Borg's backhand - why does no-one hit like that today?

[tennis_hack]

Is Borg's backhand fundamentally flawed? He was said to have a great backhand in his day, and, unlike the old-skool vs modern forehand, the mechanics of the 2hbh have not changed all that much actually - if at all.

Nadal hits his very similar to Courier (both arms straight, slightly uncomfortable looking and windshield wiper finish) and Djokovic (and almost everyone else) hits his very similar to Kafelnikov's, but no-one is seeming to emulate Borg's backhand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmkv62jkUFA

Why not?

Is Borg's backhand just fundamentally technically flawed and/or unsuited to the modern game? If so, why? The modern game is topspin-based, and Borg got heavy topspin on his backhand.

 

[Nostradamus]

because Novak's backhand is way better and easier to copy

 

[Cup8489]

I see borgs backhand as more like a 1hbh. He barely uses the left hand at all, and the backhand was better at low balls than high balls, again like the 1hander.

 

[easywin]

Pretty much everything can work out if you train it long enough.

I think its just not economical, he has the shoulder turn coming with the 2hander without the drive of the 2nd hand.

While in the past, racquet technology already limited strokes very much (compared to today), the technique was less complicated, less wristy and not as important as timing, good follow-through and hand-eye coordination.

 

[timnz]

Not how but when

Borg in one of his books talked about how he hit the ball after the ball had started coming down from the peak of its bounce. In other words he hit it late ie the complete opposite of an Agassi. That is the main reason I think he struggled when trying a comeback in the early 90s as by then the ball was coming through much faster due to improved rackets and players taking on the ball earlier.

His backhand therefore was built on having more time. He also achieved more time by being the quickest to the ball, running wise. Wilander was regarded as having a better backhand because he had a more straightforward racket takeback and follow through.

Note : I am a huge Borg fan saying all of this, so no criticism of Borg...i am saying, like all players, he was a product of his time.

 

[Tshooter]

Because it's not 1978.

And I grew up with Borg and think the word forehand should replace backhand in your sentence.

" He [Borg] was said to have a great backhand in his day."

Connors. Now that was a great backhand. I heard the word great along with Connors backhand a lot. I never heard it with Borg's. It was a good shot. No doubt.

So the question is why doesn't anyone hit a forehand like Borg's.

Same answer.

To add to it. Way too much topspin for today's game. The shot would be eaten alive. Borg used to shank it quite a bit too.

 

[timnz]

Wilander

I remember in late 82 or 83 an article came out comparing Wilander to Borg. Wilander had taken over from Borg as the French Open champion. It compared the two stroke by stroke. Wilander's backhand was regarded as superior because of it more straightforward takeback. (it also may have been because Wilander had a good one handed slice along with this two handed drive).

Now having said that, there does seem to be some difference of opinion in the 1970's and early 1980's. Some said that Borg did have the best backhand. So all the comments weren't going the one way. I remember that on so many occassions he was able to pass at will on that wing.

 

[borg number one]

Borg's backhand is a very unique shot, somewhat like the McEnroe serve. Why doesn't anyone serve like McEnroe, or hit their backhand like Connors? Borg modeled his two handed backhand after his slapshot in ice hockey. Mickhail Youzhny's backhand has some similarities to the Borg backhand. Yet, he releases his left hand much earlier, so it's much closer to a one hander. Borg had a truly great backhand. He along with Connors and Evert really popularized the two handed backhand. Of course, Borg would have a different backhand with modern frames and strings. He would have been able to hit much more pace and spin. When he played, only Connors had a better backhand and not by much. He played on faster courts and with dynamics that tilted in favor of net rushers and serve and volleyers.

 

[Tshooter]

I never thought of that but Youzhny whose backhand I always liked but thought it a weird 1HB does have similarity with Borg's.

And that was the old story. That first he played hockey and developed his 2HB based on his slapshot.

 

[Mick]

Is Borg's backhand fundamentally flawed? He was said to have a great backhand in his day, and, unlike the old-skool vs modern forehand, the mechanics of the 2hbh have not changed all that much actually - if at all.

Nadal hits his very similar to Courier (both arms straight, slightly uncomfortable looking and windshield wiper finish) and Djokovic (and almost everyone else) hits his very similar to Kafelnikov's, but no-one is seeming to emulate Borg's backhand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmkv62jkUFA

Why not?

Is Borg's backhand just fundamentally technically flawed and/or unsuited to the modern game? If so, why? The modern game is topspin-based, and Borg got heavy topspin on his backhand.

today, even Borg himself doesn't hit the backhand like that

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=239643