Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by chanee, Dec 15, 2009.
When both are on, they are a thing of beauty. So, who's forehand is greater?
Hard to say. I prefer Verdasco's forehand, it's flatter and better suited to attack.
But Nadal has by far the better footwork, overall movement, more margin for error and a much better shot selection.
Nadal with Verdasco's forehand would be a scary player on the faster surfaces.
Verdasco forehand is much flatter so it nice to see it zoom off but Nadal is the consistent forehand with all that spin and depth. I pick nadal since it is a forehand no one would teach to a kid, unique it's qualities.
Nadal for his consistency.Verdasco forehand is more spectacular, bassed on the attack, but Nadal is more efficient because of the spin and depth, like kishnsbe said.
well nadals forehand isnt as useful or effective if ur NOT nadal... he can make up for it coz hes fast and has good defensive skill. But if any one picks up tennis and u teach him that shot first, his forehand would be destroyed.
Both can create insane angles on the crosscourt forehand. Verdasco can spin it and hit flat. Nadal has more spin but cannot flatten it out aswell. Take your pick...
Nadal's is more effective generally. It's the most consistent shot in men's tennis and it puts tremendous pressure on opponents due to its spin. Verdasco's forehand is more lethal, but also much more unstable.
Looking at their H2H I vote for Nadal. Verdasco could never takea match of him. To me he who wins is better armed.
I think Nadal with Verdasco's forehand would be a better player on hard courts and other fast courts because he would still set it up with the speed and footwork of Nadal. This would make his forehand more consistent than Verdasco's because it would not be as unstable.
Nadal's is better because he has 6 slams
Not on the hardcourts though.
Well, one has 6 majors, the other has one Major semi-final. I know which one I'd choose.
Yes, I would also take Nadal's serve over Karlovic's because Nadal has 6 slams, so it is obviously better.
Verdasco has a better forehand than Nadal, probably the best currently on tour.
Whats Nadal's bread and butter? His forhand.
Whats Verdasco's bread and butter? His forhand
Whats Dr Ivo's bread and butter? His serve
Nadal's forhand has won him 6 slams (the BH helped in the later ones).
Verdasco's forhand has won his 1 GS Semi.
I agree with all the comments. The only think that differentiate Nadal's forehand success to Verdasco's is his greater footwork. Nadal's footwork is probably the best in the game.
Both forehands aren't as good as Federer.... yes even today.
Nadal's bread and butter is his amazing competitive heart first, his tough and strong mind second, his amazing athletic ability and speed third, his amazing defensive game fourth, and his outstanding forehand 5th (with his great backhand not so far behind). Verdasco's bread and better is definitely his forehand first and working down from there. That being said I still go with Nadal.
If Verdasco's forehand was the best on tour he wouldnt have lost to something like 20 straight top 10 players since January even with his crummy mental game. The forehand is too important a shot in todays game to have such limited results otherwise. Anyway the rest of his game (apart his mental game) is still much better than say Gonzalez who has had a better career than Verdasco with just his forehand.
True. And while a competitive heart, strong mind and speed win you championships, you cant get there without the technical skill
Yes I agree. When Nadal is playing his best he has the best groundstrokes on tour in either clay and grass, and amongst the best on hard courts.
"James Blake" is a former #1 compared to the ultra-lame, Verdasco. Hell, Jhohan Kreik made the top ten in the early '80's.
There are many reasons to lose a match, anyone want to say Gulbis doesn't have top ten strokes? Yet he is what 80th in the world.
Verdasco probably hits double the amount of forehand winners than Nadal.
From an offensive standpoint I would choose the Verdasco forehand over Nadal's every time.
I have seen both players hit live up close probably over 20 times, Verdasco's forehand is a monster stroke. Becomes even more evident when you see him play doubles live, so tough to even get a racquet on it to volley. The ball really explodes off his racquet . You have to see it live to appreciate it, video doesnt do it justice.
Nadal with a Verdasco forehand. I understand that it's just glimpses of the match but he did hit that forehand more freqeuntly than say, now.
Guess what? He lost to Hewitt.
There is more to the quality of the stroke than just hitting winners. The unforced error differential between Verdasco and Nadal on a typical day on the forehand side outweighs the winner differential. If you want to talk about just winners there are still guys who hit more forehand winners than Verdasco does. Federer, Gonzalez, Del Potro, for starters. Federer was in crap form in his opening match vs Verdasco at the Tour finals yet still had more forehand winners than did Verdsasco.
Verdasco has a great forehand but there is no way Verdasco has the best forehand in the game as you claim. If he had mantained his Australian Open form and made the top 5 playing like that you would have a point, but as it is not a chance.
Lastly no Gulbis does not have top strokes since he cant keep any of them in the court. Being able to hit every shot very hard with no control, variety, or anything except untamed power is not quality strokes.
I disagree, I don't think anyone means 'who has the most consistent forehand when they ask who has the best" When someone asks who has the best they usually mean the players best pure stroke. Only an ignorant ******* such as yourself would make a stupid claim that Nadal has the best of everything because he is the most consistent.
What next are you going to tell me Nadal has a better serve
than Roddick because he doesn't double fault as much.
Can you give me your top 5 forehands and please keep in mind the #1 criteria you claim, the unforced error differential.
Certainly Federer, Verdasco, Gonzalez, Soderling, Safin or Blake would not make your list given your self proposed #1 criteria of UE differential in match play as the best criteria to judge a forehand stroke.
We are talking about strokes not overall playing form. I don't give a damn about the match record or their rank,it has no bearing on the subject, it is just about the pure stroke. Watching the players hit when the other intangibles are eliminated.
Gulbis doesn't have good strokes,huh? funny stuff , what about Safin how do you rate his strokes?
So, please give me your list, or will you now backtrack?
Nevermind I can already surmise your biased viewpoint, it will be a waste of time to read your response.
5.Nadal with his right hand
I prefer the nadal forehand on clay/grass. He has the better power/control combo for those surfaces imo. But on the U.S. open surface you have to go with valentino.
There was an informal atp player poll a couple of years ago. IIRC Federer and nadal were really the only two options that kept coming up.
LOL I am not saying only consistency of strokes matter. I am saying a combination of power, shotmaking, consistency, overall effectiveness of the stroke matters. In other words you cant say Verdasco has a better forehand than Nadal just because he hits more winners, ignoring that he makes many more mistakes, ignoring his forehand doesnt create as many forced and unforced errors from other guys by the effects of the stroke itself as Nadal. And even in the ridiculous hypothetical you were to look at only winners and use that as the only basis for who has the better forehand then Federer, Del Potro, Gonzalez, Soderling, and possibly some others could all still be considered to have better forehands than Verdasco then. No Nadal's serve isnt on the same planet as Roddick. For starters the aces/service winners/free points on serve vs double faults ratio isnt even close to being in Nadal's favor here with Roddick's 50+ more free points on serve per match more than surpassing his 1 or 2 additional double faults a match, in addition to all the other superior factors of his serve, so that example is completely moot and pointless to the one on Verdasco's forehand being the best or even better than Nadal's.
As for the players you mentioned no a totally washed up Safin (the last few years) I would not consider to have amongst the best strokes of anything anymore other than "maybe" the backhand. It is a bunch of silly fanboy propoganda that his only problems the last few years where his head. He was a headcase when he was top 5 in the World regularly and winning slams. He was just clearly past his prime as a tennis player and thus the frequent defeats on the ATP tour, hardly some shock given that he was approaching 30 and had a whole assortment of injuries in the middle of the decade. Nor does an almost equally washed up Blake have any of the best strokes in the game at this point, probably a top 15 forehand still. And certainly not Ernests "I flail low percentage shots that I cant even keep in the court" Gulbis does not posses any top strokes amongst todays field.
The top 10 forehands in the game today IMO:
1. Federer- clearly still
2. Del Potro- funnily enough when he plays Federer he actually seems to have the superior forehand in those matches alone
3. Nadal- when he is playing well, which admitedly he isnt lately
5. Soderling- 2nd to 5th could be in any order really, tough one
6. Verdasco- somewhere in the 6-9 range is about right so if anything this is generous. Definitely below any of the above 5 IMO.
I never claimed that winners is the #1 criteria to judge forehands I just mentioned the disparity between the 2 players in style, Verdasco goes for more shots than Nadal every match he plays.
Like I said in the previous post, we are talking about the pure stroke not the
overall play. Have you ever seen pro players hit in practice, live?
Safin doesn't have good strokes all of a sudden because his rank fell, that is ridiculous the stroke has not changed the difference is mental not technical
always has been his entire career. Safin has some of the best strokes of anyone in the history of the game, everyone of his strokes is technically superior to Nadal's in pure form. Nadal is just a better player in all other areas of the game but not because he has better strokes than Safin.
You obviously have no experience playing tennis otherwise you would know that the player with the best technical strokes doesn't always win, plenty of players with great strokes losing to players with crap technique but superior intangibles, all the time.
Your list is basically of the top ten current players minus Murray.
Gulbis easily has top ten technical strokes, once again just like Safin it is only the mental game holding him out of the top ten, not his strokes. I think if you asked the players on tour they would all tell you he has top ten level strokes, certainly one of the biggest forehands on tour, I believe Nadal said it himself, that Gulbis is certainly a future GS winner, after playing him a few years ago.
Why no Murray? He is consistent, so why the omission, if you are basing it on consistency and playing rank?
We're just talking about the forehand. The H2H has not much to do with a particular shot. According to your reasoning (and "looking at their H2H") I suppose you think that Nadal has a better serve than Roddick.
Assuming ideal conditions, leaving mental and moving skills aside, I think Verdasco's forehand is much better than Nadal's. In fact, it's probably the best forehand executionwise in the game today (along with Federer's).
Actually you did. You said Verdasco's forehand was obviously better since he hits more winners. Read your own post.
I am not talking about overall play either. I am talking about just the forehand as this thread is titled. If we are talking about just the forehand Gonzalez has done much more overall in the last several years than Verdasco has with basically just a forehand, the rest of his game alot weaker than even Verdasco. That alone already makes your suggestion Verdasco might have the best forehand in the game laughable.
Correction, maybe once HAD some of best strokes of anyone . You know as in past tense, not present tense.
It is incredibly foolish to presume the quality of ones strokes is based solely on orthodox or smooth technique. That has been proven many times over with countless players. By that logic Hantuchova would have had by far better strokes than Venus Williams.
Fail. Safin was always a huge headcase, yet from 2000-2005 he was almost always ranked in the top 5 (minus 2003 when he was out injured almost all year) and regularly making slam semis and finals, winning Masters, while being this huge headcase. The last few years he cant post any decent results, other than the very rare fluke like last years Wimbledon. Like you even admit he has always had issues with the mental game, yet they never stopped him from being one of the best players in the game before. They stopped him from being a truly dominant force on hard courts pre-Federer and winning even more than he did. They did not stop him from being a top 5 player and winning big titles. Now with the same headcase mentality he ALWAYS had he struggles to win matches alot of time on tour his final several years. The difference? His game is not his good all around, his strokes have lost both power and consistency, his movement has gone down the toilet, and the others have improved as well. That happens in tennis and in most sports, it is called getting old, and when you had as many injuries as Safin had from 2003-2005 it accelerates the process.
Sorry but Nadal from 2006 onwards has been a player in another planet from Safin in every single way. Prime Safin arguably had better strokes than Safin (still a weaker player overall) but Safin of the last few years, LOL, get real. There is some bizarre lovefest for Safin on this forum.
Give it a rest, I never once implied the players with the best strokes always win. All I said was your sole basis for Verdsasco having the best forehand in the game perhaps and definitely a better forehand than Nadal, hitting more winners off that side sometimes when he plays Nadal (actually Nadal has had more forehand winners in atleast half of their matches anyway), was a baseless and flawed one from so many angles. That and players who cant even keep any of their strokes in the court and whose only talent is trying to hit crazy high risk/low percentage shots they arent even capable of making with any regularity (eg- Gulbis) and recent or current has beens (Safin and Blake) are not the players who have the best strokes in the game of late.
The order of my list is already very different than the current top 10 order which already makes your attempted point moot. Hardly a surprise either in this forehand dominated era that the players with the best forehands in the game today are mostly guys in the top 10 now either.
In the last year the talk about Gulbis has died down completely. A year or two ago it made sense as he looked more promising than he is actually showing to be. That often happens, a player looks like they are going to turn out better than they eventually do, as times goes on it is becoming clear they arent all that, and they fade into obscurity.
Since that is your own baseless patronizing claims of what I was saying, sidestepping your complete inability to defend your own arguments and logic, not what I ever said. It is very clear Murray does not have one of the best forehands in todays game, just as it is clear Verdasco does not have the very best one and not likely better than Nadal's just because he hits a few more winners some of the time.
I agree that Verdasco's forehand finds more winners but that in turn leads to more UE's. Nadal's forehand is more secure and can generate pace without leading to an abundance of errors.
You are ignorant, can't even debate with you because you have no technical knowledge of the game and can not grasp the difference between an individual stroke and overall play, you go on and on about where players are ranked and their records.
From a technical standpoint Verdasco has the best forehand in the game today.
Separate names with a comma.