Top 10 movers

[Open Stance]

McEnroe needs to be on this list. During his prime, he was extremely quick and his anticipation is arguably as good as anyone's in the history of the sport. Post 1984, he lost a step due to a bad hamstring injury, lack of training, desire, etc. which really hurt him just as the game was starting to change with bigger rackets and more power.

 

[runningforehand21]

Where the heck is lord Tomic

 

[King No1e]

By results, Wilander >> Hewitt >(>) Rios >> Monfils. Why is that?

By results, McEnroe >> Murray. Are you gonna tell me that Mac was a better mover than Andy?

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Federer over Nadal in movement, are you ****ing kidding me? Beautiful, effortless movement doesn't win you points if you don't make that get. And you would lose less money betting on Nadal to make those gets than Feddy. This doesn't make his movement not great, Nadal just shades him in that department.

 

[tonylg]

i think Goffin should be on the list. He has no particular strokes yet became top 10. Only because his fast footwork. i doubt Edberg. He has only one movement: the sprint to the net.

LOL .. as if Goffin or any other modern baseline bot could make an impossibly low and wide first volley, recover, close and then cover the net .. potentially getting back for an overhead as well as Edberg did.

There may be nothing more to movement in the modern game than sliding side to side behind the baseline, but those one dimensional movers don't hold a candle to one of the GOAT all court movers.

 

[abmk]

Movement is a very subjective thing and totally dependent on your game. Basically all the greats have movement that suit their games very well and if you give Borg, Nadal, Novak, Sampras, or Fed any of the other 4's movements they will be worse off, guaranteed.

In terms of who I think had the best movement tools for basically any style I probably go for Pete, Borg, and Nadal since I think all three are more explosive over longer distances than Federer (which probably makes them better at moving laterally well behind the baseline), who is probably the best at recovery and explosive footwork in small spaces, which primarily benefits an offensive style where you are within and around the baseline. Of course on top of those two styles, Pete has elite S&V and net movement as well which none of the other 3 guys have so it's very easy to say that Pete was the most complete mover although Pete's movement peak was basically only a couple years because starting in late 94/95 he started to tone it down a bit.

fed over Pete movement wise, just quite better defensively.
and when you bring in clay .....

 

[DMP]

Having watched and played a lot of tennis I have come to the view that the greatest movement you can have in tennis, assuming a certain level of technique, is pure, raw, speed and manoeuvrability. If you can get to the ball quickly enough you can chase anything down, and that can compensate for less than perfect technique. Anticipation helps, certainly for short distances, and great positioning footwork also helps (Federer in his pomp had beautiful ballet like adjustments), but in the end pure raw speed* is the best if you can only have one thing.

Which is why I put Borg at number one in my lifetime. He was unbelievably fast, and could track anywhere - side to side, forward and back, without ever tiring. His technique wasn't always the best in every situation but.....he was always there. A lot of the others on the OP list also had/have raw speed, but I think Borg just shades all of them. Someone like Monfils for instance might be extremely fast when he gets going, but he is just too tall to manoeuvre quickly. Chang reacted quickly but over longer sprints I would still back Borg.

* by speed I mean speed over distances up to 40 metres with a 180 degree change of direction. That would be a race from baseline to net, and then back to the baseline, or from side to side at the baseline, or across the baseline then to the net, etc.

 

[Shaolin]

Yeah they don't even belong in the top 20. I'd take Safin, Blake, pre-fatbandian, Davydenko, Rafter, Murray, Coria, Hewitt, Wilander, Mac, and probably Agassi/Courier too over them.

Wilander and Hewitt are both easy top 10.

Mecir, Rios, Monfils = overrated.

You guys are a joke. Rios had unbelievable movement, maybe the best footwork I've seen besides Federer.

@skaj , Nishikori needs to me mentioned, his footwork is impeccable.

 

[Miki 1234]

Coria most efficient movement to this day.
He wins easily this page in my opinion.
His game can only be described as moving.
Federer has the best movement tho.
Djokovic and Nadal are best from base line.
There are few players that are faster more explosive , some on shorter some on bit longer distance.
But that is not that important in a long run .
Older players as good as they were cant be compared since different speeds were played on baseline back then.
Not saying they would not be on same top lvl as today but we dont know how good would their movement be on todays standards.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Having watched and played a lot of tennis I have come to the view that the greatest movement you can have in tennis, assuming a certain level of technique, is pure, raw, speed and manoeuvrability. If you can get to the ball quickly enough you can chase anything down, and that can compensate for less than perfect technique. Anticipation helps, certainly for short distances, and great positioning footwork also helps (Federer in his pomp had beautiful ballet like adjustments), but in the end pure raw speed* is the best if you can only have one thing.

Which is why I put Borg at number one in my lifetime. He was unbelievably fast, and could track anywhere - side to side, forward and back, without ever tiring. His technique wasn't always the best in every situation but.....he was always there. A lot of the others on the OP list also had/have raw speed, but I think Borg just shades all of them. Someone like Monfils for instance might be extremely fast when he gets going, but he is just too tall to manoeuvre quickly. Chang reacted quickly but over longer sprints I would still back Borg.

* by speed I mean speed over distances up to 40 metres with a 180 degree change of direction. That would be a race from baseline to net, and then back to the baseline, or from side to side at the baseline, or across the baseline then to the net, etc.

For those reasons, Borg and Nadal are my favoured picks in movement. Yes, I don't emphasise perfection in footwork technique because we are talking of trained athletes with phenomenal talent here and what we may think of as flaws may not really be holding them back at all. Ergo, raw speed matters more.

 

[Deleted member 770948]

Nadal has the best footwork at net since Pat Cash.

 

[Deleted member 770948]

Djokovic doesn't have great footwork, he's more reliant on stretching with his upper-body, literally a gymnast.
Djokovic's feet are often in the wrong position compared to his body, so he falls or finds himself off-balanced and upper-body flexibility saves him.

 

[NonP]

Good ol' Datacipher made an observation a while back that I've yet to see successfully refuted: a Borg, Fed or Rafa may indeed be the best on/near the baseline but Edberg was world-class in both the front and the back of the court (or something to that effect). And unlike pretty much all of us dilettantes the guy actually had a pro's eye for these things, so while I was skeptical at first myself I now think he was indeed bang on. This was driven home further to me when I saw Edberg play Kafelnikov in one of those senior exos, and the only thing that floored me more than Kaf's eye-popping weight gain was Stefan's effortless agility around the court, which hardly seemed to have declined since his heyday. May well be the smoothest mover ever.

Which brings me to....

Movement is a very subjective thing and totally dependent on your game. Basically all the greats have movement that suit their games very well and if you give Borg, Nadal, Novak, Sampras, or Fed any of the other 4's movements they will be worse off, guaranteed.

In terms of who I think had the best movement tools for basically any style I probably go for Pete, Borg, and Nadal since I think all three are more explosive over longer distances than Federer (which probably makes them better at moving laterally well behind the baseline), who is probably the best at recovery and explosive footwork in small spaces, which primarily benefits an offensive style where you are within and around the baseline. Of course on top of those two styles, Pete has elite S&V and net movement as well which none of the other 3 guys have so it's very easy to say that Pete was the most complete mover although Pete's movement peak was basically only a couple years because starting in late 94/95 he started to tone it down a bit.

Yes, that all-court versatility is why I also think Pete is highly underrated here. Wouldn't go so far as to put him at the very top, but top 10 of the Open Era? You bet.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Nadal has the best footwork at net since Pat Cash.

Well, Johnny Mac would be proud of you for saying that, let's leave it there.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

By results, McEnroe >> Murray. Are you gonna tell me that Mac was a better mover than Andy?

Of course he was. Mandrew only better defensively, Mac better footwork and agility.

 

[skaj]

Federer over Nadal in movement, are you ****ing kidding me? Beautiful, effortless movement doesn't win you points if you don't make that get. And you would lose less money betting on Nadal to make those gets than Feddy. This doesn't make his movement not great, Nadal just shades him in that department.

This is tennis movement not track and field, two different things.

 

[skaj]

Of course he was. Mandrew only better defensively, Mac better footwork and agility.

Also Lendl?

 

[skaj]

Good list, with some really terrific names.
Some possible additions:

Men: Kriek, Nastase
Women: Goolagong

...will have to think more - good stuff.

Great names, they definitely deserve a mention, thanks for the reminder.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

This is tennis movement not track and field, two different things.

So Nadal is just a track and field star who is somehow one slam away from matching tennis genius Federer, got it.

 

[skaj]

So Nadal is just a track and field star who is somehow one slam away from matching tennis genius Federer, got it.

No, you didn't.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

No, you didn't.

Er, I got as much as I needed to out of a flippant and stupid response that pretends speed is irrelevant in tennis movement.

 

[skaj]

Er, I got as much as I needed to out of a flippant and stupid response that pretends speed is irrelevant in tennis movement.

No, nobody said that speed is irrelevant in tennis movement.

 

[wangs78]

Djokovic rarely looks balanced and the contortions he puts his body through look painful but what has amazed me is how the effectiveness of his movement has improved since his early 20s. Back then he clearly already had the physical speed and agility but since then it seems like he has improved his flexibility and gotten more lean which has allowed him to sustain this level of movement while avoiding injury into his 30s. Fed and Nadal's movement, on the other hand, clearly declined beginning in their late 20s. However, I will say that Fed's footwork, speed, and balance produced the most beautiful and effortless (looking) movement I ever saw. And during his peak years his court coverage was every bit as good as Nadal and Djokovic at their respective peak/prime with the added bonus of being much smoother.

 

[Villain]

As a Nole fan, it’s got to be Rafa. His movement when he was young was from another planet.

 

[skaj]

So what does it mean when you say we are talking about tennis and not track and field? Like I didn't know that, dick-head? On what basis do you claim making an incredible get is not important in tennis movement? It's literally the most important thing. Else you could train Suresh to move like a ballet dancer and he would beat Federer like he said he would in 2007.

I understand that you are frustrated by my replies, but I really don't think there's need for those childish insults. I am sorry if you didn't like the post #71, but I thought it was an appropriate response to your comment.

As for your question, I would first have to claim that an incredible get is not important to tennis movement to be able to explain that claim.

 

[skaj]

Yeah they don't even belong in the top 20. I'd take Safin, Blake, pre-fatbandian, Davydenko, Rafter, Murray, Coria, Hewitt, Wilander, Mac, and probably Agassi/Courier too over them.

Wilander and Hewitt are both easy top 10.

The idea of Safin, Agassi, Courier being better movers than Mecir, Rios, Monfis is really, really odd, I must say.

 

[skaj]

I forgot about this guy.

 

[skaj]

Very quick around the court, detailed footwork, amazing anticipation - definitely deserves an honorable mention:

 

[Pmasterfunk]

skaj doesn't belong in top 50 decent posters, stands to reason his rankings don't belong in the top 9000.

Don't be hating on us journeyman posters, we gotta live, too.

 

[skaj]

Diego Schwartzman deserves a mention for the active players.