadal decides to flatten it out, he has more power than Fed. That FH against Novak in the fifth set of AO12 was AMAZING. He can also do it when the ball is behind him like no other.

As for improvisation, I'd probably give that to Fed, he can come up with some magic like no other.

Overall, I'd take Nadal's though, it has stood up for longer and isn't showing signs of breaking down yet like Fed's started to. It's a more high percentage shot which is why it holds up better in big matches against the toughest opponents.

 

[mandy01]

Fed can take it on the rise better than Nadal, but Nadal has more consistency, hits greater passing shots and can put wicked spin on the ball, how many times we see him hit that running banana FH UTL, Fed doesn't do this anywhere near as well as Nadal.

Nadal is a great defender in general. Even then I'd say his BH passers are better. And on a low-bouncing surface, it doesn't even matter. And why would Federer hit running bananas? He's hit fantastic running FHs in his prime, 'banana' or not. Federer's movement to his right was among the first aspects of his game to decline but people with long-term memories know better.

Not to mention, when Nadal decides to flatten it out, he has more power than Fed. That FH against Novak in the fifth set of AO12 was AMAZING. He can also do it when the ball is behind him like no other.

On what basis?

Overall, I'd take Nadal's though, it has stood up for longer and isn't showing signs of breaking down yet like Fed's started to. It's a more high percentage shot which is why it holds up better in big matches against the toughest opponents.

HUH? Fed is 32 with 300+ matches more than Nadal. Let's see what happens to Nadal when he gets there. As it is, his prowess is largely debatable on HC and grass.

 

[The_Order]

Nadal is a great defender in general. Even then I'd say his BH passers are better. And on a low-bouncing surface, it doesn't even matter. And why would Federer hit running bananas? He's hit fantastic running FHs in his prime, 'banana' or not. Federer's movement to his right was among the first aspects of his game to decline but people with long-term memories know better.

The banana FH shot is another element of versatility, whether you want to admit it or not. The shot against Verdasco AO09SF, against Kolschreiber between the umpire chair and the net post being a couple of examples of how dangerous that shot is.

On what basis?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NJQtK3w7LW0&t=43

HUH? Fed is 32 with 300+ matches more than Nadal. Let's see what happens to Nadal when he gets there. As it is, his prowess is largely debatable on HC and grass.

Yeah but Fed's FH isn't just declining now is it? Fed's FH hasn't stood up for the same length of time Nadal's has. If anything, Nadal's FH is just as good now as it ever has been.

 

[objectivity]

How many left handers BHs do guys like Federer get to "abuse"? Ralph who's BH is basically quite stable, FLopez,Dasco,Melzer and some journeymen like Klizan. 3 of the Big 4 are right handers,infact only 1 of the top 20 is a lefty, advantage Nadal. Like I said, quit clutching on straws and it's you who needs to calm down clearly evident from your excessive use of capslock.

monfed dear, in reality, the real match-up advantage a lefty has over the righty, is familiarity. that is something even nadal has admitted to. i am not disagreeing with you here. the left hander is more familiar with right handers, then the right hander with left handers. but this explains very little the H2H lead nadal has over federer. because
1) federer has absolutely chomped on any other left hander
2) federer has played more than 1000 matches, and 31 against nadal alone -- its not like he is a rookie.

the real, objective reality, is that nadal has been the best player around who has been able to consistently exploit federer's weakness. and federer has not been able to compensate for it. no other player on tour has been able to do so as consistently, hence federer has dominated the rest of the field. but nadal has been superior to him man vs man, because federer simply hasn't been able to solve the nadal enigma.

 

[Messarger]

If Nadal is able to continue hitting his forehand on the hardcourts like he has been this year and as a result of that win more hard court majors, then I think he will have THE best forehand, yes, even better than Federer.

Things to consider about Nadal's forehand: watch any of his matches in 2006 on hardcourts and compare that to last night against Berdych. The difference is startling. In the past his forehand use to routinely land on the service line but now it's longer and flatter when the situation calls for it.

Of course, one match doesn't make or break a forehand, but Nadal has been hitting his 2.0 forehand for sometime now.

I think we should evaluate a stroke base on the number of things it cant do. Base on that, Nadal's forehand pass with flying colors.

Slice against his forehand doesn't work. He's able to crush shoulder height balls as we've seen on clay. He's able to hit amazing winners on the run. Yes, when faced with a deep flat ball like Djokovic's backhand it lands short, but that's the same with everyone. Hell, it's not that bad of a stroke indoors. Look at the Murray semi final in 2010 WTF. He was hitting some great forehands on important points, most notably match point to win the match.

Is it better than Federer's? Not going to answer that question for you, but i'd just like to point out something. When evaluating Federer's forehand, please do not solely look at his matches when he was hitting winners left right center like against Agassi at the 2005 US Open. We need to consider all the UE's he's made as well.

 

[abmk]

Fed can take it on the rise better than Nadal, but Nadal has more consistency, hits greater passing shots and can put wicked spin on the ball, how many times we see him hit that running banana FH UTL, Fed doesn't do this anywhere near as well as Nadal.

Not to mention, when Nadal decides to flatten it out, he has more power than Fed. That FH against Novak in the fifth set of AO12 was AMAZING. He can also do it when the ball is behind him like no other.

As for improvisation, I'd probably give that to Fed, he can come up with some magic like no other.

Overall, I'd take Nadal's though, it has stood up for longer and isn't showing signs of breaking down yet like Fed's started to. It's a more high percentage shot which is why it holds up better in big matches against the toughest opponents.

I already said that I could see someone picking nadal's fh purely on the basis of consistency, but his fh is not more versatile than federer's.

the difference in the ability to take it on the rise is *vast*, unlike the difference in their passing shots . the banana shot is just one part of ability to hit on the run. federer has hit those as well, just that he doesn't need to hit them as frequently as nadal.

I don't see that that nadal's has 'held up'* for that much longer at all. fed was wreaking havoc with djokovic with his fh in RG and USO 11. even as late as cincy 12 . there was a major blip in 2008 because of mono, but that's it .

off clay, fed's peak fh was well and above nadal's peak and second only to nadal on clay; after that it has come down, but was still better till mid-12 or so on the medium to faster surfaces

nadal needs to have very high confidence to go FH DTL, which he didn't have much in 11, part of the reason why djokovic had the clear upper hand.

of course in the second half of 09, he was hitting consistently short and top players were ruthlessly punishing him .

* - when I say held up ; its not just about consistency, but effectiveness overall

@ the first bold part, not true at all, they have about equal top end speeds on the fh.

see the first fh winners in the first two points here ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k_Z6Ijd2DY

@ 2nd bold part, don't see it at all.

 

[abmk]

The guys saying second best have all the idea what they're saying. Nadal has himself admitted during Roger's prime that if he attacked the Federer forehand he would basically get killed. Prime Fed could hit forehand winners from literally anywhere on the court and boy did he unleash those monsters.

yeah, pretty much this. nadal used to avoid it like crazy. Only when federer's movement to the right declined by quite a bit, he started hitting to it to keep federer off balance.

 

[President]

I already said that I could see someone picking nadal's fh purely on the basis of consistency, but his fh is not more versatile than federer's.

the difference in the ability to take it on the rise is *vast*, unlike the difference in their passing shots . the banana shot is just one part of ability to hit on the run. federer has hit those as well, just that he doesn't need to hit them as frequently as nadal.

I don't see that that nadal's has 'held up' for that much longer at all. fed was wreaking havoc with djokovic with his fh in RG and USO 11. even as late as cincy 12 . there was a major blip in 2008 because of mono, but that's it .

off clay, fed's peak fh was well and above nadal's peak and second only to nadal on clay; after that it has come down, but was still better till mid-12 or so on the medium to faster surfaces

nadal needs to have very high confidence to go FH DTL, which he didn't have much in 11, part of the reason why djokovic had the clear upper hand.

of course in the second half of 09, he was hitting consistently short and top players were ruthlessly punishing him .

its not just about consistency, but effectiveness overall

@ the first bold part, not true at all, they have about equal top end speeds on the fh.

see the first fh winners in the first two points here ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k_Z6Ijd2DY

@ 2nd bold part, don't see it at all.

I totally disagree with Federer having a better FH than Nadal all the way up till mid 2012, there's just no way that's true. Federer's FH declined MASSIVELY in 2008 and never got up to the same level again that it had been in 2004-2007. There are technical differences actually between his 2007 FH and 2009 FH. In 2010, 2011, and 2012 especially Nadal's forehand was clearly better than Federer on all but very few fast surfaces (at USO and AO Nadal's forehand was superior from 2010 IMO). You have to take into account those are the years that Federer was arguably serving the best in his CAREER, his FH had declined a lot at that point. It was still a great, great FH but not even close to the monster it had been and not as good as Nadal's from 2010 onwards IMO. The serve was what was helping him win on faster courts.

 

[Sky Fire]

One has to take into account forehand return as well since we are talking about versatility. Federer had a very decent FH return during his prime. Nadal's forehand return on the other hand on grass, fast HC and indoors is very mediocre. How many times have you seen Nadal return aggressively? vs Berdych AO 2012 (slow HC), Montreal 2013, thats about it.

Someone mentioned banana shots, Federer can do it too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EAhgi-iDZE , pretty good huh

 

[abmk]

I totally disagree with Federer having a better FH than Nadal all the way up till mid 2012, there's just no way that's true. Federer's FH declined MASSIVELY in 2008 and never got up to the same level again that it had been in 2004-2007. There are technical differences actually between his 2007 FH and 2009 FH. In 2010, 2011, and 2012 especially Nadal's forehand was clearly better than Federer on all but very few fast surfaces (at USO and AO Nadal's forehand was superior from 2010 IMO). You have to take into account those are the years that Federer was arguably serving the best in his CAREER, his FH had declined a lot at that point. It was still a great, great FH but not even close to the monster it had been and not as good as Nadal's from 2010 onwards IMO. The serve was what was helping him win on faster courts.

I was talking about fh till 12 on the medium to fast surfaces only, not on slow HC and of course not clay.

AO 10, federer dominated with his fh

even in 11 USO for instance, federer completely took tsonga off rhythm with serve+fh combo. troubled djokovic a lot more with serve+fh than nadal did i in the final

 

[abmk]

I concede I did type this. However, I do believe in my statement. Fed shanks all over the place on both wings. Do you disagree? The problem for him is that entire game revolves around small margins of error. Now as he ages and the hand-eye coordination is not as good as it used to be he shanks all over the place.

it certainly has smaller margins of error than nadal, but its not like berdych or soderling or sampras or gonzalez who were error-prone ; he was incredibly consistent with it at his peak ( shanks off both wings? :lol: ) and fairly consistent with it till about the last year or so.

 

[President]

I was talking about fh till 12 on the medium to fast surfaces only, not on slow HC and of course not clay.

AO 10, federer dominated with his fh.

even in 11 USO for instance, federer completely took tsonga off rhythm with serve+fh combo. troubled djokovic a lot more with serve+fh than nadal did i in the final

You are right about Australia 2010, but Nadal absolutely dominated with his forehand at USO 2010 as well and that' with a much worse serve to boot. Key words in your post are "serve+fh", without the serve in those years Federer's forehand would not have looked nearly as effective as it was. In neutral rallies, I really think Nadal's FH was clearly a better shot from 2010. 2004-2007 I agree with you, Federer's forehand was the best EVER on all surfaces except clay (and one of the very best of all time on clay). Nadal had a lot more success than Federer sine 2010, and that is MAINLY due to his FH. Federer had a great serve during this period but still much less success, I think that's due to his declined FH.

 

[RNadal]

Both of them have terrific forehands, and also their superb movements helped a great much in that. It is pointless to discuss who have the best one, even more so with the blind and biased fans over here.

 

[abmk]

You are right about Australia 2010, but Nadal absolutely dominated with his forehand at USO 2010 as well and that' with a much worse serve to boot. Key words in your post are "serve+fh", without the serve in those years Federer's forehand would not have looked nearly as effective as it was. In neutral rallies, I really think Nadal's FH was clearly a better shot from 2010. 2004-2007 I agree with you, Federer's forehand was the best EVER on all surfaces except clay (and one of the very best of all time on clay). Nadal had a lot more success than Federer sine 2010, and that is MAINLY due to his FH. Federer had a great serve during this period but still much less success, I think that's due to his declined FH.

I think people also tend to under-estimate that nadal's serve helps him out quite a bit with the fh.

2010 USO, yeah, nadal's fh was real good ....

about USO 11, at times it becomes difficult to separate how much the difference is because of serve and how much of it is because of fh ..I probably give more of the credit to the fh than you do.

overall from 2010, nadal's has been definitely better overall , no question , but I just think that from wimbledon onwards where there are mainly faster surfaces ( or faster surfaces like dubai, rotterdam in the first half ), federer's was still better till mid-2012 or so.

its not just about fh in 'neutral' rallies. putting away short fhs quickly is also a major part, otherwise sampras' fh would be regarded as miles behind rafa's.

 

[fednad]

2nd best FH of all time is Johnny Mac.
Jimbo takes the top spot.

 

[heninfan99]

There's no doubt. Nadal's forehand is sick and hugely influential. So many of us weekend warriors are trying extra spin these days.

 

[President]

I think people also tend to under-estimate that nadal's serve helps him out quite a bit with the fh.

2010 USO, yeah, nadal's fh was real good ....

about USO 11, at times it becomes difficult to separate how much the difference is because of serve and how much of it is because of fh ..I probably give more of the credit to the fh than you do.

overall from 2010, nadal's has been definitely better overall , no question , but I just think that from wimbledon onwards where there are mainly faster surfaces ( or faster surfaces like dubai, rotterdam in the first half ), federer's was still better till mid-2012 or so.

its not just about fh in 'neutral' rallies. putting away short fhs quickly is also a major part, otherwise sampras' fh would be regarded as miles behind rafa's.

Nadal has less opportunities to put away short balls because he doesn't produce so many with his serve as Federer and Sampras, it's all correlated. at USO and AO I really do believe Nadal's forehand has been a lot better than Federer's since 2010. At Wimbledon and indoor tournaments + Cincinnati Federer might have an edge during that time period. I think I agree with you for the most part, though I do put Sampras' forehand clearly behind Nadal though (and Agassi's, for that matter. Andre definitely had the better overall FH to Pete IMO).

 

[wy2sl0]

I don't know what you guys are thinking.

If we are talking heaviest forehand of all time, then we go with Nadal, obviously.

Every other shot, variety goes to Fed. Do you guys watch much tennis? Federer is top 5 in spin on the tour. I would honestly be comfortable saying he is probably within 80-85% of Nadals topspin when he really wants to hit like that. Not only that, his ability to deal with pace off the FH side is second to none. Nadal's forehand is huge liability on a fast surface because of takeback.

Who redirects pace better than Federer on the FH side? No one. The guy when he is on is the most accurate ball striker possibly of all time. The reason he shanks is because his margin of error is tiny compared to everyone because he uses his forearm for all the topspin and almost no arm. Nadal uses a ton of both. It is incredibly efficient and lethal.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Who redirects pace better than Federer on the FH side? No one. The guy when he is on is the most accurate ball striker possibly of all time. The reason he shanks is because his margin of error is tiny compared to everyone because he uses his forearm for all the topspin and almost no arm. Nadal uses a ton of both. It is incredibly efficient and lethal.

Djokovic is close, imo.

 

[wy2sl0]

Djokovic is close, imo.

Yeah, right now, for sure. Djokovic is best at the BH redirect as well.

 

[abmk]

Nadal has less opportunities to put away short balls because he doesn't produce so many with his serve as Federer and Sampras, it's all correlated. at USO and AO I really do believe Nadal's forehand has been a lot better than Federer's since 2010. At Wimbledon and indoor tournaments + Cincinnati Federer might have an edge during that time period. I think I agree with you for the most part, though I do put Sampras' forehand clearly behind Nadal though (and Agassi's, for that matter. Andre definitely had the better overall FH to Pete IMO).

yeah, agassi's fh over sampras', no doubt in my mind about that. courier's fh at its peak as well.

@ the bold part, true, but nadal just doesn't go DTL that often unless very confident. that's also a part of the reason why he doesn't put away short balls that efficiently when compared to fed.

if we're talking about AO and USO from 10 - fed and nadal, I'm not that sure :

AO 10 - fed's was better
USO 10 - nadal's was better
AO 11 - nadal played basically one decent match , vs cilic, I'd take fed's here .
USO 11 - fed's was better
AO 12 - nadal's was better
USO 12 and AO 13 - nadal did not play.

 

[President]

yeah, agassi's fh over sampras, no doubt in my mind about that. courier's fh at its peak as well.

if we're talking about AO and USO from 10- fed and nadal, I'm not that sure :

AO 10 - fed's was better
USO 10 - nadal's was better
AO 11 - nadal played basically one good match , vs cilic, , I'd take fed's here
USO 11 - I'd take fed's here
AO 12 - nadal's was better
USO 12 and AO 13 - nadal did not play.

I'd agree except for USO 11, Nadal's forehand was actually very good in that tournament. I remember him decimating every opponent (including Murray and giving Roddick one of the worst beatdowns of his life) he played in that tournament until he ran into Djokovic. Federer troubled Djokovic more than Nadal mainly due to a matchup issue (and a MUCH better serve) rather than a better forehand. AO 2011 is very inconclusive as well, neither played great in that tournament. Federer was straight stetted by Djokovic and Nadal was clearly injured against Ferrer. I'd say that one is a wash. And Nadal puts away short balls VERY well, the point is basically over as soon as he gets a short ball. This is where he is MUCH better than Murray and Djokovic, his FH against short balls is like his overhead, he nearly always ends the point and NEVER misses.

 

[objectivity]

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=304646

And the guy who made that list is a hardcore Laver fan. Show me one list/article which says Ralph has the greatest FH of all time. GO!



I called you a Nadulltard and with every post you confirm it. :lol:

here's a list for you. and its a video too, so you don't have to read.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYC-SXq9w3k

 

[abmk]

I'd agree except for USO 11, Nadal's forehand was actually very good in that tournament. I remember him decimating every opponent (including Murray and giving Roddick one of the worst beatdowns of his life) he played in that tournament until he ran into Djokovic. Federer troubled Djokovic more than Nadal mainly due to a matchup issue (and a MUCH better serve) rather than a better forehand. AO 2011 is very inconclusive as well, neither played great in that tournament. Federer was straight stetted by Djokovic and Nadal was clearly injured against Ferrer. I'd say that one is a wash. And Nadal puts away short balls VERY well, the point is basically over as soon as he gets a short ball. This is where he is MUCH better than Murray and Djokovic, his FH against short balls is like his overhead, he nearly always ends the point and NEVER misses.

oh , nadal's FH is wayyyyyy better than murray's at putting away short balls of course and yeah better than djokovic's as well , but its not better than federer's. The thing is he doesn't end it in one shot, he drags the opponent around the court , mostly with CC fhs and then finally puts it away. This works majority of the time, but at times, if a player is in-form, it costs him when the player turns around the rally ( ala djokovic ) or is hitting out at every slight chance ( ala rosol or soderling )

about USO 11, nadal's fh was very good until the final, but it went down in the final. nadal served mediocre in the final, but so did djokovic, so the rallies mostly started neutral. federer served much better in the semi than nadal in the final, but then djokovic himself served much better in the semi. both federer and nadal's fhs were very good until they met djokovic. IIRC, federer only lost one set till the semi, to cilic. federer's was better vs djokovic. so that clinches it for me.

about AO 11, it was mainly fed's BH that cost him the match vs djoker, not his FH. not much of a difference in fedal's fhs in that tourney, but federer showed enough glimpses of very good enough FHs, more so than nadal IMO. not that big a big difference of course.

 

[hoodjem]

Pancho Segura's.

 

[monfed]

monfed dear, in reality, the real match-up advantage a lefty has over the righty, is familiarity. that is something even nadal has admitted to. i am not disagreeing with you here. the left hander is more familiar with right handers, then the right hander with left handers. but this explains very little the H2H lead nadal has over federer. because
1) federer has absolutely chomped on any other left hander
2) federer has played more than 1000 matches, and 31 against nadal alone -- its not like he is a rookie.

No other left hander moonballs like Ralph so your argument fails,sorry.

the real, objective reality, is that nadal has been the best player around who has been able to consistently exploit federer's weakness. and federer has not been able to compensate for it. no other player on tour has been able to do so as consistently, hence federer has dominated the rest of the field. but nadal has been superior to him man vs man, because federer simply hasn't been able to solve the nadal enigma.

Yes just like Ralph hasn't solved the Davydenko matchup issue on HC,trails him 1-6.

 

[The_Order]

I already said that I could see someone picking nadal's fh purely on the basis of consistency, but his fh is not more versatile than federer's.

the difference in the ability to take it on the rise is *vast*, unlike the difference in their passing shots . the banana shot is just one part of ability to hit on the run. federer has hit those as well, just that he doesn't need to hit them as frequently as nadal.

LOL Fed doesn't need to hit them? That's because he can't.

The difference in consistency is also *vast* Fed gets days where he shanks heaps of them.

I don't see that that nadal's has 'held up'* for that much longer at all. fed was wreaking havoc with djokovic with his fh in RG and USO 11. even as late as cincy 12 . there was a major blip in 2008 because of mono, but that's it .

Nadal's FH has held up since 2005. Sure there were patches where it wasn't great, but for the most part it's held up better than Federer's.

off clay, fed's peak fh was well and above nadal's peak and second only to nadal on clay; after that it has come down, but was still better till mid-12 or so on the medium to faster surfaces

Grass is the fastest surface. Nadal's FH was better at WIM10 than Federer's and also at WIM11 as well.

nadal needs to have very high confidence to go FH DTL, which he didn't have much in 11, part of the reason why djokovic had the clear upper hand.

of course in the second half of 09, he was hitting consistently short and top players were ruthlessly punishing him .

Yep pick the 2 periods where it wasn't working well. Mind you, in 2011, it was mainly against Novak only where it wasn't working well for him.

* - when I say held up ; its not just about consistency, but effectiveness overall

@ the first bold part, not true at all, they have about equal top end speeds on the fh.

see the first fh winners in the first two points here ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k_Z6Ijd2DY

LOL I can post Nadal's fh vids as well, many of them. Rafa can hit it harder. Deal with it.

@ 2nd bold part, don't see it at all.

Of course you don't see it, because you don't want to see it. Courier sees it as well. Fed's FH is under immense pressure against guys like Nadal and Novak who can turn defence into offence and hence he is forced to go for more resulting in errors. This isn't the case with Nadal vs Fed and Novak. In 2011, it was Nadal's BH that Novak was attacking and breaking down, but not the FH.

 

[mandy01]

The banana FH shot is another element of versatility, whether you want to admit it or not. The shot against Verdasco AO09SF, against Kolschreiber between the umpire chair and the net post being a couple of examples of how dangerous that shot is.

HUH? How does the banana ball attest to versatility? That's his general technique :?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NJQtK3w7LW0&t=43

Do you have an actual measurement of the power generated? Even I can post a dozen Federer videos where he rips the opponent apart with his FH.

Yeah but Fed's FH isn't just declining now is it? Fed's FH hasn't stood up for the same length of time Nadal's has. If anything, Nadal's FH is just as good now as it ever has been.

Is this a joke? Federer's FH is among the few things still keeping him in the game.

 

[forzamilan90]

Agree. Fed and Nadal are respectively the two greatest forehands of all time, best right handed forehand and best left handed forehand

 

[The_Order]

oh , nadal's FH is wayyyyyy better than murray's at putting away short balls of course and yeah better than djokovic's as well , but its not better than federer's. The thing is he doesn't end it in one shot, he drags the opponent around the court , mostly with CC fhs and then finally puts it away. This works majority of the time, but at times, if a player is in-form, it costs him when the player turns around the rally ( ala djokovic ) or is hitting out at every slight chance ( ala rosol or soderling )

about USO 11, nadal's fh was very good until the final, but it went down in the final. nadal served mediocre in the final, but so did djokovic, so the rallies mostly started neutral. federer served much better in the semi than nadal in the final, but then djokovic himself served much better in the semi. both federer and nadal's fhs were very good until they met djokovic. IIRC, federer only lost one set till the semi, to cilic. federer's was better vs djokovic. so that clinches it for me.

about AO 11, it was mainly fed's BH that cost him the match vs djoker, not his FH. not much of a difference in fedal's fhs in that tourney, but federer showed enough glimpses of very good enough FHs, more so than nadal IMO. not that big a big difference of course.

Fed ends it in one shot all right, just doesn't mean he will win it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo_PvJ1Mu44&feature=player_detailpage&t=131

 

[mandy01]

LOL Fed doesn't need to hit them? That's because he can't.

You Nadalfanboys are truly ridiculous. It's like the only Fed you remember is the one that isn't on form or the Fed in his matches lost. It's really hilarious.

The difference in consistency is also *vast* Fed gets days where he shanks heaps of them.

No, he doesn't shank heaps of them. He shanks a few and Nadal fanboys like you make a big deal out of it. Let's see Nadal not shank balls with Fed's racquet and his level of explosiveness.

Nadal's FH has held up since 2005. Sure there were patches where it wasn't great, but for the most part it's held up better than Federer's.

And what do you have to back this up?

Grass is the fastest surface. Nadal's FH was better at WIM10 than Federer's and also at WIM11 as well.

Is this a joke? Federer was injured in 2010 but even so the difference between Fed-Nadal in those years was less of strokes and more of movement.

LOL I can post Nadal's fh vids as well, many of them. Rafa can hit it harder. Deal with it.

Again, on what basis?

Of course you don't see it, because you don't want to see it. Courier sees it as well. Fed's FH is under immense pressure against guys like Nadal and Novak who can turn defence into offence and hence he is forced to go for more resulting in errors. This isn't the case with Nadal vs Fed and Novak. In 2011, it was Nadal's BH that Novak was attacking and breaking down, but not the FH.

Honestly, I don't know when Courier said what he did but so what? That's what commentators like him do.

 

[The_Order]

HUH? How does the banana ball attest to versatility? That's his general technique :?

HUH? Because it shows additional variety in the shot.

Do you have an actual measurement of the power generated? Even I can post a dozen Federer videos where he rips the opponent apart with his FH.

No, but I've never seen Fed smack one like that with the ball behind him like that.

Is this a joke? Federer's FH is among the few things still keeping him in the game.

Yeah lol, it's keeping him out of a lot of games too. Turn your blinkers off, don't just judge on the last match he played.

 

[mandy01]

HUH? Because it shows additional variety in the shot.

In what way? A running FH is a running FH period.

No, but I've never seen Fed smack one like that with the ball behind him like that.

That's because you haven't seen Fed at all.

Yeah lol, it's keeping him out of a lot of games too. Turn your blinkers off, don't just judge on the last match he played.

HAHA look who's talking. What have you done? You're judging him at a time his form as a whole is bad. Serve, return FH, everything. How convenient. His FH is the one weapon he still has. If he mis-times the ball it is because he cannot put himself in position due to movement. It has nothing to do with his stroke mechanics. God, you're idiotic.

 

[abmk]

LOL Fed doesn't need to hit them? That's because he can't.

he has hit them at times, just that you haven't seen it .

The difference in consistency is also *vast* Fed gets days where he shanks heaps of them.

Nadal's FH has held up since 2005. Sure there were patches where it wasn't great, but for the most part it's held up better than Federer's.

Yep pick the 2 periods where it wasn't working well. Mind you, in 2011, it was mainly against Novak only where it wasn't working well for him.

oh, its not like nadal's fh was that good on HC before 2008 or so. he was absent from mid-12 till early 13 as well.

if by holding up, you just mean keeping it in, then maybe. I and most would include hitting it *effectively* as part of consistency. just hitting it short and keeping in doesn't work.

peak to peak , the difference is consistency is not vast at all. fed's fh at its peak was ridiculously consistent

Grass is the fastest surface. Nadal's FH was better at WIM10 than Federer's and also at WIM11 as well.

it was, but I was speaking about overall .... not just wimbledon .. federer was so well off it in wim 10 because of injury problems. Just that he doesn't whine about them all day like nadal and his camp.

LOL I can post Nadal's fh vids as well, many of them. Rafa can hit it harder. Deal with it.

LOL, both have equal top end speeds with the fh. that's reality. its only in your la la land , where its not true. I just pointed out a couple of those shots.

Of course you don't see it, because you don't want to see it. Courier sees it as well. Fed's FH is under immense pressure against guys like Nadal and Novak who can turn defence into offence and hence he is forced to go for more resulting in errors. This isn't the case with Nadal vs Fed and Novak. In 2011, it was Nadal's BH that Novak was attacking and breaking down, but not the FH.

not at fed's prime. nadal avoided fed's FH a lot in federer's prime. even on clay, fed's FH was devastating vs nadal in rome 06 and hamburg 07 as well ( after 1st set ). there was no one, and I repeat no one who really wanted to go to fed's FH wing. they were sh*t scared of it.

novak actually had a lot of trouble with fed's I/O and DTL FH till 09 or so. even in 11, he had lot of trouble because it, more than with nadal's.

like I said, its not just about the errors, but about the effectiveness.

novak wasn't breaking down nadal's FH in 11, but it wasn't that effective as it could be and you know it. that's a -ve.

only hitting errors is not a -ve