Who has better forehand: Sampras or Djokovic

[6august]

I put Sampras FH below Lendl in old days (I don't think Agassi FH is better than Sampras) and Djokovic below Fedal nowadays but it's impossible for me to choose which one is better, Pete the Great or Novak the Tyrant )))

Would love to hear from you, especially from those who've followed tennis since mid 80's like me.

Thank you.

 

[NonP]

Pistol, of course. He practically halved the court with that shot, and while Novak's FH might have a slight edge in consistency - before you trot out the tired talking point about UFEs, remember that Pete in his ATP career never switched to poly - it's never been the point-ending weapon Pete's was.

Put another way, the Sampras FH is arguably one of the top 5 in history, while Novak's would do well to make the top 20. Here's a more comprehensive breakdown:

Top 20 OE actually ain't that crazy, but the jokers are shouting top 10 all time or even top 3 only behind Fedal, which is beyond comical (and I say that as a fan). Not only does the Djokovic FH lack top-end power compared to other top FHs, he can't take it as early as Agassi or even Davydenko, flatten it out or smack it on the run a la Lendl or Pistol, or impart dizzying spin like such dirtmeisters as Bruguera, Guga, Mancini and even Andreev. To put it more bluntly it's the proverbial jack-of-all trades-master-of-none type, which still makes it plenty dangerous but not as much as other ATG FHs.

These guys alone are clearly ahead of Djoko (in chronological order only - DOB listed for comparison):

Borg (1956)
Lendl (1960)
Agassi (1970)
Courier (1970)
Sampras (1971)
Federer (1981)
Nadal (1986)
Del Potro (1988)

Somewhat more debatable but still ahead:

Becker (1967) - now even surer about this after revisiting the Pete-Boris matchup for the 1698547th time
Gonzalez (1980)

That's at least ten. Then you've got the following candidates most of whom these teenyboppers haven't even heard of, let alone have the capacity to evaluate with any technical acumen:

Santana (1938)
Okker (1944)
Newcombe (1944)
Nastase (1946)
Gomez (1960)
Arias (1964)
Gustafsson (1967)
Krickstein (1967)
Korda (1968)
Mancini (1969)
Larsson (1970)
Rosset (1970)
Bruguera (1971)
El Aynaoui (1971)
Ferreira (1971)
Krajicek (1971)
Chang (1972)
Enqvist (1974)
Norman (1976)
Moya (1976)
Philippoussis (1976)
Grosjean (1978)
Ferrero (1980)
Johansson, J. (1982)
Roddick (1982)
Andreev (1983)
Verdasco (1983)
Soderling (1984)
Bautista Agut (1988)

Honorable mentions:

Wilander (1964) - below Novak overall, but 2nd to none in consistency (read: ideal for clay)
Muster (1967) - ditto
Berasategui (1973) - the Hawaiian grip makes it virtually useless on grass, but arguably the most powerful FH ever pound for pound
Kuerten (1976) - likewise the big backswing keeps it from unqualified ATG status, but again what power!
Davydenko (1981) - Novak's is basically a superior version of Davy's FH (though, as noted earlier, the Russian could take the ball earlier with better consistency)

You're welcome to count how many but I'm sure that's more than 20 names. Of course one could argue Djoko is better than these guys and I'd probably agree more often than not, but top 10 all time sounds rather frivolous now, doesn't it? I will, however, add that Novak is superior to overrated ones like Blake, Berdych (though he's somewhat borderline), Monfils, Sock, Thiem, etc.

But throw in historically acknowledged pre-OE masters like Tilden (1893), Johnston (1894), Cochet, Perry (1909), Vines (1911), Kramer (1921), Segura (1921) and Kramer (1921) and you've got well over 30-40. Maybe know what you're talking about before mouthing off? (I know, I know, we're still talking on the internet.)

And what most of you youngsters fail to see re: the Sampras FH or for that matter FHs in general:

As for the FH comparison... Fed does have the better FH in that it'd be ideal for more top players than Pistol's. But - and this is a big but - I doubt Sampras himself would be that much better off with the Federer FH, if at all. Pete's MO was to take the game away from his opponent, so that extra flat(tish) power especially on the run was just about perfect for him. Great as Fed's weapon was/is he's never been among the very best in turning defense into offense when stretched out to the right, the one chink in an otherwise picture-perfect armor, and I suspect that for Pistol whatever benefits of having Fed's FH would be outweighed by the inability to practically halve the court with that running FH.

So the real Q isn't whose FH is better but which better complements one's game, and the A, as usual, depends on who/what you're talking about.

 

[Linelicker]

Things you only hear on TTW.

 

[abmk]

Sampras - lower half of top 10
Djokovic's just outside top 10

 

[OneLastWimby]

Sampras, and by some margin in my opinion.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

Pistol, of course. He practically halved the court with that shot, and while Novak's FH might have a slight edge in consistency - before you trot out the tired talking point about UFEs, remember that Pete in his ATP career never switched to poly - it's never been the point-ending weapon Pete's was.

Put another way, the Sampras FH is arguably one of the top 5 in history, while Novak's would do well to make the top 20. Here's a more comprehensive breakdown:



And what most of you youngsters fail to see re: the Sampras FH or for that matter FHs in general:

Some great points, but a serious case of grumpy old man (cat) shining through there

 

[PETEhammer]

Pietros of course, although Novak has a great (not merely good, but great) forehand as well

 

[canta_Brian]

A good explanation of why having a great forehand isn’t that important to Djokovic is Federer’s neo backhand.

As soon as Fed had the shot he could afford to stop running around to hit his forehand. That meant he wasn’t having to cover so much space on the forehand. This meant he could step up the court a bit further and be hyper aggressive.

Djokovic isn’t about any one great shot. He is more about trusting all his shots and therefore being very hard to move out of position. He is always able to get his body behind the ball and hit from within his frame. He never needs to take on the risky/spectacular shot.

 

[Noleberic123]

In 2021?

Djokovic.

 

[skaj]

I put Sampras FH below Lendl in old days (I don't think Agassi FH is better than Sampras) and Djokovic below Fedal nowadays but it's impossible for me to choose which one is better, Pete the Great or Novak the Tyrant )))

Would love to hear from you, especially from those who've followed tennis since mid 80's like me.

Thank you.

Whomever you rank higher, Sampras is in that league(Lendl, Agassi).
Djokovic is in a lower tier.

 

[Born_to_slice]

Sampras had a good forehand for his time but would get murdered in fh to fh exchanges with Djokovic. Variety on fh is also heavily in Novak's favor. Sampras had better forehand volleys and better running fh dtl (Novak better running fh cc).

If Sampras had better fh than Djokovic, he would've won several RG titles.

 

[Red Rick]

Lmao top 5 forehand in history

 

[Sunny014]

Sampras - lower half of top 10
Djokovic's just outside top 10

Please give the top 10 or maybe the top 20.

 

[mxmx]

I'm not sure Sampras' forehand is better than Agassi's. Djokovic? Yes.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

lol takes

 

[GhostOfNKDM]

Agassi had a better forehand than either.

 

[mxmx]

Agassi had a better forehand than either.

Yeah. I kind of meant that.

 

[NatF]

Agassi had a better forehand than either.

No doubt.

 

[DIMI_D]

I put Sampras FH below Lendl in old days (I don't think Agassi FH is better than Sampras) and Djokovic below Fedal nowadays but it's impossible for me to choose which one is better, Pete the Great or Novak the Tyrant )))

Would love to hear from you, especially from those who've followed tennis since mid 80's like me.

Thank you.

Where’s the poll??
Sampras for sure

 

[abmk]

Please give the top 10 or maybe the top 20.

Federer
Nadal
Lendl
Courier
Borg
Agassi
Sampras
Delpo
Gonzalez
Moya

are the top 10 IMO.

 

[6august]

Agassi had a better forehand than either.

In my poor memories, i don't have the impression that Andre could bully Pete in FH rallies.

Of course i could be wrong, so much water under the bridge.

)))

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

Federer
Nadal
Lendl
Courier
Borg
Agassi
Sampras
Delpo
Gonzalez
Moya

are the top 10 IMO.

 

[GhostOfNKDM]

In my poor memories, i don't have the impression that Andre could bully Pete in FH rallies.

Of course i could be wrong, so much water under the bridge.

)))

Pete's first serve made whatever followed, look good.

Much better on that wing in the forecourt than from the baseline.

 

[6august]

Federer
Nadal
Lendl
Courier
Borg
Agassi
Sampras
Delpo
Gonzalez
Moya

are the top 10 IMO.

How about Rublev, Karatsev and Berretini? They all have huge forehand?

 

[abmk]

How about Rublev, Karatsev and Berretini? They all have huge forehand?

Won't even come into my top 25.

In no particular order: Djokovic, Ferrero, Soderling, Tsonga, Safin, Blake, Larsson, Newk, Arias, Roddick, Andreev, Verdasco, Wilander, Becker, Connors, Nastase, Gomez, El Ayaonoui, Norman, Korda, Berdych, Thiem, Grosjean etc all above them.

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Sampras. He was known for that shot. I think Djokovic is known more for his backhand.

 

[abmk]

@NonP : You missed Safin in that list.

 

[Sunny014]

Federer
Nadal
Lendl
Courier
Borg
Agassi
Sampras
Delpo
Gonzalez
Moya

are the top 10 IMO.

Nice list.

Gonzales's winners are at times second to none

 

[Sunny014]

Sampras had a very nice running forehand

 

[Third Serve]

Sampras by a fairly significant margin I think. Novak’s forehand is a great shot, though.

 

[NonP]

Agassi had a better forehand than either.

Yeah. I kind of meant that.

No doubt.

I don't mind if anyone puts Dre or Jim ahead of Pete in the GFOAT ranking, but I guarantee you players feared the Sampras FH more.

And what I said about Pete vs. Fed applies to Pete vs. Dre as well. For attacking players there's no question whose FH would be better.

In my poor memories, i don't have the impression that Andre could bully Pete in FH rallies.

Of course i could be wrong, so much water under the bridge.

)))

There's not a single player past and present who "could bully Pete in FH rallies," LOL. Draw more errors, sure, though like I said this supposed (relative) weakness of Pistol's tends to be exaggerated.

@NonP : You missed Safin in that list.

Wasn't meant to be a fully comprehensive list (as you can see several older and newer names are missing), but yeah that's a big omission. Would back Nole vs. Marat, though. BH goes to the Russian.

 

[GhostOfNKDM]

Pietros of course, although Novak has a great (not merely good, but great) forehand as well

Given your preferences, you must love Kokkinassis

 

[NatF]

I don't mind if anyone puts Dre or Jim ahead of Pete in the GFOAT ranking, but I guarantee you players feared the Sampras FH more.

And what I said about Pete vs. Fed applies to Pete vs. Dre as well. For attacking players there's no question whose FH would be better.

Maybe? Hard to qualify though. Besides that I think Federer's forehand is comfortably better than Sampras' in pretty much every department bar on the run - even then I think Sampras' superiority is probably mostly his movement to his right being better. I certainly don't think that an attacking player would be better off with Pete's forehand than Federer's...

 

[NonP]

Maybe? Hard to qualify though. Besides that I think Federer's forehand is comfortably better than Sampras' in pretty much every department bar on the run - even then I think Sampras' superiority is probably mostly his movement to his right being better. I certainly don't think that an attacking player would be better off with Pete's forehand than Federer's...

Pete vs. Fed is obviously a bit trickier but I still say Pete would be better off with his own FH. Doubt any part of Fed's FH could compensate for that virtually unequaled ability to halve the court.

And I disagree the running part is the only thing Pete has over Fed. I say Pete was also better CC (remember, the net is lower around the center), with more power and depth to boot. Fed obviously has the edge I-O and also DTL due to his higher topspin/margin for error, but what pushes him over the edge is his greater versatility.

Also I should point out that this discussion is heavily biased towards baseliners, which may make sense today but not so much historically. Maybe Fed's FH would still be more ideal for attacking players overall, but that advantage wouldn't be so clear-cut as it is for their baseline counterparts.

 

[BeatlesFan]

I don't think Agassi FH is better than Sampras)

Would love to hear from you, especially from those who've followed tennis since mid 80's like me.

Since you think Pete’s FH is better than Andre, you need to stop listening to the opinion of your seeing eye dog. It’s utterly laughable, and I watched both of them play live dozens of times and watched both practice countless times. I watched both play many junior matches as well.

Sampras’ FH couldn’t touch Andre’s. Not even
In the same dimension. It’s as ludicrous an assertion as claiming Andre had the better serve than Pete.

 

[6august]

Since you think Pete’s FH is better than Andre, you need to stop listening to the opinion of your seeing eye dog. It’s utterly laughable, and I watched both of them play live dozens of times and watched both practice countless times. I watched both play many junior matches as well.

Sampras’ FH couldn’t touch Andre’s. Not even
In the same dimension. It’s as ludicrous an assertion as claiming Andre had the better serve than Pete.

Calm down, calm down.

AA is not better doesn't mean he's worse. Once again, whenever i think of AA his UFO-size racquet immediately comes to my mind so i can't take any of his shots serious.

)))

 

[Red Rick]

Sampras by a pretty significant margin I think. Novak’s forehand is a great shot, though.

Are there even full matches on youtube that aren't potato quality?

 

[Red Rick]

 

[Red Rick]

In reality I'm waiting for a 90s fetishist to explain to me how Sampras had a best serve of his period, a top 5 forehand of all time, was one of the best athletes the game had ever seen and won fewer clay titles than Andy Roddick.

 

[Third Serve]

Are there even full matches on youtube that aren't potato quality?

Probably just a couple of them (you can get really nice-quality highlights from the USTA channel but idk about full matches), but I dunno if potato video quality translates to potato tennis quality.

 

[Red Rick]

Probably just a couple of them (you can get really nice-quality highlights from the USTA channel but idk about full matches), but I dunno if potato video quality translates to potato tennis quality.

No but I think there's a gigantic highlight bias towards the 90s.

 

[MeatTornado]

I have no issue putting Pete ahead, but the disrespect to Novak in this thread is bonkers. Dude doesn't hit flashy highlight reel winners so he gets totally ignored?

Do you people seriously have that little appreciation for how goddamn hard it is to place your groundstrokes that close to baseline? Novak's done that day in, day out for nearly 15 years now. But sure, Pete could hit a running cross-court winner once or twice a match so he's clearly superior. God knows Novak's never come up with anything on the run...

 

[MeatTornado]

Since you think Pete’s FH is better than Andre, you need to stop listening to the opinion of your seeing eye dog. It’s utterly laughable, and I watched both of them play live dozens of times and watched both practice countless times. I watched both play many junior matches as well.

Sampras’ FH couldn’t touch Andre’s. Not even
In the same dimension. It’s as ludicrous an assertion as claiming Andre had the better serve than Pete.

Pretty embarrassing for Andre to get out-rallied so many times by a guy with such a laughably worse forehand, no?

 

[Third Serve]

I have no issue putting Pete ahead, but the disrespect to Novak in this thread is bonkers. Dude doesn't hit flashy highlight reel winners so he gets totally ignored?

Do you people seriously have that little appreciation for how goddamn hard it is to place your groundstrokes that close to baseline? Novak's done that day in, day out for nearly 15 years now. But sure, Pete could hit a running cross-court winner once or twice a match so he's clearly superior. God knows Novak's never come up with anything on the run...

Yeah Novak’s FH is a legit great shot. Even if you don’t find his style appealing, some respect needs to be placed on his game.

 

[Druss]

Anybody remember this shot?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Pretty embarrassing for Andre to get out-rallied so many times by a guy with such a laughably worse forehand, no?

They said Novak dunks better than me. Even if it was a joke, I took great offence to that accusation. His forehand is good shot though. That could be better than mine, maybe.

 

[Deleted member 779124]

In reality I'm waiting for a 90s fetishist to explain to me how Sampras had a best serve of his period, a top 5 forehand of all time, was one of the best athletes the game had ever seen and won fewer clay titles than Andy Roddick.

Clay was considered a bit slower when Pete was playing which needs to be considered somewhat.

 

[MeatTornado]

They said Novak dunks better than me. Even if it was a joke, I took great offence to that accusation. His forehand is good shot though. That could be better than mine, maybe.

Honestly shocked he never quit basketball for tennis when it was said Pete had best slam dunk around

 

[zagor]

Pete's better but I don't think the margin is as big as portrayed. If there's one thing that's underrated in Novak's game, it's his FH, it's what made him go from a great player to an amazing one in 2011.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Those that say Djoko has a weak forehand have never dropped 40-15 on anybody.