The Better Forehand: Nadal or Sampras?

Who's forehand would you have, Sampras or Nadal's?

  • 1. I'd rather have Sampras's forehand

    Votes: 33 29.5%
  • 2. I'd rather have Nadal's forehand

    Votes: 79 70.5%

  • Total voters
    112

Big Dave

New User
i'd take nadals forehand. Petes is better for fast surfaces....so penetrating! but Nadal's is so much more versatile, gotta go with Rafas...it's a more "all-court" forehand.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
Pete had a great forehand, and the best running forehand ever. But, Nadal's and Federer's forehands are more versatile. Both can crack winners from anywhere to anywhere with their forehands.
 

OKUSA

Hall of Fame
Nadal's forehand is lethal on Clay and Grass, then good at Aussie. At the USO it's decent.

Still it's better than having no shot at winning the French
 

TennisBalkan

New User
Neither one of these players have a great forehand, especially Sampras, other than his serves and volleys his ground strokes are awful. But if I had to choose between these two, I would choose Nadal's forehand.
 

autumn_leaf

Hall of Fame
although my forehand resembles nothing like nadal's i would still pick it. the speed, spin, margin for error, angle. the amount of kick off that thing is already unfair, if he manages to flatten it out well then...we'd just have to call it cheating.
 
With today's technology, I would've liked to see prime pete's fh. but with the technology they are both using pete using natural gut and an 85sq in and nadal using a poly with 100sq in i think their forehands are about even
 

davey25

Banned
I am a huge fan of both players but I have to say Nadal. I know there is more facets to the baseline game than just the forehand but I cant imagine even a prime Sampras completely owning a prime Federer from the baseline the way Nadal has. Even in most of Federer's wins over Nadal he was just owned almost 100% from the baseline.
 

davey25

Banned
Not really. I'm a huge fan of both players so nobody can accuse me of bias here. Sampras has a better forehand on the faster surfaces and a better running forehand than Nadal.
Nobody ever had a better running forehand than Sampras. His opponents were petrified of opening up a chance for that shot.
 
Nobody ever had a better running forehand than Sampras. His opponents were petrified of opening up a chance for that shot.
Yeah, it was brilliant how Sampras just left his entire forehand side open and just goaded his opponents to hit his forehand, Sampras burnt Courier and Agassi so many times with his running forehand.
 

Anaconda

Hall of Fame
I am a huge fan of both players but I have to say Nadal. I know there is more facets to the baseline game than just the forehand but I cant imagine even a prime Sampras completely owning a prime Federer from the baseline the way Nadal has. Even in most of Federer's wins over Nadal he was just owned almost 100% from the baseline.
Nadal dominates Federer from the baseline because Federer mentally loses it. Sampras has enough power to kill Nadal from the back court and wouldn't mentally wilt like Federer does.
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Nadal dominates Federer from the baseline because Federer mentally loses it. Sampras has enough power to kill Nadal from the back court and wouldn't mentally wilt like Federer does.
disagreeable. Nadal takes on guys with bigger forehands than pete all the time, and they don't have a glaring weakness like pete's backhand. and Nadal's running forehand, especially when going for the pass, is truly frightening... his passing shots are just unbelievable.
 

Anaconda

Hall of Fame
disagreeable. Nadal takes on guys with bigger forehands than pete all the time, and they don't have a glaring weakness like pete's backhand. and Nadal's running forehand, especially when going for the pass, is truly frightening... his passing shots are just unbelievable.
Oh so Soderling, Berdych and Gonzo (biggest FH's) don't have glaring weaknesses like Sampras' backhand? - which is actually a good shot, explains why they have so many grand slams doesn't it? Oh wait!


Sampras has a better running forehand than Nadal and day of the week.
 

Spider

Hall of Fame
Nadal's forehand on clay and grass is just brutal. The amoung of speed and viscious topspin that he can produce from any part of the court makes him a scary prospect for anyone. His forehand is just too brutal to compare it to anyone at the moment. Atleast with the ballbashers you know they will bash the ball as hard as they can and then will start to miss.

With Nadal, he almost never misses his forehand, clearly the best player in the world by far.
 

Kobble

Hall of Fame
Nadal's is way better. Sampras' forehand was good, but it wasn't that great. His running forehand was one of the better, but then again, he was basically going for broke, so, of course it will make some highlights. Plus, I have seen Agassi beat Pete forehand to forehand numerous times. Nadal has freakish consistency, and even more freaky highlight reels. Nadal all the way.
 

davey25

Banned
Agassi did not outplay Sampras off the forehand side that often. Sampras's forehand was clearly more powerful than Agassi's and the only way Agassi won forehand rallies was errors by Sampras. Agassi had to pick on the Sampras backhand as much as he possibly good in the baseline rallies since off the forehand side he could not outhit Sampras, all he could do off that side is maybe outsteady him.

Sampras, Nadal, Federer, and Courier all have superior forehands to Agassi.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
nadal ... normal FH ( considering the surfaces they have played on respectively ... rafa's would have been less effective in pete's era and pete's less effective in nadal's ) AND running FH.

Pete could be spectacular with his running FH, but nadal gets quite a bit more of them back into play ( and can hit winners as well ) . I actually think pete's running FH gets over-rated in comparision to nadal's because of the wow factor ( highlights ) , they don't remember/realise that pete did miss quite a few of them
 
Last edited:

kishnabe

Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras forehand might be ulgy to me...but damm it as good as Federer forehand even in Federer prime. Sick action.

I would want Sampras forehand for Aussie,WImby and US while I would want Nadal forehand solely for the French!
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Agassi did not outplay Sampras off the forehand side that often. Sampras's forehand was clearly more powerful than Agassi's and the only way Agassi won forehand rallies was errors by Sampras. Agassi had to pick on the Sampras backhand as much as he possibly good in the baseline rallies since off the forehand side he could not outhit Sampras, all he could do off that side is maybe outsteady him.

Sampras, Nadal, Federer, and Courier all have superior forehands to Agassi.
so forcing errors of a wing is NOT outplaying a player from that wing ? Now, I have heard it all !!!
 

davey25

Banned
so forcing errors of a wing is NOT outplaying a player from that wing ? Now, I have heard it all !!!
Overall Sampras won more of the forehand to forehand rallies than Agassi I am pretty sure counting all points. Agassi was scared of the Sampras forehand and rally would even try and engage in those rallies. He knew he would lose most, just like he would with Courier, Federer, or Nadal as well.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Overall Sampras won more of the forehand to forehand rallies than Agassi I am pretty sure counting all points. Agassi was scared of the Sampras forehand and rally would even try and engage in those rallies. He knew he would lose most, just like he would with Courier, Federer, or Nadal as well.
yes, sampras won slightly more of those ( not by too much of a margin ) because he was a superior mover and not necessarily because he had the better FH. I've told you this countless times before, but you don't realise this ...

and no, agassi was not scared of the sampras FH ....

and again, FH to FH rallies are not the only measure, agassi won more points going FH DTL than pete did ...
 

davey25

Banned
yes, sampras won slightly more of those ( not by too much of a margin ) because he was a superior mover and not necessarily because he had the better FH. I've told you this countless times before, but you don't realise this ...

and no, agassi was not scared of the sampras FH ....
You overrate the Agassi forehand. It was great but it was never the best. I cant believe in the forehand threads a couple people picked him as having the best forehand of the 90s, what a joke. Even his own coach Brad Gilbert admited that "several guys" (his own words) had better forehands than Agassi. Those would obviously include Courier and Sampras before anyone else. Of course since you love Agassi you will insist he had the best forehand of the 90s even though Courier owned him for years off that shot alone so I am not going to bother arguing about it with you.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
You overrate the Agassi forehand. It was great but it was never the best. I cant believe in the forehand threads a couple people picked him as having the best forehand of the 90s, what a joke. Even his own coach Brad Gilbert admited that "several guys" (his own words) had better forehands than Agassi. Those would obviously include Courier and Sampras. Of course since you love Agassi you will insist he had the best forehand of the 90s even though Courier owned him for years off that shot alone so I am not going to bother arguing about it with you.
firstly, do you accept that a major reason for sampras winning more of those FH CC exchanges was because he was the superior mover ?

secondly, yes, courier had a superior FH to agassi ...

and thirdly no, I don't "love" agassi
 

davey25

Banned
firstly, do you accept that a major reason for sampras winning more of those FH CC exchanges was because he was the superior mover ?
Watching their matches I felt Sampras had the superior overall forehand and it showed when they played. That is good enough for me. Not nearly as big a difference as the backhand but this isnt a thread about overall groundstrokes anyway.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Watching their matches I felt Sampras had the superior overall forehand and it showed when they played. That is good enough for me. Not nearly as big a difference as the backhand but this isnt a thread about overall groundstrokes anyway.
that is NOT an answer to my question. Answer it if you CAN !

I did NOT ask whom you thought while watching had the better FH !
 

mcenroefan

Hall of Fame
I think Sampras's forehand has been underrated over time. I've always liked what Agassi once said about Sampras....basically that he would be cruising through a set agaisnt Sampras thinking Sampras was holding serve but not playing all that well and then, in a single game, Sampras would up his level and break serve....end of set.

In any case, they are two completely different forehands....one with insane spin (helped by racket and strings) and one relatively flat by comparison.
 

Ultra2HolyGrail

Hall of Fame
You overrate the Agassi forehand. It was great but it was never the best. I cant believe in the forehand threads a couple people picked him as having the best forehand of the 90s, what a joke. Even his own coach Brad Gilbert admited that "several guys" (his own words) had better forehands than Agassi. Those would obviously include Courier and Sampras before anyone else.

Can't say i agree.. Agassi was known as a haircut and a forehand. The guy could punish his forehand. No way sampras or courier could hit it harder consistently.
 
nadal's forehand for me, cause it's such an anomally so much spin, the left hand, the unusual nature of the shot; yet highly effective, hell yeah!
 

mtr1

Professional
At AO, Wimbledon and the USO, I'd rather take Sampras' forehand, but clearly Nadal's forehand is superior on the clay. Technology plays a big part as well, Nadal's forehand would be much less effective with Natural gut strings, whereas Sampras' is transferable from gut to poly, wood to graphite.
Overall, I'd rather have the Sampras forehand, I find the Nadal forehand ugly (but effective), and I think I would enjoy hitting a Sampras forehand rather than Nadal's.
 

Ultra2HolyGrail

Hall of Fame
Nadals forehand is effective because he is a lefty i think. If he was a righty it wouldn't be nearly as effective. His crosscourt forehand to any righty backhand is tough to deal with.

I'm still not fond of nadal massive spin technique and over the head follow through. Even the pros seem to imatate nadal in the follow through over the head. Murray looked like a ********* today trying to imatate nadal with his forehand..
 

davey25

Banned
Can't say i agree.. Agassi was known as a haircut and a forehand. The guy could punish his forehand. No way sampras or courier could hit it harder consistently.
I suppose you didnt see Courier or Agassi play from 1991-1995 then. And how else would Courier own Agassi so badly during all of Courier's prime or near prime years if he didnt have a superior forehand. His backhand wasnt anywhere near Agassi's, Agassi's return of serve was clearly stronger. Courier wasnt an unbelievable scrambler even if he did move better than Agassi, he didnt have a devastating serve, he certainly wasnt a half decent volleyer, and his game was devoid of hardly any variety or intangibles. Unless you are saying it was on force of will and fitness, it is pretty obvious his forehand was too much for Agassi and allowed Courier to own Agassi for all those years.

And anyway like I said Agassi's own coach, a certain Brad Gilbert, who was also the biggest Agassitard on the planet said a few guys had better forehands than Agassi in interviews in 94 and 95. Who do you think were two of the guys he was referring to.
 
Last edited:

Ultra2HolyGrail

Hall of Fame
I suppose you didnt see Courier or Agassi play from 1991-1995 then. And how else would Courier own Agassi so badly during all of Courier's prime or near prime years if he didnt have a superior forehand. His backhand wasnt anywhere near Agassi's, Agassi's return of serve was clearly stronger. Courier wasnt an unbelievable scrambler even if he did move better than Agassi, he didnt have a devastating serve, he certainly wasnt a half decent volleyer, and his game was devoid of hardly any variety or intangibles. Unless you are saying it was on force of will and fitness, it is pretty obvious his forehand was too much for Agassi and allowed Courier to own Agassi for all those years.
Who cares about all those years. What happened to courier? He lost interest? You really think courier compares to agassi? You really think courier could win sets off of federer in his 30's like agassi did? Go watch fed vs agassi clips and tell me courier could baseline like agassi. You think it's just agassi's speed and backhand that made his compete into his 30
s?





And anyway like I said Agassi's own coach, a certain Brad Gilbert, who was also the biggest Agassitard on the planet said a few guys had better forehands than Agassi in interviews in 94 and 95. Who do you think were two of the guys he was referring to.

Who cares.
 

davey25

Banned
Who cares about all those years. What happened to courier? He lost interest? You really think courier compares to agassi? You really think courier could win sets off of federer in his 30's like agassi did? Go watch fed vs agassi clips and tell me courier could baseline like agassi. You think it's just agassi's speed and backhand that made his compete into his 30s?

Who cares.
LOL so that is your rebuttal. First of saying "who cares" about what Brad Gilbert says, even though he is the one who knows Agassi and his game better than anyone, was Agassi's closest confidante on tour for years, and is a qualifed expert and coach on the game? Umm ok. :rolleyes:

And did I say Courier was a better player than Agassi career wise? No I said he had the better forehand which he did. Hence why Agassi despite being the superior player was Courier's pigeon for years, he was stubbornly (stupidly) determined to try and outhit Courier on the forehand side when they played and couldnt do it during Courier's reasonably good years.

I forgot though I am talking to someone who thinks Capriati's best is better than Graf's best and that Capriati baselined (your term) far better than Graf ever did, even with a pathetic 1-10 head to head which ended with a 6-1, 6-0 loss by 23 year old Capriati to 30 year old soon to retire Graf. Not to mention in this case it is comparing the worst 3 slam winner in history man or women by far to a 22 slam winner.
 

Ultra2HolyGrail

Hall of Fame
LOL so that is your rebuttal. First of saying "who cares" about what Brad Gilbert says, even though he is the one who knows Agassi and his game better than anyone, was Agassi's closest confidante on tour for years, and is a qualifed expert and coach on the game? Umm ok. :rolleyes:
So what did he say? Several guys does not = courier or sampras.


And did I say Courier was a better player than Agassi career wise? No I said he had the better forehand which he did. Hence why Agassi despite being the superior player was Courier's pigeon for years, he was stubbornly (stupidly) determined to try and outhit Courier on the forehand side when they played and couldnt do it during Courier's reasonably good years.
Right, courier blew agassi of the court with his forehand. Go make a courier vs agassi forehand poll and get laughed at. Agassi is up there with federer on the forehand. Did you see that hit for haiti forehand that made peoples jaws drop?



I forgot though I am talking to someone who thinks Capriati's best is better than Graf's best and that Capriati baselined (your term) far better than Graf ever did, even with a pathetic 1-10 head to head which ended with a 6-1, 6-0 loss by 23 year old Capriati to 30 year old soon to retire Graf. Not to mention in this case it is comparing the worst 3 slam winner in history man or women by far to a 22 slam winner.

Stop crying about capriati.
 

AAAA

Hall of Fame
After today I think we can safely say Nadal's forehand is much better than Sampras's interms of effectiveness + reliability. It just works almost all the time.
 

hawk eye

Hall of Fame
Who's forehand would you rather have, Sampras or Nadal's?

Vote now.
Hard to say, those are the best 2 forehands the world has ever witnessed.
With Lendl 's being a close third.
To be on the safe side, I go for Nadal's on clay and slow HC, and Sampras's on fast HC and grass.
 
Top