Forehand GOAT list

[captainbryce]

My current list of GOAT forehands (in descending order):

10. Jack Sock
9. Robin Soderling
8. Ivan Lendl
7. Pete Sampras
6. Andre Agassi
5. James Blake
4. Fernando Gonzalez

3. Juan Martin Del Potro

2. Rafael Nadal

1. Roger Federer

Thoughts?

 

[beltsman]

I love Sock's FH but it just isn't consistent or accomplished enough. Sampras needs to be above Agassi. Where is Becker?

 

[captainbryce]

I love Sock's FH but it just isn't consistent or accomplished enough.

Perhaps. I suppose I was judging more on "technique" and "potential effectiveness" based on the unique capabilities that the player in question could take advantage of.

Sampras needs to be above Agassi.

I quite struggled with this to be honest. I often debate to myself which one of them had the better forehand. Sampras had an outstanding running forehand, but I do think it was a bit more one-dimensional than Agassi's. I also think his forehand wasn't as aesthetically pleasing (which is biased and subjective of course) as some of the others on the list. Agassi could hit winners off the forehand from any position on the court and he took the ball earlier which is why I placed him slightly higher. But they are both great shots in their own right. I think people sleep on Andre's forehand because his backhand (which is one of the greatest of all time) often overshadowed his forehand (kind of like how Roger Federer's GOAT forehand often overshadows the greatness of his backhand).

Where is Becker?

Becker had a really good forehand (as did Bjorn Borg, Jim Courier, and Andy Roddick in their prime). But when I compare it to some of the other names on the list, I don't know that I would rather exchange one of their forehands for the ones listed here.

 

[jm1980]

What, no Becker?

 

[Aesthetics_above_all_else]

Jack Sock? LAWL

 

[captainbryce]

What, no Becker?

Hmm. You're the second person to mention that. Maybe I should go back and watch some of Boris's old matches, and rethink this thing, lol.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Jack Sock?

Seriously?

If his FH was that great, where are his tournament victories?

Tick tock..... (waiting patiently)

1. Fed
2. Lendl
3. Rafa
4. Del Po (ONLY in 2009--- LETHAL!)

 

[jm1980]

4. Del Po (ONLY in 2009--- LETHAL!)

 

[BeatlesFan]

Yeah... unreal ball striking. Del Po was DA MAN for that ONE match.

 

[captainbryce]

Jack Sock?

Seriously?

If his FH was that great, where are his tournament victories?

The first one in singles was in Houston this year. He has doubles titles at Wimbledon, and Indian Wells, and a mixed title at the US Open. Perhaps more singles titles are coming (given that he is only 23 years old and hasn't yet peaked physically).

More to the point, I'm not considering "tournament victories" as a relevant factor in the effectiveness of ONE shot! It takes more than a good forehand to win any tournament, let alone a grand slam.

1. Fed
2. Lendl
3. Rafa
4. Del Po (ONLY in 2009--- LETHAL!)

Now that is an acceptable answer!

 

[beltsman]

On the Delpo topic, what in his technique is special that gives him that insane pace?

 

[captainbryce]

On the Delpo topic, what in his technique is special that gives him that insane pace?

It's actually quite similar to Federer's (only with a slightly more western grip). But the key factor that both of them share in common is racket head speed (which mostly is a result of excellent timing). The difference between Del Potro and Federer is that Del Po is stronger, and therefore generates even more pace with the same perfect technique as Federer, but Federer takes the ball earlier on that wing taking time away from his opponents.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

I loved Gonzalez forehand. The shot is canon like just like Delpo but he hits down the line and passing shot, returns all too well than Delpo I think. Would not be too much of a stretch to put him on top of the list.

But Federer/Nadal faced top level opponents throughout. So, that should be more difficult to hit opponents off the court with better skills.

I love Rafa's forehand between 2008/12. He could be 10 feet behind baseline and still hit forehand winners. He would always run around forehand on clay and even on grass and hard court, majority shots were forehand. His best was almost the best forehand I saw. There was no portion of the court from where he couldn't hit forehand for winners. Banana shots, ridiculous passing shots were all very surprising things.

Federer has survived for longer time I feel. Almost till 2012 he was playing well on forehand. But what is better was his footwork to run around backhand and convert defense to offense with many small footsteps.

 

[BeatlesFan]

If Sock's FH was so great, he'd be winning matches and tournaments. I don't deny he has pace and placement, but it's irrelevant. Novak's FH is a cipher compared to Fed and Nadal, but he has 10 in the bag, so he's above Sock.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Tennis historian/author, Steve Flink, pusblished this top "five" FHs of all time about 3 yrs back:

1- Federer
2- Nadal
3- Lendl
4- Tilden
5- Sampras, Borg, Del Potro

http://www.worldtennismagazine.com/archives/8087
.

 

[Shaolin]

Moya deserves a place in this discussion.

 

[6august]

No Verdasco? Unfair.

 

[Aesthetics_above_all_else]

LMAO!!!!!!!! I love Del Potro

 

[beltsman]

Enjoy some of Sampras:

 

[HewittAlwaysDisappoints]

No Verdasco? Unfair.

Enjoy

 

[zep]

Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Del Potro etc are obvious ones but I think Djokovic also has an excellent forehand that often gets overlooked because of his superior backhand. It may not be as much of a weapon as Federer or Nadal's but it is an extremely reliable shot and he can consistently hit deep and find extreme angles with his FH. His FH deserves to be in the top 10 IMO.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Del Potro etc are obvious ones but I think Djokovic also has an excellent forehand that often gets overlooked because of his superior backhand. It may not be as much of a weapon as Federer or Nadal's but it is an extremely reliable shot and he can consistently hit deep and find extreme angles with his FH. His FH deserves to be in the top 10 IMO.

nowhere near to be considered as greatest.

 

[Zoid]

1 - Federer
2 - Nadal
3 - Lendl/Sampras
5 - Becker
6 - Gonzalez
7 - Delpo
8 - Soderling
9 - Djokovic
10 - Agassi

honourable mention - blake, verdasco, courier, moya, roddick, gasquet (lawl) im sure there are others. Hard to compare eras given the game has moved so much to the baseline and modern players can just swing as hard as they like with spin.

 

[NatF]

Courier should be on the list above the likes of Soderlng and Sock. Likewise Roddick and Djokovic from the current era have better forehands than those guys.

 

[Noleberic123]

Okay seriously why is sock on there?? He has a fantastic forehand but honestly is not in the top 10 of all time

 

[Deleted member 688153]

I'd put Pete higher personally.

But Fed-Nad top two sounds about right.
Not a lot between them.

Also, if you're going to put Sock, why not Djokovic or Becker instead?
Both have a better FH than Sock.

Actually, what about Borg?

 

[The Green Mile]

Where the hell is Ramos?

 

[smalahove]

It's actually quite similar to Federer's (only with a slightly more western grip). But the key factor that both of them share in common is racket head speed (which mostly is a result of excellent timing). The difference between Del Potro and Federer is that Del Po is stronger, and therefore generates even more pace with the same perfect technique as Federer, but Federer takes the ball earlier on that wing taking time away from his opponents.

I've seen them once live, playing against each other in Paris in 2013. Iirc, all the top 10 players except Murray were there - and I saw everyone from just behind the VIP seats, pretty much in the middle, so I got a great first hand experience watching the top players.

That being said, that match was insane. Nobody else was even close to the pace they were producing at times, clearing the net by less than a foot a lot of the time. The TV or video isn't anywhere close to showing the difference between, let's say, DelPo's or Fed's full out flat FH and the average topspin ATP FH. Btw. Nadals height and spin, and bounce wayyyyy inside the baseline was also equally impressive up close (even though Ferrer won).

 

[captainbryce]

Tennis historian/author, Steve Flink, pusblished this top "five" FHs of all time about 3 yrs back:

1- Federer
2- Nadal
3- Lendl
4- Tilden
5- Sampras, Borg, Del Potro

http://www.worldtennismagazine.com/archives/8087
.

I respect any renowned historians opinion, but ultimately that's all it is, an opinion. Forgetting the fact that his #5 choice includes three completely different players from three different eras that he couldn't decide between (which somewhat diminishes the legitimacy of his expertise in my opinion), the simple fact that he included Bill Tilden (a player from the 1920s, who played in long sleeves, trousers, and with a wooden racket) on his list is ridiculous. Does anyone in their right mind honestly believe that such a player would win a forehand to forehand rally against any top 20 player in the modern era? Once again, this comes down to how an individual qualifies the "GOAT", and what criteria they use to determine GOAT status. If you are comparing players only against their own contemporaries, or judging them based on their accomplishments more than their skill, then sure you could put a player like Bill Tilden on the list and it'd be a valid argument. But that's clearly not the criteria that I was using to determine the "greatest". In my opinion, when referring to individual shots, it is the stroke itself that I am evaluating (power, spin, precision, consistency, overall effectiveness, etc), not what type of accolades the player garnered over the course of their career, or what's in their trophy case.

 

[captainbryce]

Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Del Potro etc are obvious ones but I think Djokovic also has an excellent forehand that often gets overlooked because of his superior backhand. It may not be as much of a weapon as Federer or Nadal's but it is an extremely reliable shot and he can consistently hit deep and find extreme angles with his FH. His FH deserves to be in the top 10 IMO.

I agree with you. And I ultimately made the same argument with Agassi.

 

[Jaitock1991]

Jack Sock??? He sure hits a monstrous ball, but he's nowhere near the 10 best of all time.
Other than that, I think it's generally a decent list(all though I'd changed a few of the names).

 

[Levi_Ackerman]

I love Sock's FH but it just isn't consistent or accomplished enough. Sampras needs to be above Agassi. Where is Becker?

What, no Becker?

Looks like tennis, for OP, only dates back to the 1990s.

 

[Jaitock1991]

A few years back, I seem to remember a stat that said something like "Rafael Nadal has never lost a tennis match when 64% or more of his groundstrokes were forehands."
That really shows just how much he lives and dies by his ability to get it in play, and how increadibly dominant that shot is. It's so hard to chose between his and Fed's. I really don't know.

 

[BeatlesFan]

1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Lendl
4. Sampras
5. Agassi

Andre's FH was an incredibly lethal shot with unbelievable velocity. His FH in person is monstrously more effective than it ever appeared on TV. Becker's FH was unbelievable as well, very underrated.

 

[Jaitock1991]

1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Lendl
4. Sampras
5. Agassi

Andre's FH was an incredibly lethal shot with unbelievable velocity. His FH in person is monstrously more effective than it ever appeared on TV. Becker's FH was unbelievable as well, very underrated.

I've seen it live once. Couldn't close my mouth for 1 hour after I saw those bombs.

 

[antonico]

Great list, except for Blake. Courier belongs in his place to say the least, given that the 4 Majors he won were almost specifically due to his Off Forehand - which was the most potent weapon in the Men's game at the time (Courier led Agassi H2H 7-5). Blake never made a Major Final (Fernando Gonzalez did). So Courier belongs on the list long before Blake.

 

[Algo]

1) Federer
2) Sampras
3) Nadal
4) Gonzalez
5) Delpo
6) Lendl
7) Borg
8) Agassi
9) Connors
10) Courier

 

[captainbryce]

1 - Federer
2 - Nadal
3 - Lendl/Sampras
5 - Becker
6 - Gonzalez
7 - Delpo
8 - Soderling
9 - Djokovic
10 - Agassi

honourable mention - blake, verdasco, courier, moya, roddick, gasquet (lawl) im sure there are others. Hard to compare eras given the game has moved so much to the baseline and modern players can just swing as hard as they like with spin.

I agree. But I do find it interesting that you included Agassi on the list (ahead of Blake). I'm not criticizing your choice, I'm just curious to know in what capacity you believe that Agassi's forehand is superior?

 

[captainbryce]

Great list, except for Blake. Courier belongs in his place to say the least, given that the 4 Majors he won were almost specifically due to his Off Forehand - which was the most potent weapon in the Men's game at the time (Courier led Agassi H2H 7-5). Blake never made a Major Final (Fernando Gonzalez did). So Courier belongs on the list long before Blake.

Once again, I don't rate the accomplishments of any player as a relevant factor in determining the proficiency of any ONE shot! Frankly, I believe it is ridiculous to do so since there are so many aspects of the game that determine the outcome of matches, tournaments, and careers. By your logic, Roddick's forehand is better than Blake's too since he has a grandslam title and Blake doesn't. The bottom line is, if given the choice between having Blake's forehand and Courier's forehand (and none of their other attributes in particular), I'd pick Blake's in a heartbeat. These guys play each other on the senior tour now and in a forehand to forehand rally, Blake's forehand destroy's Couriers. Courier had a really good forehand no doubt, and yes it was his primary weapon. But it was essentially the precursor and prototype for the modern, American forehand that you also saw from Roddick and several others in recent years. But in a forehand to forehand rally, Blake can hurt Nadal. Courier and Roddick could not!

 

[captainbryce]

Looks like tennis, for OP, only dates back to the 1990s.

In case you hadn't noticed, Lendl is on the list! Becker played into the late 90's, while Ivan Lendl retired 5 years earlier. Looks like you have little room to criticize someone's tennis, historical knowledge. If I honestly would rather have had Boris Becker's forehand than Jack Sock's, I would have said so. Different strokes for different folks for sure (pun intended) but I stand by my list!

 

[captainbryce]

1) Federer
2) Sampras
3) Nadal
4) Gonzalez
5) Delpo
6) Lendl
7) Borg
8) Agassi
9) Connors
10) Courier

Sorry, you lost me at Connors.

 

[Algo]

Sorry, you lost me at Connors.

Luckily he's at the bottom part of my list

 

[antonico]

Once again, I don't rate the accomplishments of any player as a relevant factor in determining the proficiency of any ONE shot!

Which is tantamount to saying that a player's game and his results are completely unrelated. If we accept your premise on Blake's Forehand - that its so much better than so many others - then what good is having such a shot if it never does the job for you in the tournaments that matter most? It matters not one whit that Blake can hit a great Forehand when it's 1-all 15-all. The question is, where is that same shot when it's 4-all 30-all? Deuce? Break Point down? Set point down? Or more to the point, where was it at the business end of Majors in the 2nd week? If such a shot isn't there for you in the moments that matter most, then the shot itself doesn't matter all that much; having it is essentially useless. Where do you think Nadal's career results have come from? They've come from the same shot - his Forehand. But Nadal, unlike Blake, can pull off that shot optimally when it mattered most - whereas Blake always found a way to choke that shot when it counted. The comparison to Blake & Roddick is ludicrous. Roddick won his lone Major (and reached the Final of 4 others) because of his Serve, not his Forehand. More succinctly put, the Roddick Serve was far better than the Blake Forehand.

And it's more than rich irony that you embed this particular video to showcase Blake's Forehand. No matter how beautiful it looks here, Blake lost this match - to the very guy you say he caused problems (and incidentally, after early wins against Nadal, Blake didn't beat Nadal again starting with the match before this one, 2008 Indian Wells). The video clip proves the entire point I'm making. Thanks for that .

 

[Levi_Ackerman]

In case you hadn't noticed, Lendl is on the list! Becker played into the late 90's, while Ivan Lendl retired 5 years earlier. Looks like you have little room to criticize someone's tennis, historical knowledge. If I honestly would rather have had Boris Becker's forehand than Jack Sock's, I would have said so. Different strokes for different folks for sure (pun intended) but I stand by my list!

Ivan Lendl retired in 1994, which, correct me if I am wrong, is part of the 90s. So I fail to see the point of that rebuttal (if you can call it that ).

 

[Levi_Ackerman]

Yeah... unreal ball striking. Del Po was DA MAN for that ONE match.

Say something now, b****!

 

[sarmpas]

deleted..............

 

[Zoid]

I agree. But I do find it interesting that you included Agassi on the list (ahead of Blake). I'm not criticizing your choice, I'm just curious to know in what capacity you believe that Agassi's forehand is superior?

I think blake had a great forehand but it was too one-dimensional. It was extremely flat and lacked variety (as did much of his game) - on a quick hard court it is no doubt one of the most devastating shots the game has seen, but on clay it was muted - he couldn't rip it with spin and he couldn't hit angles or open up the court, Andre's was a more 'complete' forehand for me, capable of doing more with the ball across conditions. At the US open I would take blake's for sure though.

 

[BeatlesFan]

I think anyone who saw Andre play live would say his FH was absolutely jaw dropping. I've never seen any pro ever hit FH's like Andre, though admittedly, I never saw Del Potro play live.

I saw Andre's second-ever match that he played on the ATP tour. It was in 1995 at Indian Wells and he played Wilander, who was then one of the game's greats. I have never seen a crowd that stunned when Andre started hitting FH's. Admittedly, most of them were long, but the pace was just... unbelievable. Wilander was chucking on the other side of the net, just because of the pace. Andre lost something like 6-0, 6-1, but there was nobody in the stadium who wasn't awestruck. Everyone was talking about this kid for days after he'd lost in the second round.

I've seen many Andre matches since then and never failed to be stunned by his FH. Pete's running FH was second-to-none, but his FH while stationary just wasn't as great as Andre's, IMO. I place Fed and Rafa's FH above Andre because they had greater variety, perhaps more consistency and both were better lateral movers than Agassi.

Lendl and Becker's FH were also awesome and hit with great pace, but not in the league of Andre.

 

[sarmpas]

I've seen many Andre matches since then and never failed to be stunned by his FH. Pete's running FH was second-to-none, but his FH while stationary just wasn't as great as Andre's, IMO.

Courier said the same but some Sampras fanboys will never accept it. The prerequisite of a great running forehand is athleticism, a quality Sampras had in abundance, can't say the same about Agassi.

 

[Gary20]

1. Federer
2. Sampras
3. Nadal
4. Courier
5. Agassi
6. Lendl
7. Borg
8. Del Potro
9. Muster
10. Moya.