Better Running Forehand: Sampras or Nadal

Better Running Forehand

  • Rafa

    Votes: 107 49.1%

  • Pete

    Votes: 88 40.4%

  • Tie

    Votes: 14 6.4%

  • Biggie Smalls

    Votes: 9 4.1%
  • Total voters
    218
vive le beau jeu ! said:
i think you should get new glasses... you might represent a danger to walls and public light poles.

don't you see a difference between these ?

500121-BS1.jpg


061009_mole_rat_02.jpg
Click to expand...

Hahaha, surely you are the bestest Rafa hater here in TW. Laughing so hard :D
Why can't the likes of Monfed, Dudeski , Omega etc be like you ? They're so dull and empty. :twisted:
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
With equal equipment, that is, Nadal having to play with gut and an 85 sq in frame, it's no contest. Sampras all the way because Sampras is due to talent, Nadal due to equipment.
 
Last edited:
coloskier said:
With equal equipment, that is, Nadal having to play with gut and an 85 sq in frame, it's no contest. Sampras all the way because Sampras is due to talent, Nadal due to equipment.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. My compilation shows just how much topspin and sidespin Sampras can generate with that racquet and natural gut strings, at pace over the higher part of the net.
 
monfed said:
Interesting question. It's very close lets just say Pete for balls that are keeping low and getting away from him in a skiddy fashion, Ralph for the rest. I think overall you have to give it to Nadal because Ralph depends on it to keep S&Vers from stalling his baseline play so it's more critical for him than Pete who could S&V himself.
Click to expand...

Problem for Nadal is that he almost never has to do it against S&V or on fast courts. In fact, he has real trouble doing it against both, whereas Pete did it on all surfaces and opponents.
 
Sorry but this is a joke. Nadal can cover so much more ground than sampras. But even at full stretch Rafa can generate crazy racket head speed. Someone mentioning Del Potro? Del Potro's running forehand is what Rafa/Roger/Novak would reach in a stride. The running forehand requires movement.


Rafas game revolves around movement. His sideways movement coupled with what he does with the ball makes him the Greatest Defender I have ever seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
MichaelNadal said:
King Rafa takes this one. He gets ridiculously out of position sometimes and on the full run will drill a ball right on the line time and time again.
Click to expand...
recently rewatched 2011 rg final, Nadal killed federer with his running FH down the line. Made some ridiculous passes on key points like bp 1st set, 0-40 down first game 2Nd set, 4th set BP down
 
MichaelNadal said:
Stop acting like this lol, this narrative is so tired. Nadal’s running FH is not limited to surface.
Click to expand...

nadal's top spinny forehand is more effective on clay than grass. sampras's flat low cross court running forehand is much more effective than nadal's on fast surfaces, especially the old 90s grass and carpet
 
arvind13 said:
nadal's top spinny forehand is more effective on clay than grass. sampras's flat low cross court running forehand is much more effective than nadal's on fast surfaces, especially the old 90s grass and carpet
Click to expand...
oh, pleeeeze...here are some Rafa scorchers in Wimbledon to add to the USO bazookas quoted above
MichaelNadal said:
Stop acting like this lol, this narrative is so tired. Nadal’s running FH is not limited to surface.
Click to expand...
Exactly
 
IC you mugs are being worse than useless as usual. Let's start with a relatively sane take:

kandamrgam said:
Why is it so difficult?

Running DTL FH - Nadal
Running CC FH - Sampras
Click to expand...
While this is true it understates just how much Bull relies on that DTL FH. The above Wimby clip illustrates this to a comical extent, but here's a more thorough explanation:

Better running forehand : Djokovic vs Sampras?

Lendl hit a mean ass forehand with a sweet ass racquet. I still think on the dead run that Pete's had more heat. Lendl's was probably more accurate, especially on the pass. I think a lot of people on these boards don't know that Lendl was the guy who pioneered the modern game that is the power...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

When he's forced to go CC a la vs. Sascha in the 1st-set TB of last year's RG SF you can clearly see him struggling to generate as much pace. There's zero chance elite attackers wouldn't pick up on that and approach the net accordingly.

That's why Bull yields to not only Pistol but also Ivan in the running department, though you could say his superior athleticism at least makes it a tie with Lendl. No one in the OE has ever halved the court like the BOAT and his GOAT running FH is the reason why.

As for the aforementioned clip:

JustMy2Cents said:
oh, pleeeeze...here are some Rafa scorchers in Wimbledon to add to the USO bazookas quoted above
Click to expand...
Literally every one of 'em is DTL. (Count 'em if you think I'm bluffing.) GSM Sampras!
 
Running forehand is very important shot in finishing points, it needs great skill and athleticism to hit shots on the run.
 
Nadal reaches a few extra balls but PETE a little more deadly when he got there. With his racket head speed Nadal excels at picking up low balls at the end of his range and getting that shot over the high part of the net, Pete a bit more explosive and with his heavier racket was better at crushing balls cross court. I prefer PETE's but I might just be conditioned to vote against Nadal :laughing:
 
Well, the running forehand is Nadal's absolute bread and butter shot, no matter if down the line ("banana shot") or crosscourt (like in the saved set point at RG against Zverev), and Nadal is likely the GOAT baseliner.

Sampras on the other hand is an outright attacking first strike player with the serve and net play being his bread and butter.

So how can this even be a contest? It's just as absurd as asking who is the better serve and volley player between those two.

Obviously Sampras had quite some great running forehand shots as well, like here:


But what were career highlight running forehands for Sampras were all repeated by peak Nadal in literally any single match.
 
ChrisRF said:
Well, the running forehand is Nadal's absolute bread and butter shot, no matter if down the line ("banana shot") or crosscourt (like in the saved set point at RG against Zverev), and Nadal is likely the GOAT baseliner.

Sampras on the other hand is an outright attacking first strike player with the serve and net play being his bread and butter.

So how can this even be a contest? It's just as absurd as asking who is the better serve and volley player between those two.

Obviously Sampras had quite some great running forehand shots as well, like here:


But what were career highlight running forehands for Sampras were all repeated by peak Nadal in literally any single match.
Click to expand...
No Federer fan hurts me with their takes as much as you do.
 
ChrisRF said:
Well, the running forehand is Nadal's absolute bread and butter shot, no matter if down the line ("banana shot") or crosscourt (like in the saved set point at RG against Zverev), and Nadal is likely the GOAT baseliner.

Sampras on the other hand is an outright attacking first strike player with the serve and net play being his bread and butter.

So how can this even be a contest? It's just as absurd as asking who is the better serve and volley player between those two.

Obviously Sampras had quite some great running forehand shots as well, like here:


But what were career highlight running forehands for Sampras were all repeated by peak Nadal in literally any single match.
Click to expand...

Slay bestie
 
NonP said:
IC you mugs are being worse than useless as usual. Let's start with a relatively sane take:


While this is true it understates just how much Bull relies on that DTL FH. The above Wimby clip illustrates this to a comical extent, but here's a more thorough explanation:

Better running forehand : Djokovic vs Sampras?

Lendl hit a mean ass forehand with a sweet ass racquet. I still think on the dead run that Pete's had more heat. Lendl's was probably more accurate, especially on the pass. I think a lot of people on these boards don't know that Lendl was the guy who pioneered the modern game that is the power...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

When he's forced to go CC a la vs. Sascha in the 1st-set TB of last year's RG SF you can clearly see him struggling to generate as much pace. There's zero chance elite attackers wouldn't pick up on that and approach the net accordingly.

That's why Bull yields to not only Pistol but also Ivan in the running department, though you could say his superior athleticism at least makes it a tie with Lendl. No one in the OE has ever halved the court like the BOAT and his GOAT running FH is the reason why.

As for the aforementioned clip:


Literally every one of 'em is DTL. (Count 'em if you think I'm bluffing.) GSM Sampras!
Click to expand...
Cool.
the net rusher has to pick a side and if it's as bad as you paint there must be 100s of examples of Rafa's dtl being rendered toothless
now can we have the rallies please? they must outnumber Rafa fh winners by your logic
 
NatF said:
No Federer fan hurts me with their takes as much as you do.
Click to expand...
Well, we compare Sampras to a better overall player (we cannot deny this with 8 more Slams) exactly in the style or let's say in a "discipline" the latter is most famous for. As I said, one is an attacking player with serve and net play being his bread and better, while the other is the GOAT in running forehand counterpuches. And if you watch the 2008 Wimbledon final or the 2009/2012 AO matches against Federer, you can see that this isn't limited to clay.


Sampras may very well have the best running forehand outside the baseline specialists, while Nadal may have the best volley/overhead for a baseline specialist, but that's really all we can say. If it would be different, both would have dominated literally everywhere. They would have been the best offensive AND defensive players then.

But in reality, I meant to be generous to Pete by the way. I didn't want him to be involved in a "contest" he can only lose (at least if people would be objective). As I said, it's the same like making a thread if Nadal is the better serve and volley player than Sampras. Nadal fans also wouldn't like the bashing Nadal would get there.
 
ChrisRF said:
Well, we compare Sampras to a better overall player (we cannot deny this with 8 more Slams) exactly in the style or let's say in a "discipline" the latter is most famous for. As I said, one is an attacking player with serve and net play being his bread and better, while the other is the GOAT in running forehand counterpuches. And if you watch the 2008 Wimbledon final or the 2009/2012 AO matches against Federer, you can see that this isn't limited to clay.


Sampras may very well have the best running forehand outside the baseline specialists, while Nadal may have the best volley/overhead for a baseline specialist, but that's really all we can say. If it would be different, both would have dominated literally everywhere. They would have been the best offensive AND defensive players then.

But in reality, I meant to be generous to Pete by the way. I didn't want him to be involved in a "contest" he can only lose (at least if people would be objective). As I said, it's the same like making a thread if Nadal is the better serve and volley player than Sampras. Nadal fans also wouldn't like the bashing Nadal would get there.
Click to expand...

Some nasty, nasssstyyyy passes in that match lol.
 
ChrisRF said:
But what were career highlight running forehands for Sampras were all repeated by peak Nadal in literally any single match.
Click to expand...
Bull gets more highlight reels because they're fresher in our minds and there's more TV coverage now, genius. You're dreaming if you think that clutch running FH was a rarity for Pistol.

JustMy2Cents said:
Cool.
the net rusher has to pick a side and if it's as bad as you paint there must be 100s of examples of Rafa's dtl being rendered toothless
now can we have the rallies please? they must outnumber Rafa fh winners by your logic
Click to expand...
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said your boy's running FH is "toothless." Just not as good as Pistol's and Ivan's when going CC. His grip makes it virtually impossible for him to compete in that regard.

And almost every approach of Bull's opponents in that clip was mediocre at best. Maybe you think the likes of McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Cash, Rafter and for that matter Sampras would be just as clueless coming to the net, but even now players at all levels win at least 60% of net points on average. Highlights are highlights for a reason.

Oh and TA also gives Pistol and Bull an equal FHP/100 (forehand potency per 100 forehands) of 8.6 - 2nd only to Dre's 9.2 (unless you insist on being anal and count Delpo's 8.7) among ATGs with a sufficient sample - and it's only in 7-9 W% (% of 7/9-shot rallies won) that Pete falls clearly behind your boy:


Which makes sense cuz that's when net players tend to lose the point if they can't finish it off with 1-3 volleys. Even in 10+ W% (read: actual rallies) Pistol's and Bull's #s are almost identical, 53.1% vs. 53.9%. So much for their rally FHs being a joke of a "contest," as one of our resident clowns puts it.
 
ChrisRF said:
Well, we compare Sampras to a better overall player (we cannot deny this with 8 more Slams) exactly in the style or let's say in a "discipline" the latter is most famous for. As I said, one is an attacking player with serve and net play being his bread and better, while the other is the GOAT in running forehand counterpuches. And if you watch the 2008 Wimbledon final or the 2009/2012 AO matches against Federer, you can see that this isn't limited to clay.


Sampras may very well have the best running forehand outside the baseline specialists, while Nadal may have the best volley/overhead for a baseline specialist, but that's really all we can say. If it would be different, both would have dominated literally everywhere. They would have been the best offensive AND defensive players then.

But in reality, I meant to be generous to Pete by the way. I didn't want him to be involved in a "contest" he can only lose (at least if people would be objective). As I said, it's the same like making a thread if Nadal is the better serve and volley player than Sampras. Nadal fans also wouldn't like the bashing Nadal would get there.
Click to expand...
I just don't think you've seen much of Sampras. Not interested in debating conjecture and points made based on generalisations and specious logic such as "baseliner" vs "all-courter". Sampras having a GOAT running forehand doesn't make him a GOAT defensive player when he doesn't have the patience, lacks the same defence to offence off the backhand wing and hasn't got the shot tolerance of the best defensive players. Likewise even with ATG volleys Nadal's serve just isn't good enough to be a GOAT offensive player.

If you think Nadal's is better then that's fine but to say Pete's best shots are just regular ones for Nadal is a clown take.
 
NatF said:
I just don't think you've seen much of Sampras.
Click to expand...
No chance with that. I watched any of his matches available on TV as a kid and re-watched any of his matches available on Youtube or elsewhere online later. I even created highlights of many matches myself. He is my second favourite player in history after Federer.

And still, my point stands. A spectacular running forehand point by Sampras is a rarity compared to Nadal, and the absolute best ones by Nadal were never seen before in tennis history. Not quality wise and not quantity wise.

And of course you have to take the whole baseline play into consideration if you think about how likely it is that player A is better than player B in a baseline shot. Because an extreme running forehand may be a SPECIAL baseline shot, but it's still a baseline shot of course. And this special baseline shot is Nadal's trademark shot anyway (while for Sampras it's the serve and the overhead).

I just have to give it to Nadal, as simple as that. I admit that not even Federer (who is very underrated as a defensive player and may be the best in history OVERALL to turn defense into attack) is close to Nadal in terms of running forehand.
 
ChrisRF said:
No chance with that. I watched any of his matches available on TV as a kid and re-watched any of his matches available on Youtube or elsewhere online later. I even created highlights of many matches myself. He is my second favourite player in history after Federer.

And still, my point stands. A spectacular running forehand point by Sampras is a rarity compared to Nadal, and the absolute best ones by Nadal were never seen before in tennis history. Not quality wise and not quantity wise.

And of course you have to take the whole baseline play into consideration if you think about how likely it is that player A is better than player B in a baseline shot. Because an extreme running forehand may be a SPECIAL baseline shot, but it's still a baseline shot of course. And this special baseline shot is Nadal's trademark shot anyway (while for Sampras it's the serve and the overhead).

I just have to give it to Nadal, as simple as that. I admit that not even Federer (who is very underrated as a defensive player and may be the best in history OVERALL to turn defense into attack) is close to Nadal in terms of running forehand.
Click to expand...

You know you can't give Nadal credit on TTW lol
 
I haven't seen much of Sampras but from what I have seen it's probably accurate to say he can hit a better running CC FH than Rafa can. Rafa's running CC FH is never a surprise shot, as 99% of the time he hits a loopy CC FH to give himself time to get back into the point. The running FH DTL is his big surprise shot that when he hits it, his opponents just stare at it like, WTF? If we were talking passing shots though, Rafa beats Sampras in every category.
 
NonP said:
When he's forced to go CC a la vs. Sascha in the 1st-set TB of last year's RG SF you can clearly see him struggling to generate as much pace. There's zero chance elite attackers wouldn't pick up on that and approach the net accordingly.
Click to expand...
That match isn’t really representative of Nadal’s career, he was struggling in most aspects of the game there. Your point’s fair but the example isn’t particularly convincing.
 
Just like Fed’s, I think PETE’s FH is more robust than Nadal’s overall as it can cope with being attacked with pace better. If anything though Nadal seemed to prefer it when he was being forced to run to his FH corner to hit FHs than when someone (eg Djokovic or Davy or Nalby) was just blasting BHs hard at his FH corner while he was already stood there. Prime Nadal’s running passing shot, both DTL and CC, is one of the most effective shots of this century and probably the best passing shot in the slower court era. And I think people are downplaying his CC non passing FH.
So will go for Rafa here for this niche topic.
 
Pete has better angles on the shot and he can handle pace better. However, Nadal by virtue of his athleticism is able to successfully reach and execute a greater number of running FHs. It is, after all, a running FH, so I don’t think we should neglect to consider movement here. About a wash, I’d say.
 
ChrisRF said:
No chance with that. I watched any of his matches available on TV as a kid and re-watched any of his matches available on Youtube or elsewhere online later. I even created highlights of many matches myself. He is my second favourite player in history after Federer.

And still, my point stands. A spectacular running forehand point by Sampras is a rarity compared to Nadal, and the absolute best ones by Nadal were never seen before in tennis history. Not quality wise and not quantity wise.

And of course you have to take the whole baseline play into consideration if you think about how likely it is that player A is better than player B in a baseline shot. Because an extreme running forehand may be a SPECIAL baseline shot, but it's still a baseline shot of course. And this special baseline shot is Nadal's trademark shot anyway (while for Sampras it's the serve and the overhead).

I just have to give it to Nadal, as simple as that. I admit that not even Federer (who is very underrated as a defensive player and may be the best in history OVERALL to turn defense into attack) is close to Nadal in terms of running forehand.
Click to expand...

Well in that case I think we just have a very different experience watching tennis, also evidenced by how I think you overrate latter years Federer compared to his best years. Let's agree to disagree then.

My final point is that I fundementally disagree that we have to take the whole of their baseline play into account when talking about bits in isolation. That makes no sense. The fact is Pete's running forehand was a legendary shot and feared by his rivals. It was a shot that leaned heavily on his strengths e.g. his explosiveness and athleticism. Other aspects of his baseline play weren't as strong but his movement to his right and able to inject pace were second to none. Like I said earlier the fact he lacked patience and his backhand wasn't a weapon from the back have no bearing on his running forehand...
 
NonP said:
When he's forced to go CC a la vs. Sascha in the 1st-set TB of last year's RG SF you can clearly see him struggling to generate as much pace. There's zero chance elite attackers wouldn't pick up on that and approach the net accordingly.

That's why Bull yields to not only Pistol but also Ivan in the running department, though you could say his superior athleticism at least makes it a tie with Lendl. No one in the OE has ever halved the court like the BOAT and his GOAT running FH is the reason why.
Click to expand...
You are comparing 35/36 old Nadal's passing shots which he still does anyway. Nice try.
 
Winners or Errors said:
No way Pete's running forehand makes Fed break down in tears...
Click to expand...
Pete specialized in whomping forehands into an opponent's forehand. He and Agassi came from the school of thought that breaking down your opponent's strength is the best way to go because they collapse like a house of cards after. I think his forehand into the forehand is one of the deadliest shots of the 90s and very underrated here. He would definitely make Roger hurt with that shot - Roger who doesn't move anywhere near as well to his right and whose forehand on the forehand side while great is inferior to his forehand on the backhand side.
 
K kids, time for another genius (mini-)dissertation from your superior. If I'm understanding Sackmann's FHP/BHP right a negative % in either stat means the player is likelier to lose the point when hitting a FH/BH. Obviously his giving the shot before a winner 0.5 makes this not exactly a zero-sum game, but the rationale is sound.

And that chart tells us 8 players fall under that ignoble category when it comes to FHP/100 (among the charted matches, so most old-timers are excluded). Most of 'em are expected - Karlovic, Paire, Feli, Cressy, etc. - but Gulbis surprises moi. Of course we all know about that fugly revamped FH, arguably the ugliest in history, but was it really THAT bad a shot? A pre/post-breakdown should be interesting if any of you jokers are up for it.

Also that lack of truly godawful FHs supports the prevailing consensus that in absolute terms even most weak FHs are stronger than their BH siblings. More on this below.

The rest:
  • Likewise the FHP leaders (among serious GFHOAT candidates) are more or less whom you expect: Dre (9.2), Delpo (8.7), Pistol (8.6), Bull (8.6), Mailman (8.0) and Fraud (7.8), in that order. Djoker (7.3) isn't quite up there, which does reinforce the prevailing consensus that his FH, while an ATG shot, isn't a GOAT contender.
  • Boris is just below Fraud, 7.6 vs. 7.8. Now y'all know why Pistol in his book ranked the Becker FH among the best he'd faced, along with Dre's and Ferreira's, and why I rated it above Djoker's even before TA data confirmed my infallible observation.
  • OTOH I no longer say Gonzo's monster FH (an admittedly stellar 9.2) is possibly better than Djoker's. You really need an elite running FH to get to the next level - have him hit as many on the run as the real FH-meisters and I guarantee you his FHP drops like a brick - and that's where Fernando falls short of Novak.
  • Borg posting "only" 6.7 on the FH side (still in the top range) is somewhat surprising, but keep in mind that his sample is rather clay-heavy (13 out of 31 matches) and woodies/pre-poly graphites didn't allow such a high % of winners as today's playthings especially on dirt. Ditto Lendl (6.6).
  • Obviously much of Rafter's 7.1 can be chalked up to his ATG net game aka the infrequency of his groundies, but it's still remarkable that he stands so tall in this stat when Mac (3.2) and Edberg (2.4) are closer to the bottom as expected.
  • Blake's good but not great 6.2 is yet more proof highlights don't tell the whole story. Ditto Birdman's 5.5 (though his FH isn't as hyped much).
  • Marat's 3.5 confirms that I was right to note his FH was a little too prone to errors even in his prime and also to rate it below Krajicek's (6.4 - sorry @arvind13).
  • As I suspected almost half of top men fall below 0% in BHP/100. Guess where Pistol stands? 0.1, right around the average. "Weak" BH, my ass. (Of course his colleagues back in '92 knew better.)
  • In fact Fraud's % stands exactly at zero, which should tell you just how absurd it is to rank his BH among the top 5 1HBHs ever. But then maybe an "average" BH is a prerequisite for becoming a BOAT!
  • Ivo's -25.8 off his BH is by far the lowest % I see on either side. We all know how subpar his BH was but good gawd.
  • Now this is a real surprise: Stan posting a paltry 0.1 in BHP/100. And most of his 132 charted matches are from after '12 so there shouldn't be much bias here. Will need to explore this further before I declare his highlight-ready BH overrated.
  • OTOH Korda Sr.'s sensational 5.8 tells moi I seriously overstated his UFE% when I eliminated him from the list of OE contenders with an arguably better 1HBH than Fraud's. Wasn't expecting this whopper, either. Like I said, the most dangerous BH I've seen, 1H or 2H.
  • Dre's 5.4 (only behind Brown, Borg and Korda) is more proof his BH may well be the best of the OE. Not as sold on Borg's cuz his heavy topspin often meant short balls and his winners would come more off his FH in this era, but it's also up there.
  • Courier's 4.2 stands in 8th place among all charted men, higher than Nalby's 3.6, Chang's 3.3, Safin's 3.2 and Jimbo's 3.1. I'm sure his opponents just loved attacking that "weak" BH of his!
  • Djoker's 2.5 is somewhat surprising, but not so much once you consider how often his opponents targeted his BH despite his relatively weaker FH (roughly as often, per TA). And Lendl's 3.0 is even more impressive given the real and perceived greater vulnerability of his BH, if not as great as you might think (45% to 55%).
  • As expected Edberg is one of the few studs with a higher BHP/100 (2.8) than a FHP (2.4).
  • My boy Boris impresses again with 2.7. He really had no weakness aside from his not-so-elite movement.
  • I'm not too surprised by Guga's 2.1 cuz as a born daredevil/showman he was never gonna score high in this stat. All things considered that's still a damn good %, along with 4.9 off his FH.
  • I'm not sure how Rafter managed 2.0 with his BH cuz most slices aren't hit for winners. At the very least it does seem that even I'd underrated his ground game.
  • Gasquet's 1.8, while far from mediocre, should put an end to the notion that his signature shot is one of the top GBHOATs. Ditto Almagro's -0.5 (yes, a net negative).
And last but not least, Dre's kingship on both sides of the court is yet more proof his groundies (as opposed to ground game, yes) are indeed the greatest of the OE, if not all time. Jim ain't far behind either, but still yields to his bitter rival.

Now a couple quickies:

NatF said:
I just don't think you've seen much of Sampras. Not interested in debating conjecture and points made based on generalisations and specious logic such as "baseliner" vs "all-courter". Sampras having a GOAT running forehand doesn't make him a GOAT defensive player when he doesn't have the patience, lacks the same defence to offence off the backhand wing and hasn't got the shot tolerance of the best defensive players. Likewise even with ATG volleys Nadal's serve just isn't good enough to be a GOAT offensive player.

If you think Nadal's is better then that's fine but to say Pete's best shots are just regular ones for Nadal is a clown take.
Click to expand...
It's also a myth that Pistol didn't play defense. Here's a great counterexample from '02, well into his 2-year title drought:


Which should be common sense, really. You don't win 14 majors - 7 of 'em on hard to boot - unless you've got the fundamentals down to pat. Offense alone can only take you so far, however spectacular it is.

Third Serve said:
That match isn’t really representative of Nadal’s career, he was struggling in most aspects of the game there. Your point’s fair but the example isn’t particularly convincing.
Click to expand...
Third Serve said:
Pete has better angles on the shot and he can handle pace better. However, Nadal by virtue of his athleticism is able to successfully reach and execute a greater number of running FHs. It is, after all, a running FH, so I don’t think we should neglect to consider movement here. About a wash, I’d say.
Click to expand...
Well, check out any of his CCs and you'll see what I mean. The fact that the above Wimby career collection of highlights for Bull includes not one CC sez it all, no?

Also I wouldn't be so sure about Bull being able to reach and execute more FHs on the run. Remember, he can't generate pace with as much ease as Pistol and Lendl precisely cuz his grip makes it that much more difficult for handling low balls, and while his athleticism might be a decisive factor vs. Ivan it'd be close to negligible vs. Pistol who wouldn't be standing so far back to begin with. You really don't need Olympic sprinting speed to achieve elite movement on a tennis court and Pistol's superior explosiveness should roughly compensate for whatever edge Bull has in baseline coverage.

Phenomenal said:
You are comparing 35/36 old Nadal's passing shots which he still does anyway. Nice try.
Click to expand...
Wimbledon's handpicked career highlight reels for your boy say otherwise. Nice try.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TeamOB
  • Poll Poll
Better Passing Shot: Nadal or Hewitt
Replies
41
Views
6K
anantak2k
anantak2k
M
Would this happen to Nadal if he faced Sampras on Hard Court?
2
Replies
71
Views
7K
Razer
Razer
T
  • Poll Poll
Nadal or Federer, Better Kick Serve??
Replies
17
Views
5K
patty_mnouchkine
patty_mnouchkine
TeamOB
Why has Santiago Giraldo not had more success?
Replies
9
Views
1K
tennisbuck
tennisbuck
K-H
  • Poll Poll
Best running forehand DTL?
Replies
13
Views
2K
citybert
C
Back
Top