Best Shot for Each ATG

[King No1e]

For every player who has won 4+ Slams (include Sir Andrew too, if you prefer) which was their best shot (for its specific function, not necessarily the one they won the most points with - I'm sure Agassi won more points off his serve than his ROS)?
Laver: Volleys
Rosewall: Slice
Connors: Backhand
Borg: Forehand
Vilas: Haven't seen him play enough
McEnroe: Volleys
Lendl: Forehand
Wilander: Return
Edberg: Backhand volley
Becker: Serve
Courier: Forehand
Sampras: Serve
Agassi: Return
Federer: Forehand
Nadal: Forehand
Djokovic: Backhand
Murray: Lob

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Vilas, Courier and Murray aren't ATGs...you can make cases for Murray all you want, but that won't change facts...sorry Murray fanboys, thats just how things are - accept it...a couple more grand slam victories would probably change that, but with only 3 grand slams to his name he is clearly NOT an ATG, no matter how many finals he made and ATP tournaments won...grand slam victories is what matters the most in tennis and this is where he ultimately lacks so...Courier and ESPECIALLY Vilas aren't even anywhere close to an ATG (at least Murray reached double digit slam finals count and was in general consistent enough throughout his career to make some points in his favor! Courier and Vilas got nothing going for them...)

 

[game..set..match]

always felt Nadal's backhand was underrated.

because he's right handed, that thing has a lot of power and accuracy.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Agassi: Return

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

 

[King No1e]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

I actually considered putting ROS above BH for Djokovic, they're both the GOAT shots in their respective departments.
Agassi had both one of the best returns and best backhands in history, as well as his FH. Even if he dictated more with his FH, there's a case to be made his BH was a more exceptional shot in its department.

 

[MeatTornado]

I actually considered putting ROS above BH for Djokovic, they're both the GOAT shots in their respective departments.
Agassi had both one of the best returns and best backhands in history, as well as his FH. Even if he dictated more with his FH, there's a case to be made his BH was a more exceptional shot in its department.

If return is an option I think Novak's return game is more exceptional than his backhand.

 

[Crazy Finn]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

I actually considered putting ROS above BH for Djokovic, they're both the GOAT shots in their respective departments.
Agassi had both one of the best returns and best backhands in history, as well as his FH. Even if he dictated more with his FH, there's a case to be made his BH was a more exceptional shot in its department.

Both wings of Agassi's groundstrokes were all-time great. I think with his return, he was one of the first that I remember - if not the first - whose return was actually a weapon. He would attack people's serves. To be sure, before that people would hit good returns and sometimes winners especially when people came in after serving, but Agassi's return was an actual weapon - he would sometimes hit the #$%^ out of the ball on the return. This was not just a weak second serve, either, he would sometimes attack a hard first serve if he could - in an era in the late 80's when people almost always just tried to get good serves back over.

 

[MeatTornado]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

With that logic then no one should be listed with their serve either, right?

 

[Cashman]

Vilas is definitely his topspin backhand, which was legendary.

Laver is hard but I would probably say his running backhand. I don't think I've ever seen anyone come close to hitting that shot as well as he did.

I would probably have the half-volley for Rosewall, it was his signature and arguably the best the game has ever seen. Incredibly difficult shot and he hit it all the time on account of his weak serve.

As great as Sampras's serve was, for me his signature stroke will always be the dunker smash with his running forehand a close second.

Edberg would be his kick serve - the best in history, only Rafter could rival it.

 

[skaj]

Serena: serve
Graf: forehand
Navratilova: backhand volley
Evert: passing shot
Court: overhead
Seles: return
King: volley
Goolagong: slice
Henin: backhand
Venus: backhand
Hingis: drop shot
Sharapova: backhand
Clijsters: forehand
Mandlikova: forehand volley
Sanchez-Vicario: moon ball

 

[skaj]

For every player who has won 4+ Slams (include Sir Andrew too, if you prefer) which was their best shot (for its specific function, not necessarily the one they won the most points with - I'm sure Agassi won more points off his serve than his ROS)?
Laver: Volleys
Rosewall: Slice
Connors: Backhand
Borg: Forehand
Vilas: Haven't seen him play enough
McEnroe: Volleys
Lendl: Forehand
Wilander: Return
Edberg: Backhand volley
Becker: Serve
Courier: Forehand
Sampras: Serve
Agassi: Return
Federer: Forehand
Nadal: Forehand
Djokovic: Backhand
Murray: Lob

Passing shot for Borg is also a good option. All of Wilander's shots were basically mediocre, perhaps backhand stands out a little.

 

[ElChivoEspañol]

always felt Nadal's backhand was underrated.

because he's right handed, that thing has a lot of power and accuracy.

Nadal has a top 5 BH of all time.

His BH is so underrated because it's overshadow by his FH, arguably the GOAT FH.

 

[PDJ]

Serena: serve
Graf: forehand
Navratilova: backhand volley
Evert: passing shot
Court: overhead
Seles: return
King: volley
Goolagong: slice
Henin: backhand
Venus: backhand
Hingis: drop shot
Sharapova: backhand
Clijsters: forehand
Mandlikova: forehand volley
Sanchez-Vicario: moon ball

Good list.
I'd just add that BJK was far more flexible on the bh volley.
Evert, yes passing shot, but personally for me it was her lob, which was had so much variety on both wings, and a lob volley that I've never seen equalled.
Both Goolagong-Cawley and Bueno had backhand smashes that were sublime. Balletic and deadly.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Nadal has a top 5 BH of all time.

His BH is so underrated because it's overshadow by his FH, arguably the GOAT FH.

Safin, Wawrinka, Nalbandian, Agassi, Djokovic, Kuerten. Tell me please which two among these have an inferior backhand to Nadal's.

 

[skaj]

Safin, Wawrinka, Nalbandian, Agassi, Djokovic, Kuerten. Tell me please which two among these have an inferior backhand to Nadal's.

And there are plenty other backhands, his is not even top20.

 

[Swingmaster]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

Good point. A good returner is a good returner because he has solid strokes, not because he has a magical ability to deal with serves. Agassi had a great backhand too, obviously, and he could hit on the rise. I guess serve returning isn’t a bad one to give him, since it might do the best job of encapsulating what it was that made him great.

 

[Swingmaster]

Nadal has a top 5 BH of all time.

His BH is so underrated because it's overshadow by his FH, arguably the GOAT FH.

If Nadal had the goat forehand(which he might) and a top five backhand he would be far and away superior to Djokovic. But he’s not.

 

[Beckerserve]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

I rated Couriers FH greater than Agassi but Agassi had a better BH than Jim.
Tbh always felt Courier should have had more Majors. He was Sampras chief rival up 1991-1994 and i think Sampras overhauling him at that early key stage of their careers hurt Jim. Andre found his game 1998 onwards and Pete was arguably not what he was which allowed Andre to win more Majors than Jim could as his peak was when Sampras was at his peak.
I adore all three. They moved the game on from Boris in truth albeit Boris in 1996 had a glorious swansong. But 1990-1995 he did not have answers on hard court at all and was limited to grass and carpet courts for success as the other 3 had moved the game on hard courts.

 

[Swingmaster]

I rated Couriers FH greater than Agassi but Agassi had a better BH than Jim.
Tbh always felt Courier should have had more Majors. He was Sampras chief rival up 1991-1994 and i think Sampras overhauling him at that early key stage of their careers hurt Jim. Andre found his game 1998 onwards and Pete was arguably not what he was which allowed Andre to win more Majors than Jim could as his peak was when Sampras was at his peak.
I adore all three. They moved the game on from Boris in truth albeit Boris in 1996 had a glorious swansong. But 1990-1995 he did not have answers on hard court at all and was limited to grass and carpet courts for success as the other 3 had moved the game on hard courts.

That’s an intesting take if that is indeed your take. That Courier might’ve been the better player.

 

[King No1e]

Safin, Wawrinka, Nalbandian, Agassi, Djokovic, Kuerten. Tell me please which two among these have an inferior backhand to Nadal's.

Both the one-handers. And I have a 1HBH.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Good list, but Andre's FH was top 3 of all time. In practically every game he would hit his FH, whereas his ROS is hit much less often (obviously). Putting Andre's ROS above his FH is sort of like ranking Nole's ROS ahead of his BH. In any case, Andre's great strength was always his FH.

Andre had better BH than FH, although he probably has the best groundstroke combination of all time. But I think Federer, Nadal and Lendl have a better forehand.

 

[initialize]

If Nadal had the goat forehand(which he might) and a top five backhand he would be far and away superior to Djokovic. But he’s not.

Sorry but Fed’s forehand is way better than Nadal’s, except on clay. Nadal’s topspin heavy forehand is why he hasn’t won more slams on faster surfaces, it’s simply too slow

 

[WildRevolver]

Sorry but Fed’s forehand is way better than Nadal’s, except on clay. Nadal’s topspin heavy forehand is why he hasn’t won more slams on faster surfaces, it’s simply too slow

Yeah, 7 slams is such an indication of being too slow.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Nadal: Forehand topspin to the backhand no!

Ftfy

 

[Beckerserve]

That’s an intesting take if that is indeed your take. That Courier might’ve been the better player.

In their era i felt Courier was better on clay and hard as at his best i felt he could out grind Andre. But i do feel Sampras really got to Courier as it seemed to me on hard courts he couldnt hurt Pete from baseline as the Pete FH often outshone his own and the BH of Pete would stand up to a bombardment by Jim. He was more predictable than Andre so could not hurt Pete like Andre could so i got feeling Jim lost hope as he always knew Pete was likely in his way for Majors outside clay. Then on clay Bruguera arrived who caused Jim problems and i think he went off rails for a while and never recovered.
Hugely underrated player in my view.
Pete and Andre hold him in the highest esteem as a player.

 

[MichaelNadal]

 

[NatF]

Andre had better BH than FH, although he probably has the best groundstroke combination of all time. But I think Federer, Nadal and Lendl have a better forehand.

Not true at all. His backhand is slightly better historically compared to his forehand but as far as individual shots go the forehand is still better for him - as it is for like 99% of pros.

 

[MadariKatu]

If Nadal had the goat forehand(which he might) and a top five backhand he would be far and away superior to Djokovic. But he’s not.

I'm not saying that Nadal has a goat backhand, but for him to be clearly superior to Djokovic, he'd need a far better serve. He's among ATGs the one with the worst serve, and Djokovic's is arguably the best return, which makes if for a bad match up for Nadal.
A better backhand would help him, yes, but I don't think it's the shot that hampered him the most against Novak.

 

[Third Serve]

Andre had better BH than FH, although he probably has the best groundstroke combination of all time. But I think Federer, Nadal and Lendl have a better forehand.

Pretty much every pro player's FH is better than his BH, and Andre is no exception to this rule. Both were great shots, though.

 

[skaj]

I'm not saying that Nadal has a goat backhand, but for him to be clearly superior to Djokovic, he'd need a far better serve. He's among ATGs the one with the worst serve, and Djokovic's is arguably the best return, which makes if for a bad match up for Nadal.
A better backhand would help him, yes, but I don't think it's the shot that hampered him the most against Novak.

I think it is actually, Djokovic just has a better forehand+backhand combo. Nadal's return is very good too, and Djoko doesn't have a Karlovic serve, so the difference is not huge. Much bigger difference is Federer-Nadal, when it comes to serving. However, Roger has a lesser backhand.

 

[MadariKatu]

I think it is actually, Djokovic just has a better forehand+backhand combo. Nadal's return is very good too, and Djoko doesn't have a Karlovic serve, so the difference is not huge. Much bigger difference is Federer-Nadal, when it comes to serving. However, Roger has a lesser backhand.

Agree to disagree. Federer has a lesser backhand, but also a lesser return. When Nadal serves against Djokovic, he starts many times on the defense from the very first shot, so he's defending when he's returning, and also when he's serving. Djokovic doesn't serve like Karlovic or Isner, but has improved what was an underrated serve, while Nadal has declined a bit in his returns (still top of the tour).

More than just a single thing it will be a combination of factors. Djokovic's game not having a particularly weak wing is one of them, but I'll stick to my believe of Nadal's weak serve. When he was serving at his best, that is what made the biggest difference that helped him beat Djokovic on hard.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Pretty much every pro player's FH is better than his BH, and Andre is no exception to this rule. Both were great shots, though.

I'm talking in relative terms. His BH ranks a bit higher than his forehand, but yes, like 99% of players, he'd rather hit a forehand than a backhand.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Not true at all. His backhand is slightly better historically compared to his forehand but as far as individual shots go the forehand is still better for him - as it is for like 99% of pros.

See above. Even for the likes of Safin, Nalbandian, Wawrinka, who have the goat backhands, they'd rather hit a forehand than a backhand, but most would tell you they have better backhands than forehands.

 

[skaj]

Agree to disagree. Federer has a lesser backhand, but also a lesser return. When Nadal serves against Djokovic, he starts many times on the defense from the very first shot, so he's defending when he's returning, and also when he's serving. Djokovic doesn't serve like Karlovic or Isner, but has improved what was an underrated serve, while Nadal has declined a bit in his returns (still top of the tour).

More than just a single thing it will be a combination of factors. Djokovic's game not having a particularly weak wing is one of them, but I'll stick to my believe of Nadal's weak serve. When he was serving at his best, that is what made the biggest difference that helped him beat Djokovic on hard.

The combination of factors yes, but what I am saying is that the main factor is Djoko's advantage in groundstrokes department. They are very close of course, and yes when one of them is serving well it can make a difference, but their points are 90% baseline rallies. Both move well, both are fit, Nadal does have a power advantage, but Novak's strokes combined are better so I think that's the main factor. I could be wrong of course.

By the way Federer also has other advantages over Djokovic, like net attacks, touch shots, tactical abilities.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Passing shot for Borg is also a good option. All of Wilander's shots were basically mediocre, perhaps backhand stands out a little.

Wilander's return and especially passing shots were top class.

 

[skaj]

Wilander's return and especially passing shots were top class.

Good passing shot yes. Don't remember his return being particularly great.

 

[topher]

Budge: Serve, honorable mention to his backhand

If we’re discussing returns Connors is definitely up there, his return was very ahead of its time.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

You forgot Roddick’s legendary approach shot bro

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Andre had better BH than FH, although he probably has the best groundstroke combination of all time. But I think Federer, Nadal and Lendl have a better forehand.

Lendl and Agassi were the most balanced OE ATGs off both wings, for sure. Djokovic comes fairly close I suppose, wasn't as consistent offensively though.

 

[skaj]

You forgot Roddick’s legendary approach shot bro

I think that ATG stands for all-time greats.

 

[skaj]

Lendl and Agassi were the most balanced OE ATGs off both wings, for sure. Djokovic comes fairly close I suppose, wasn't as consistent offensively though.

I would rank Djokovic second after Agassi, if we are talking about ATP all-time greats.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

I think that ATG stands for all-time greats.

What’s your point?

 

[Keizer]

And there are plenty other backhands, his is not even top20.

Agreed. From the 2000s alone:

Agassi, Djokovic, Safin, Nalbandian, Murray, Nishikori, Zverev, Medvedev....

 

[skaj]

What’s your point?

Your post was about Roddick, whilst the thread is about all-time greats.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

Your post was about Roddick, whilst the thread is about all-time greats.

I still fail to see the incongruence here

 

[mahesh69a]

How about a best shot of tequila for all the ATGs ???

 

[Hamnavoe]

Murray: Lob

 

[King No1e]

Murray would've won 15+ Slams in any other era. Easily top 5 all time, along with Djokovic, Nadal, Ferrer, Wawrinka, and maybe Federer

 

[skaj]

I still fail to see the incongruence here

It's okay, take your time, we all have our own pace.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

It's okay, take your time, we all have our own pace.

based on strong era H2H, Nadal > Federer > Roddick > Djokovic
case closed