Roger Federer, what could have been?

[10sdude85]

I know this topic has probably been beaten to death, but I have a feeling that there is ONE thing that could have changed the Federer legacy. I want to know one thing, and that is how good would Federer have been if he had a two-handed backhand? I know he dominated the game for 3 and half years with a one handed backhand, but the only person that mattered that he couldn't defeat was Rafael Nadal, who quite possibly has the sickest two-handed backhand in the world, and now we have Andy Murray who has another awesome two-handed backhand who just destroyed Roger. Everyone knows how precise and how well prepared you need to be to hit an effective one handed backhand. With a two-handed backhand you have more power and more depth that hurts pretty effectively. It seems that Roger isn't prepared in time to hit his backhand let alone do any damage with it to Nadal or Murray. Thoughts please?

 

[S H O W S T O P P E R !]

He would have never reached the top 100. End of discussion.

can you feel the sarcasm?

 

[2ndserveace]

Roger wouldn't be as good. He would still have great footwork, a good serve, and a huge forehand, but his backhand would be terrible.