Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by TheCanadian, Apr 30, 2012.
Whose BH would you rather have?
Richie's BH is better looking, or shall I say 'more beautiful' ... however Murray's BH is more efficient.
There's not really a better or worse really. Gasquets is a thing of beauty but I'd take Murrays backhand for for its solidity and the fact that he doesn't get pushed back so far behind the baseline.
Gasquet's is aesthetically more pleasing, but Murray has been able to do more with his. So Murray's, I guess.
I think Murray's backhand is more solid so i picked him. But Gasquet can hit some absolutely sick winners when he's on.
I am a one hander but I wouldn't want Gasquet super long swings.....rather have a solid efficient stroke like Murray's.
It's amazing what Gasquet has been able to achieve despite his average serve and FH (and his "troubles"). I must assume that his BH has done for him what the FH does for most players. And it's just great to see a player who doesn't run around his BH all the time.
Tough call. Sadly, we have no recorded stats measuring forehand and backhand quality so that leaves naked eye subjectivism, which is a shame.
If you took away Murray's backhand and gave him an average tour backhand, where would he be? Likely where Gasquet is now.
If you took away Gasquet's backhand and gave him an average tour backhand, where would he be? I honestly have no idea.
Murray's backhand does not require him to stand 12 feet behind the baseline, but his can be surprisingly error prone at times. Gasquet has both consistency and power down but I think it is more vulnerable again because of the timing and positioning it requires. It's a toss-up, really.
This must be a joke, is there really any comparison, Gasquet.
Is this a joke thread? What has Gasquet's backhand won him? Nothing!
Murray is leagues above Gasquet in all aspects of the game.
Depends, what is my style of play, and where do I play most of my shots from, seems if you stand 10-15 foot behind the baseline Gasquet's BH is really good.
He was in the top ten and is a top 15 player. Most would kill for such a career.
Gasquet's BH is definately sexier than Andy's BH.
But Andy's is the more solid one, Gasquet's BH has it's days off, so I would go for Murray's.
Gasquet has the most solid 1HBH I've seen since Kuerten's. I think you're confusing Richie's with Fed's. :lol:
Nah..Just saying that a 1HBH (even the best one) can't be as solid as Murray's BH, probably because he hits it with less pace.
Also Richmond's BH breaks down when he gets pissed, he has his moments when he shanks dat thing Federesque.
I like Richmond's BH, looks really aesthetic but IMO Kuerten has still the best 1HBH ever.
Solid-wise i would take: Andy's BH
In terms of sexiness i would take: Richmond's BH
They both moonball 95% of the time and hit 1-3 winners per set. When you take movement and tactics out of it Gasquet's backhand is better, he does the same thing Murray does but with way more racquet head speed, so his moonballs have more spin and his winners are 110mph to Murray's 90mph.
Head says Murrays but heart says Gasqs
When you're concerned about winning matches, then I think you may realize Murray is in a different class. Gasquet plays in the stands to hit his gorgeous stroke. If he doesn't have that space, it's useless. Murray can do anything with his and from anywhere on the court. So if you want to look good and be known for having something, then go Gasquet. If you want to be known for having been a top 4 player for years in a row...Murray.
The real question is, whose forehand is better
Or whose forehand is worse...
That's just the same question inverted.
It's whose BTW - sorry for the grammar/spelling fascism but I can't resist.
Man, you hurt my ego.
Tell your ego I'm sorry ;-)
Murray is a better player, but that doesn't mean every stroke is better, I'd rather have Isner's serve, but that doesn't mean he will win more matches than Murray.
Gasquet all day.
He will do quite soon.
He's not only saying Murray is a better player. He's saying Murray's backhand is way more useful for winning a match. I would agree.
Be quiet, troll.
I love Gasquet's backhand, it may not be the most efficient but it's one of the most beautiful to watch, probably the most beautiful one-handed one.
You've been watching tennis since jan 2011? I'm sure you know what you're talking about...
If I am creating the ultimate player, picking the best serve, forehand, backhand, etc., I don't think Murray's backhand is an option, whereas Gasquet's would be.
Depends what you mean by the ultimate player. If you mean the player who ultimately looks the best on court, then you'd probably pick Gasquet because his backhand looks so much nicer.
However, if you're looking for the player who ultimately dominates on court, then you'd have to go with Murray because he has won so much more with his backhand than Gasquet has managed with his.
That's because Murray is fast, not because he has a better backhand. Gasquet is slow and anticipates really badly too, and he moves inefficiently. Murray is up there with Nadal in terms of movement in my opinion.
In addition, Murray only chokes in grand slam finals, Gasquet chokes in 3rd round atp 500 matches.
By ultimate player I mean, if I were constructing a robot, and I could take the best serve, Isner, Sampras, etc., and the best forehand, and backhand, etc. and create the ultimate player.
Just look at djoker vs mugray. Djokers backhand is in another league, how could you even mention them together....however IMO you could mention gasquets bh with djokers. The difference is djoker does everything better than gasquet.
Easily Murray's. Gasquet's is fun to watch and can hit some nice winners, but Murray's backhand is second only to Djokovic in terms of flexibility and consistency.
Actually, Murray's backhand held up quite well against Djoker's. I would consider them in the same league. It's Murray's forehand that doesn't stack up to Djoker's.
If Gasquet didn't have his BH, would he be a top 50 player? His FH looks awkward and his serve is very average for professional tennis.
If he had Murray's BH, would he be a top 15 player?
Murray doesn't have his versatility or ability to hit winners from all kinds of positions.
Possibly yes. But his overall game would have to improve to the level of Murray's.
You must be joking. Do you ever watch Murray at his best? See Murray v Nadal at 2011 Tokyo for a recent example. He has ten times the versatility compared to the likes of Gasquet.
Lol...how could you NOT mention them together? You clearly haven't seen their 2011 Rome semi or their 2012 AO semi or you wouldn't have made such an absurd statement.
Please if you don't know much about tennis, don't comment ,just read the forum until you know more about the game! Thanks
I maintain that Gasquet can hit BH winners that Murray simple cannot. I believe that statistics bear this observation out: Gasquet hits more BH winners than Murray.
And vice-versa. Gasquet has a single-handed backhand, Murray has a double-handed backhand. So neither can hit shots with it that the other can.
Well, if he does they don't do him much good. Murray wins many more matches with his backhand than Gasquet can manage with his!
Murray wins matches with his speed.
This is just a play with words. I know that you know what I meant: Gasquet can hit more BH winners from a greater variety of court positions.
Of course Murray wins more matches because he's a superior player and better athlete, but that doesn't mean he has a superior BH.
I would offer that these are two different questions, and thus two different answers are possible.
My answers are that Murray's backhand might be better because it is more solid, whereas I would much rather have Gasquet's backhand for its power and superior aesthetics.
You can be as fast as you like but if you don't have a decent forehand or backhand it won't do you much good. Murray's forehand is a bit iffy but his backhand is undoubtedly one of the best in the business.
Murray is better at everything than Gasquet.
I disagree. As I said in an earlier post, I think Gasquet has a more attractive and aesthetically pleasing backhand (single-handers usually do look nicer than double-handers) and he can certainly hit some superb shots with it but Murray's is simply more effective.
Separate names with a comma.