The best looking backhands

#51
Oh man! That guga video posted by @-NN- !
Inspiring. I sort of liked that boston song in jr high school, but never got why people adore it forevah. Now, with this video, i get it. More than a feeling, seeing Kuerten and his freakishly emotive backhands.

Edit: The stan vid is not too shabby either. Thanks for poasteng!
 
Last edited:

jarko111

Professional
#53
Jelena Jankovic. I think her inside out, run-around inside in, and that backhand down the line.. my goodness.
Mauresmo's one-hander is an honorable mention.
 

skaj

Professional
#54
There is something utterly grotesque about Gasquet's backhand.

Let's look at Mecir. The sheer force of his backhand is a sight to behold...


Backhands I like...





It’s funny that Mecir’s powerful backhands stand out for you. Yes, they look particularly awesome when hit out of nowhere wonderfully disguised like that, but it’s the more frequent, soft ones that I think of first when talking about Miloslav’s backhands. Anyways, hit hard or soft, they are all beautiful and elegant of course...

Kurten's backhand I always loved, but I don't see it as beautiful really, it's not very refined. Wawrinka's, as I said already here somewhere, is like a "robot backhand" to me, not aesthetically pleasing.
 
#59
That's cool, to each their own. I personally as most people prefer more fluid motion, I don't like at all how constrained and interrupted it looks.
There's something about your tone that irks me. 'As most people' implies an element of arguing from popularity against my taste; why was this necessary? You make it sound like you're trying to convince me that what I look at and like isn't concordant with reality in some way, or is unjustified, misguided or not based on what is 'normal' to consider pleasing; deliberately highlighting it as an anomaly. Who are you trying to convince, and why? My jimmies are rustled.
 

skaj

Professional
#61
There's something about your tone that irks me. 'As most people' implies an element of arguing from popularity against my taste; why was this necessary? You make it sound like you're trying to convince me that what I look at and like isn't concordant with reality in some way, or is unjustified, misguided or not based on what is 'normal' to consider pleasing; deliberately highlighting it as an anomaly. Who are you trying to convince, and why? My jimmies are rustled.
Hmm, not sure what "tone" you see here and why, but actually what I was saying is that my taste is quite conventional and boring in this case, so I was talking about me in the sentence you are referring to, not you at all. If there is anything about you in the discourse there, it's a compliment for your taste being different and original. As for "what you look at is not concordant with reality", you already said that that is not the case, that you see what I have previously described and that you like it, right? So, there is no "against" here, just different tastes, formed in different ways.

Not sure why you read that the way you did, but I feel the need to make a digression and say this, whether it has to do with your direction of thoughts here or not: backhands, tennis, tastes aside, being different and "not normal" doesn't mean anything bad. There is nothing wrong with liking something that most people dislike. My friend for example is into guys with glasses and slouching shoulders, "awkward" looking guys. There is absolutely nothing wrong with her or them. We are all different, and we should be, we are humans, not robots.
 
Last edited:
#63
i definitely prefer 1HBHs (federer, edberg, wawrinka, arazi, srichaphan, philippoussis, shapovalov, etc.) :)
but there are some (smooth) 2HBHs that i can appreciate as well (baghdatis, rios, gulbis) :)
 
Last edited:
#65
Hmm, not sure what "tone" you see here and why, but actually what I was saying is that my taste is quite conventional and boring in this case, so I was talking about me in the sentence you are referring to, not you at all. If there is anything about you in the discourse there, it's a compliment for your taste being different and original. As for "what you look at is not concordant with reality", you already said that that is not the case, that you see what I have previously described and that you like it, right? So, there is no "against" here, just different tastes, formed in different ways.

Not sure why you read that the way you did, but I feel the need to make a digression and say this, whether it has to do with your direction of thoughts here or not: backhands, tennis, tastes aside, being different and "not normal" doesn't mean anything bad. There is nothing wrong with liking something that most people dislike. My friend for example is into guys with glasses and slouching shoulders, "awkward" looking guys. There is absolutely nothing wrong with her or them. We are all different, and we should be, we are humans, not robots.
Thank you for your clarification.
 

am1899

Hall of Fame
#67
2 hander: Agassi, Safin, Nishikori

Honorable mentions to Rusty Hewitt and Andy Murray. They both have the straight arm thing going, and though it’s not conventional, it works for them and is pleasing to me to watch.

1 hander: Armitraj, Sela, Pavel

Honorable mentions to Tommy Robredo, Tommy Haas, Albert Costa, and Gabriella Sabatini
 
Last edited:
#74
I don't like Gasquet's backhand at all. He rolls it so much and he's not as aggressive as a Wawrinka or Thiem. Thiem can roll it too a lot but he's very aggressive. Did you see some of those 1 handers he ripped againast Nadal at the USO?? My gawd...
Thiem's backhand looks stiff and muscled. I don't know if it's because of his extreme grip or because he locks out really early.
 
Top