Greatest forehand of all time! Not greatest ground game or greatest baseliner.

TheNachoMan said:
Nadal would get PISTOLwhipped on grass or any fast surface.
Click to expand...
Courier, Chang and Muster beat Sampras on carpet.
Moyá, Corretja and Kuerten defeated him on an indoor hard court.
Courier, Yzaga, Korda, Hewitt beat him on the hard courts at Flushing Meadows.
And do you have the audacity to say that Nadal, being much better than all those players put together, couldn't beat Sampras on a fast surface sometimes?
:sneaky:
 
Roger and Rafa both have the best forehands I've seen. Both have differences in which area of forehand execution they shine in best, but I can't find fault with either.

Roger's timing is impeccable and it really helps him on medium to fast surfaces; in his prime it was a wrecking ball no one wanted to face - because he had it all - timing, off the rise, spin, power, placement. Add the defensive shots, forehand slices and droppers and you have the complete package.

Rafa's forehand is equally impressive in a different way and it shines best on clay. But he has the same qualities - an innate sense of dictating with that shot with spin, timing, placement, power. His strength is really the topspin and accuracy of placement even today.

Delpo and Gonzo deserve mentions because of the heat they could bring.

If we want to acknowledge pioneers then Jimmy Arias and Lendl come to mind in shaping the foundations of the modern forehand that the Big 3 exemplify.

Pete to me continued the Lendlian tradition but IMO is far from the best exponent of it.
 
UnderratedSlam said:
We shall never know how those scores may have been if WTF was played in mid-year.

Nadal is usually totally shot by September, common knowledge. Of course, that's how he plans the year, it's his decision hence not an excuse but it may explain part of why those H2Hs are so clear.
Click to expand...
you are getting cringier
 
DSH said:
Courier, Chang and Muster beat Sampras on carpet.
Moyá, Corretja and Kuerten defeated him on an indoor hard court.
Courier, Yzaga, Korda, Hewitt beat him on the hard courts at Flushing Meadows.
And do you have the audacity to say that Nadal, being much better than all those players put together, couldn't beat Sampras on a fast surface sometimes?
:sneaky:
Click to expand...
Yeh and Olivier Mutis, Igor Andreev, Nicolas Almagro, Horacio Zeballos, Marcel Granollers, Irakli Labadze, Andrey Rublev, Denis Shapovalov?
 
UnderratedSlam said:
Of course he was great, hugely talented, but that doesn't change the fact that he was a servebot.

Opelka jokes about being a servebot, why wouldn't Sampras own it too?

Nowhere is it written that a servebot has to have a certain height or that he can't be talented or win slams.
Click to expand...
Does a Servebot have one the best FHs and volleys of all time? Just to name a few. Idiots are galore here
 
GhostOfNKDM said:
Roger and Rafa both have the best forehands I've seen. Both have differences in which area of forehand execution they shine in best, but I can't find fault with either.

Roger's timing is impeccable and it really helps him on medium to fast surfaces; in his prime it was a wrecking ball no one wanted to face - because he had it all - timing, off the rise, spin, power, placement. Add the defensive shots, forehand slices and droppers and you have the complete package.

Rafa's forehand is equally impressive in a different way and it shines best on clay. But he has the same qualities - an innate sense of dictating with that shot with spin, timing, placement, power. His strength is really the topspin and accuracy of placement even today.

Delpo and Gonzo deserve mentions because of the heat they could bring.

If we want to acknowledge pioneers then Jimmy Arias and Lendl come to mind in shaping the foundations of the modern forehand that the Big 3 exemplify.

Pete to me continued the Lendlian tradition but IMO is far from the best exponent of it.
Click to expand...

good answer.
 
SamprasisGOAT said:
efc06ce9357c431ba417503bf0932ba8.gif

I’ll take Petes forehand over Nadals 7 days a week and twice on a Sunday
Click to expand...

Lol Sampras could never dream of hitting a running FH passing shot from 20ft behind the baseline if he smoked peyote.
 
ChrisRF said:
You think Nadal has the better forehand overall but Sampras the better running forehand? That’s strange, because Nadal’s most famous forehand shot is the running banana passing shot.

Just watch videos of peak Nadal turning defense into immediately winning the point with that shot (or even crosscourt with extreme use of his wrist). That’s the best running forehand of all time by a wide margin.

Look what Sampras did here (at 4:00):

It was the shot of the match, and I admit that back then I was stunned. But later Nadal hit that shot (and better ones) like 10 times in every match.
Click to expand...
How about that second serve at 2:45. Pure Sampras
 
SamprasisGOAT said:
Isolate the forehand. Not general baseline play. Sampras has the greatest ever
Click to expand...
It's impossible to do that since footwork goes into every shot, but if you try to evaluate how much they can do when they have enough time (how often they create this time depends on footwork) separately from offensive footwork, Federer still handily wins both categories. The offensive footwork speaks for itself, but when given time Federer's spin, pace, depth, precision give him a combination of both variety and potency no one can match.

And all this is without getting into Fed's X factor/sixth sense which is that he can time his FH perfectly without his feet set and with his weight going in the wrong direction, which allows him to hit the ball a beat earlier than everyone else when he runs around it, meaning that even his average quality inside out/in FHs are rushing the opponent in a way no one else does.

He is not as good on the dead run as Sampras or Nadal who are more explosive bigger window athletes, but, in addition to this being a very rare scenario in general (but still an important one due to the psychological effect of connecting on these shots), he gets into these scenarios far less often due to the above making his strike rate on FHs turning the point in his favor much higher.
 
It’s up there. Definitely the greatest running FH ever. I wouldn’t put on Fed or nadals level though in terms of what he could do with it not on the run. But it’s definitely among the greatest for sure. Pete’s serve (especially his GOAT second serve was what put him on another level

of course who knows the type of damage could do with the forehand with these rackets though
 
One of the best for sure. I'd put his cross court forehand as better than Fed, Rafa, Ivan, Agassi. He used that thing like a club, both from the neutral and running position.
Overall not #1, but maybe #5.
 
Having scrolled through this thread and read some very interesting comments, I feel compelled in the interests of fairness to state that PETE's backhand was not a very good shot. Of course it worked how he needed it to, and unlike some other ATGs, he wasn't afraid to go for it on big points, but by no means was this a steady, dependable shot for extended rallies. Aside from his Thalassemia it is probably the biggest reason he didn't get a RG title somewhere in the 92-96 period.
 
DSH said:
Courier, Chang and Muster beat Sampras on carpet.
Moyá, Corretja and Kuerten defeated him on an indoor hard court.
Courier, Yzaga, Korda, Hewitt beat him on the hard courts at Flushing Meadows.
And do you have the audacity to say that Nadal, being much better than all those players put together, couldn't beat Sampras on a fast surface sometimes?
:sneaky:
Click to expand...
How many WTFs has Rafa won again on the miserable, slowed down, high bouncing indoor hard courts of this pitiful era? And you have the audacity to say he would beat one of the best indoor players on a fast, low bouncing court? Next joke please.
 
ElChivoEspañol said:

13:03

lol please tell me more.
Click to expand...

You are just proving my point. 2:18, against one of the greatest serve and volleyers of all time on a much faster and lower bouncing court.
There are many, many more examples of him doing this against volleyers far greater than Rodger...
 
metsman said:
And all this is without getting into Fed's X factor/sixth sense which is that he can time his FH perfectly without his feet set and with his weight going in the wrong direction, which allows him to hit the ball a beat earlier than everyone else when he runs around it, meaning that even his average quality inside out/in FHs are rushing the opponent in a way no one else does.
Click to expand...
Bingo

Fed’s forehand can do so much in situations where he’s given so little to work with.
 
Third Serve said:
Bingo

Fed’s forehand can do so much in situations where he’s given so little to work with.
Click to expand...
From Fedfan to Fedfan, his crosscourt, especially on the run has always been lacking. He is one of the kings of the inside out though.
 
initialize said:
Nah my friend. Maybe best ever forehand on clay, but grass and hardcourt? Not even close
Click to expand...
Clay isn't a maybe, it's a definitely by miles. Grass doesn't have a definitive best forehand ever, the surface has changed so much over the years. Grass from B.P. (Before Pete) is completely different from A.P. (After Pete). Federer is probably the best or near the best ever on hard, which again has also changed much over the years. So while grass can't be factored in, and Federer is better on hard, Rafa's is also a top 10 on hard.

Being the undisputed GOAT on one surface and a top 10er on another is better than Fed who is perhaps the best on hard, but nowhere near the best on clay.
 
SamprasisGOAT said:
This thread is not about the greatest baseline game or greatest movement or the greatest ground strokes overall.

It’s about one shot.
The forehand.

Pete Sampras has the greatest forehand of all time.
Now that’s Not a sentence you here on these forums and I’m sure this will be a controversial thread but anyway back to petes forehand.
He’s got the greatest forehand of all times. It’s a fact. The human eye can judge it alone. Nothing else is needed really to make the judgment. He could do anything he wanted to do with it. Blast winners or dictate play. Go for it or be patient. The flatness, heaviness and adaptability is what makes it stand out.
Sampras copied lendls forehand stroke mechanics because Lendl was the player Sampras rooted for over McEnroe and Connors in the 80s as a kid. He also trained with Lendl in 1988 for a month.
Lendl and Sampras both had the pointed elbow preparation and that’s what gave them power and control on the forehand.
Basically Pete took lendls forehand and bettered it. Used it in a different way. With petes blood condition and his lack of stamina training/bad diet he used his forehand to hit clean winners instead of dictate points and moving his opponent around like Lendl did on clay. But Sampras and Lendl have forehands that were very similar in mechanics and technique. Sampras if he had the stamina and movement could easily have won the French open with his forehand alone. But he couldn’t move to well on clay and wasn’t fit enough.
Look at the agassi matches with Sampras. Agassi always went to petes backhand side because agassi knew the point was over if petes forehand was involved. A big compliment to Pete.
A shot to pieces Agassi in 2005 was out hitting a prime Federer forehand to forehand. Only 3 years earlier Sampras had blasted Andre off the court with his forehand.
Agassi had an overall better ground game then Sampras. But forehand to forehand Sampras clearly wins.
Many players have better overall ground games and baseline games then Sampras and would probably win most matches overall if Sampras always stayed back and rallied with them. That’s why Sampras wasn’t a pure baseliner and stuck to his serve and volley in most big matches.
Better baseliners and overall ground games were
Lendl
Djokovic
Federer
Nadal
Borg
Agassi
Connors
Wilander
hell even safin and Hewitt and Murray and wawrinka but none had a better forehand.
Click to expand...
Sampras had a better running forehand (to the right) than Federer. Federer had a better inside out forehand
 
SamprasisGOAT said:
Is it just me or has Pete got a few more fans posting lately? I like it. How it should be. I think with Federer likely being passed in slams soon people are starting to see the bigger picture.
Click to expand...
Pete has been underrated here and on other tennis forums once Roger passed his slam record, perhaps even before. Pete may have not had the greatest forehand, or ground game of all time, but it certainly was one of the greatest.
 
Herald said:

You are just proving my point. 2:18, against one of the greatest serve and volleyers of all time on a much faster and lower bouncing court.
There are many, many more examples of him doing this against volleyers far greater than Rodger...
Click to expand...

That's a generic passing shot bud, I can find anyone hitting that shot today. Take your Sampras fanboy glasses off will ya.

In the meantime I'll leave you with this beauty, enjoy.


8:41
 
ElChivoEspañol said:
That's a generic passing shot bud, I can find anyone hitting that shot today. Take your Sampras fanboy glasses off will ya.

In the meantime I'll leave you with this beauty, enjoy.


8:41
Click to expand...
Keep proving my point bud. There's 100 just like it ;)
 
It’s Federer, easy. Not based on one or two metrics, but the whole picture. He could do whatever he wanted with the shot. Flat, loopy, pure drive, he had every angle, he had inside out, inside in, could place it anywhere he wanted at any length or speed, could take it late or on the rise… I don’t think it’s much of a debate.
 
Fabresque said:
It’s Federer, easy. Not based on one or two metrics, but the whole picture. He could do whatever he wanted with the shot. Flat, loopy, pure drive, he had every angle, he had inside out, inside in, could place it anywhere he wanted at any length or speed, could take it late or on the rise… I don’t think it’s much of a debate.
Click to expand...
Cross court and runner were always lacking. PETE noticeably better in those categories.
 
Herald said:
How many WTFs has Rafa won again on the miserable, slowed down, high bouncing indoor hard courts of this pitiful era? And you have the audacity to say he would beat one of the best indoor players on a fast, low bouncing court? Next joke please.
Click to expand...
Is Nadal a worse player in these conditions than the players mentioned?
Do you have the audacity to say that if Courier, Chang, Muster and Kuerten beat Sampras on carpet and indoor hard court in the 90s, Nadal couldn't do it too?
Please!
:oops::whistle:
 
DSH said:
Is Nadal a worse player in these conditions than the players mentioned?
Do you have the audacity to say that if Courier, Chang, Muster and Kuerten beat Sampras on carpet and indoor hard court in the 90s, Nadal couldn't do it too?
Please!
:oops::whistle:
Click to expand...
Yes, I do. If Rafa can't win a WTF against a laughable field under conditions that heavily favor him, he isn't beating PETE on an indoor, fast, low bouncing hard court. And you have the audacity to ask if I have the audacity?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Herald said:
Yes, I do. If Rafa can't win a WTF against a laughable field under conditions that heavily favor him, he isn't beating PETE on an indoor, fast, low bouncing hard court.
Click to expand...
Kuerten did it in 2000.
Nadal from 2010 would have done it too.
Muster, a player who should be classified as a clay specialist, beat prime Sampras on carpet.
And we all know that the Austrian is not even a quarter of the Spanish player on any surface.
But it seems that for some, the myth of someone who was, supposedly, unbeatable remained in the memory.
:rolleyes:
 
It's Rafa for a variety of reasons.

Nadal generates the deadliest angles of the great forehands so often discussed. He rips people off the court and makes the geometry of the court look different and it's why he can do much of what he does when he's confident and playing well.
 
DSH said:
Kuerten did it in 2000.
Nadal from 2010 would have done it too.
Muster, a player who should be classified as a clay specialist, beat prime Sampras on carpet.
And we all know that the Austrian is not even a quarter of the Spanish player on any surface.
But it seems that for some, the myth of someone who was, supposedly, unbeatable remained in the memory.
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Why hasn't Rafa managed a WTF under joke conditions then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lambielspins
  • Poll Poll
Greatest baseliner of all time?
2
Replies
75
Views
7K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
M
Greatest Player of All Time - Three Tournaments Played
Replies
27
Views
3K
THUNDERVOLLEY
THUNDERVOLLEY
lambielspins
Rating Agassi, Sampras, Connors, Mac, Fed, Lendl, Borg, in each area of game.
2
Replies
99
Views
10K
kaiotic
K
U
Pete Sampras NOT the greatest player of all time.
2
Replies
72
Views
6K
uNIVERSE mAN
U
King No1e
  • Poll Poll
Greatest FH volley of all time?
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
Lavs
Lavs
Back
Top