Who has the best Forehand in the Mens Game?

Simple one guys. Who in your opinion has the best FH in the mens game on tour at the moment?

went with Nadal, but even as a Murray fan can't see him belonging on this list.

Lol Mad for Chelsea, was going to say the same thing that Murray should be on this list.

I've edited this post after some thought.

I think I'd give the edge to Fed, currently.

Historically, Fed by some distance.

Andy has one of the best cross court forehands, plus has the touch to play a drop shot off it, but lacks accuracy on the in to out shot and also needs to develop the down the line one more.

There are really 2 players who have consistently brilliant forehands - Federer and Nadal (Djokovic just a bit behind). Other guys (Soderling for example) can give it a really big crack but maybe don't have the consistent accuracy or variety of shot as the top 2 or 3.

I voted for Rafa because I think he just has the edge in terms of consistent power and placement, and I've never seen anyone as good at dealing with a low and short ball on the forehand side - most players miss a lot either in the net or long, but Rafa just kills off so many points off this type of ball.

For me it has to be Djokovic, for both style and substance. I say style because, if you dont consider the beauty of the shot, both Del potro and Soderling have very powerful forehands, but they are not particularily graceful. And just for grace it has to be Federer. Nadal has a very effective/powerful FH but again does not really look all that graceful with his helicopter style of rotation.

Djokovic has very compact swing action and can dominate the court from the baseline with very minimum net clearance. I think he does not hit top spin, but also does not hit very flat either. I think he has the variety to induce spin at will, unlike Nadal who hits top spin all the time.

Federer by a mile. Imagine how many FOs he would have won with a DBHB.

Then Delpo maybe.

Federer has more versatility and flexibility on the FH than Rafa. His FH, in purely shot making terms, is still stronger.

Rafa is more consistent and less error prone. His rallying FH is better than Fed's.

A more detailed analysis.

CC FH - Nadal's cc FH is very strong, with lots of spin and high bounce. He gets good angles and can push his opponent out wide. Roger has less topspin but also creates incredible angles. Rafa does tend to hit this short at times but can usually get away with it as most players struggle with the high bounce. Overall I think Rafa's cc FH is more effective simply because it plays to most opponents' weaker wing.

Inside out FH - He also hits a very good inside out FH but he needs to be feeling confident to play it consistently. Roger also hits this shot great, except in recent years, he's lost half a step which means he can't get into position to hit this shot as often as he used to. I would say this one is pretty even.

Inside in FH - Fed has the best inside in FH i've ever seen.

Down the line FH - This is the one with which Rafa struggles, unless he's playing at his absolute best. Even then he doesn't hit it as effectively or as regularly as Roger. A case in point is the recent matches against Dojokovic, where a good strategy to change the dynamic of the cc exhanges (from Rafa's FH to Novak's BH) would have been to hit the down the line FH. However, he rarely played that shot and often executed poorly. Fed plays this shot extremely well and is more adept at changing the direction of play with his FH.

Additionally, Fed has the ability to play drop shots from the back of the court, he can use the squash shot as a defensive shot that keeps the ball low. He also plays closer to the lines and hits more winners, as a general rule.

All in all, I think Fed's FH is still superior to Rafa's, if he's playing well. Historically, it's probably been the greatest shot in the men's game, challenged, in my opinion, only by the Sampras serve.

Tenez wrote:Federer by a mile. Imagine how many FOs he would have won with a DBHB.

Then Delpo maybe.

I know the answer to that: 1 FO.

Rafa is more consistent and less error prone. His rallying FH is better than Fed's.
----------------------------------

Rafa scores a point after 5 FHs, Roger after one or 2. That's the big difference.

Tenez wrote:Federer by a mile. Imagine how many FOs he would have won with a DBHB.

Then Delpo maybe.

If he thought that a DBHB would have made his game better he'd have adopted one, surely? He's had a bad match-up against Nadal because of his BH and has lost 17 matches to Nadal in the last 8 years. He's also won another 550 in the meantime so the old SHB has not done him too badly I'd venture to suggest.

If he thought that a DBHB would have made his game better he'd have adopted one, surely?
------------------------------

Surely not. It's not as simple! To have an efficient double HBH at this level one needs to develop a big abdominal belt.

Most great DHBHers of the past, Mecir, Nalbandian, Safin, Rios, and Agassi have had back problems. Today's players are much better prepared and can support their back better while leaning.

Plus, on faster surfaces, Fed's single BH allows him to be more creative and anticipate better.

Young players can evolve playing with one hand instead of 2. I am not aware of professional players having switched the other way around.

Tenez wrote:If he thought that a DBHB would have made his game better he'd have adopted one, surely?
------------------------------

Surely not. It's not as simple! To have an efficient double HBH at this level one needs to develop a big abdominal belt.

Most great DHBHers of the past, Mecir, Nalbandian, Safin, Rios, and Agassi have had back problems. Today's players are much better prepared and can support their back better while leaning.

Plus, on faster surfaces, Fed's single BH allows him to be more creative and anticipate better.

Young players can evolve playing with one hand instead of 2. I am not aware of professional players having switched the other way around.

Tenez - that was my point. His SBH has done him very well; without it he'd be a different player and who knows what would have happened in his career.

The two Fernandos
Gonzalez and Verdasco

Haddie-nuff wrote:The two Fernandos
Gonzalez and Verdasco

Surely not? If the criteria is to look spectacular, then yes, perhaps. But if we're talking about variety, consistency, placement etc, etc, then these two are far behind.

Haddie-nuff wrote:The two Fernandos
Gonzalez and Verdasco

Good shout, Gonzalez has had a lot of injury problems ( hip operation) but as for Nando what has happened to the rest of his game, he is a top ten player but not the way he has been playing!

Tenez - that was my point. His SBH has done him very well; without it he'd be a different player and who knows what would have happened in his career..
---------------------
But the way the game is going, with physical players able to retrieve more shots and test that SHBH 7 or 8 times in a rally, it's now a clear disadvantage.

If it wasn't for Federer's huge talent, you'd have 0 SHBH in the top 10, let alone at the very top.


Federer made most of his wins with his BH before Nadal, Djoko and Murray were able to retrieve his shots. Now players are standing further back and able to run faster and longer. At the beginning, Federer got tested only by Nadal on clay but as those 3 players got stringer and fitter, they also challenged Federer on his best surface.

Would Federer had developed a SHBH had it started training now at the age of 5? Nothing is less certain. Until they pace up the conds, SHBHers are doomed.

Well If I agree with you then we would both be wrong

You cant speak of another tennis player on 606v2 unless it comes back to fEDERER V NADAL.... and mention the latter there is not a thread where Tenez wont´t pop up.... now there I proved one point at least

Haddie-nuff wrote:Well If I agree with you then we would both be wrong

I'm not looking for agreement.

After all it's a forum for discussion and debate.

It would however be nice if one could offer some explanation/analysis.

Often it seems (and i'm not referring to you here) that people post one line opinions based on their own prejudices for and against certain players.

Nadal has been testing Federer on all surfaces since he was 17 in 2004 - its not just strength, its talent.

I would also say Nadal has the best (not necessarily most powerful) FH in tennis due to its variety, spin/force and consistency.

Guys like Gasquet, Wawrinka and Youhnzy aren't not solidly in the Top 10 due to lack of DHBH, its other areas of their game that let them down actually. Their SHBH's are actually one of the best areas of their game. I think guys with SHBH could be in top 10 if they had other areas of their game that were stronger....its not as clear cut as that,

When they are both on form there is not a forehand in tennis that is more ferocious than Gonzalez. Look at the AO semi final that Verdasco played against Nadal his forehand was the weapon that nearly beat Nadal. They are both brilliant (true Verdasco is not on form at the moment) so that point can be argued I still say they both have the deepest most penetrating forehands in the game.

And though Im a Nadal fan (and his is good) it all comes back to the No.1. and 2 on this forum. And all Tenez can talk about is Federers SHBH Off topic !!!

Tenez wrote:Tenez - that was my point. His SBH has done him very well; without it he'd be a different player and who knows what would have happened in his career..
---------------------
But the way the game is going, with physical players able to retrieve more shots and test that SHBH 7 or 8 times in a rally, it's now a clear disadvantage.

If it wasn't for Federer's huge talent, you'd have 0 SHBH in the top 10, let alone at the very top.


Federer made most of his wins with his BH before Nadal, Djoko and Murray were able to retrieve his shots. Now players are standing further back and able to run faster and longer. At the beginning, Federer got tested only by Nadal on clay but as those 3 players got stringer and fitter, they also challenged Federer on his best surface.

Would Federer had developed a SHBH had it started training now at the age of 5? Nothing is less certain. Until they pace up the conds, SHBHers are doomed.

Do you think on current form though, Gasquet could squeeze back into the top 10? That would help certainly bring another SHBH into the top 10 again.

Nole's got everything: inside in, inside out, cross court, down the line, drop-shot.

Guys like Gasquet, Wawrinka and Youhnzy aren't not solidly in the Top 10 due to lack of DHBH, its other areas of their game that let them down actually. Their SHBH's are actually one of the best areas of their game. I think guys with SHBH could be in top 10 if they had other areas of their game that were stronger....its not as clear cut as that,.
-------------------------------------
Wrong as usual I am afraid. As good as their SHBH is, they can't cope with the solid, less versatile DHBH of the top 4 players.

Even Murray was targeting Gasquet BH yesterday. and got lots of rewards from it.

Those 3 players are actually extremely talented. In my view more talented than quite a few players in the top 10 but they are at a clear disadvantage nowadays beause of slower conds and fitter players exploiting that.

Gasquet lost to Djoko at the FO and MUrray at Wimbledon and that clearly cause his SHBH though good with some flashy winners cannot keep on going for ever when tested by the physical players.

The risk is simply not paying. Having a SHBH gives them a smaller sweet spot and that basically is it! Added the fitness factor that you also refuse to see, and there you go: Gasquet, Wawrinka and Youzhny have a high risk game, making them mentally weaker than those solid fitter players.

Make grass faster as in 1990 and they might turn into mentally stronger players with Djoko, Nadal and Murray becoming mentally weaker like Wilander was on grass.

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:Tenez - that was my point. His SBH has done him very well; without it he'd be a different player and who knows what would have happened in his career..
---------------------
But the way the game is going, with physical players able to retrieve more shots and test that SHBH 7 or 8 times in a rally, it's now a clear disadvantage.

If it wasn't for Federer's huge talent, you'd have 0 SHBH in the top 10, let alone at the very top.


Federer made most of his wins with his BH before Nadal, Djoko and Murray were able to retrieve his shots. Now players are standing further back and able to run faster and longer. At the beginning, Federer got tested only by Nadal on clay but as those 3 players got stringer and fitter, they also challenged Federer on his best surface.

Would Federer had developed a SHBH had it started training now at the age of 5? Nothing is less certain. Until they pace up the conds, SHBHers are doomed.

Do you think on current form though, Gasquet could squeeze back into the top 10? That would help certainly bring another SHBH into the top 10 again.

I am sure with a good spell of luck, some will travel inside the top 10 but staying there at the very top under those slower conds? no way...only Federer had the talent and stamina to.

Haddie

The point with players like Verdasco, Gonzalez, Soderling etc is that they have very good days when the forehands will crush anyone, but they also have a lot of days when it is off and they make a lot of errors.

I know Federer mis-hits occasionally as well (hardly a surprise with the speed the racket goes through the contact point), but it's rare that he has a day when as many go out as in. And then you get to Rafa and his extraordinary ability to minimise errors while hitting hard and with immense spin. It is this consistency as well as the accuracy and power that sets the very best apart from the lower ranked players.

Legend OP !!!!!!!

Why are we talking about SHBH the above poster obviously cannot read.
Are we not talking FOREHAND here.

.....................................................
Make grass faster as in 1990 and they might turn into mentally stronger players with Djoko, Nadal and Murray becoming mentally weaker like Wilander was on grass.

-----------------------------------

What has this got to do with anything or is this forum now become the sole views of one poster.

Dummy ... oh come on ... not in this tournament maybe but you have not been able to call Federer consistent on either wing for months.

They all have their off days him included. (though shhhhhhshhhhhh must be careful what I say here) there is a Federer fanboy aboard.

I did for the record vote for Nadal because of the variation he can generate from it.

Legend Im asking why the discussion has turned to SHBH... the thread has become a farce. I frankly did not vote for anyone.. the thread is a discussion being led by the usual poster. and is pointless.
Ill leave you with it

legendkillar wrote:I did for the record vote for Nadal because of the variation he can generate from it.

Does he have more variety than Federer on the FH side?

I'd add something else: Federer has the ability to flatten his FH more than Rafa, this is what makes it so lethal on hardcourts.

He can also take it very early, often standing on the baseline ala Agassi.

I think Fed definitely has more versatility and variety.

emancipator wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I did for the record vote for Nadal because of the variation he can generate from it.

Does he have more variety than Federer on the FH side?

Rafa can flatten the FH out, probably not as flatter as Federer.

Rafa from an inside out FH perspective has the variety of angles of where he can hit it compared to Federer.

I am a fan of both. But Rafa just ever so slightly gets the nod.

For me its a tie between Federer and Del Potro. Del Po has the most pace and hits it so flat. Federer's because of the variety and complete mastery of that stroke. Nadal's forehand is in the top 5, I would put Novak up there as well as soderling and TSonga somewhere in the top 10. Novak's foreahand is like a hybrid of Fed's and Nadal's. He hits it big spin with a very western grip like Nadal. Yet, he takes it earlier and hits it flatter than nadal similar to Fed.

Tenez wrote:Added the fitness factor that you also refuse to see, and there you go: Gasquet, Wawrinka and Youzhny have a high risk game, making them mentally weaker than those solid fitter players.

Refuse to see what - your point of view?
Oh give it a rest will you Tenez, its all you ever talk about. Fitness, fitness, fitness, blah, blah, blah.
Tennis is a combative, high speed game - since when wasnt being fit a key attribute for a top player?
You think Federer isnt incredibly fit and that he didnt train to become so? Same with Murray, same with Djokovic?
Most of the best players in the Open Era have been incredibly fit, and importantly fitter than their peers - so what?
The mind and body are inter-connected, thats hardly rocket science either.
We all know the courts are slower, we all know the players have to play longer ralleys, we all know they have to be fit to do so.
But being fit alone doesnt make champions otherwise any fit player could do it.

Just talk about something else other than physiques, Nadal or slow courts for a change eh?

When Djokovic has his eye on the ball, there is no better striker of a forehand shot than him, its deadly accurate and nigh on impossible to get a racquet on it in time.

lydian wrote:Just talk about something else other than physiques, Nadal or slow courts for a change eh?

So let us know what else makes Nadal the number 1 in the world? His 2 points he scores at the net? his guile? or is it this peculiar talent of calling MTOs in the middle of tense moments?

Please enlighten us about Nadal's skills that really distinguish him from the rest.

yawn, yawn, yawn Tenez...I dont have to justify why Nadal is #1, he's a great player, the results speak for themselves.

Change your record will you, its getting really tedious seeing every thread, and this tennis forum in general, being choked by your obsessive dislike of Nadal. Just give it a rest.

Lydian your Rafa fanatism makes you a bit blind and over sensitive when talking about this player. I am not criticing him as much, I am just telling it the way it is. your proven little understanding of the game and posts littered with false assumptions prevents you from actually bringing anything interesting yourself so you comment on my posts instead of coming up with interesting posts yourself.

Tell us rather how a flat hitter needs to hit the ball downwards cause teh weight of the ball is negligeable...

It's all in B&W from you on 606!!!!

It all depends on how you define the best ?

As a fan I like to see Federer's as he's so aggressive with it and hits many winners. The downside is on a bad day he can spray it all over the shop just giving away points.

As a player I'd want Nadal's as that combination of spin, power, angle, ball flight etc makes it almost unique and it just wears opponents down. The downside is on a bad day he still won't miss many but the ball lands short allowing opponents to step in and dominate him.

Novaks and Rafa's are the best at the moment but are both extremely ugly strokes.

Federers at his best was incredible.. as soon as it was on that wing it was point over.

'So let us know what else makes Nadal the number 1 in the world? His 2 points he scores at the net? his guile? or is it this peculiar talent of calling MTOs in the middle of tense moments?

Please enlighten us about Nadal's skills that really distinguish him from the rest..'

I'm not a big fan of Nadal, but you seem to be implying that the only reason he's world number one is because of his physique, which is just plain wrong. Nadal is world number one for a load of reasons:
*His incredible forehand, and solid and versatile backhand
*His hugely improved serve, which is consistent, accurate, and hard to attack
*His speed around the court
*His mental strength, and ability to produce a great shot when it matters the most
*His ability to disarm Federer's game, which has led to numerous important Grand Slam victories against the Swiss player
*His general touch around the court; Nadal generally wins the rallies when the ball enters the forecourt

You can't win Grand Slams just be being fit; anyone can run balls down all day long, but you have to be able to do hit good shots when you reach it otherwise you're still gonna lose!

Personally i like the look of Nadals Forehand, its unique. Not that bothered about Djokos. Federers backhand when setup for him and working looks good.

If I had to give my top ten forehands it would go something like this:

1. Del Potro
1. Roger
3. Nadal
4. Gonzalez
5. Tsonga
6. Djokovic
7.Soderling
8. Verdasco
9. Berdych
10. Monfils

This video compares Sampras and Federer's forehands on comparable shots; Sampras' forehand may have been pretty powerful, but boy was it ugly compared to Federer's:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpLOObXHzDM&feature=related

some similarities there between Sampras and Del P. Personally i always liked Sampras' forehand, especially on the run. I think Federers is all about him being in the right position