Building The Perfect Tennis Player Part 3 - The Backhand

Right folks what we have is the Sampras serve and the Nadal forehand. We are nearly there. What we have now is the backhand. This will be interesting. DHBH v SHBH, Flat BH v Slice BH. Who for you is the master of the BH. The new breed in Djokovic, Murray, Nadal and Federer? Or do past masters such as Connors, McEnroe or Borg get your attention? Please nominate below.

a few to consider, i think these are the well known ones.

Edberg
Gasquet
Djokovic
Nadal
Murray

Nalbandian?

cant think of others at the mo.

Agassi
Kuerten
Wawrinka

Nadal, for me, has a relatively weak backhand. I wouldn't include him on this list.

SH: Gasquet
DH: Djokovic

The best out of those two? I think Gasquet's has more magic but Novak's is probably the better, more reliable weapon overall.

Novak can also hit his whilst sliding into the splits! So I'll say Novak.

Honourable mentions also for Nalbandian and Agassi.

Incidentally, the players picked Novak.

http://www.internazionalibnlditalia.tennistv.com/video/clip/1957164

(although I get the feeling that before Andy M's comment the conversation went: "Me" "You can't pick yourself" "Who did Novak pick?" "You")!

Got to be Agassi! Absolute magic. Although Novak's backhand is quite incredible too.

If we're going for outrageous winners though, a SHBH would probably get the nod; more variety for flashy winners off the wing.

And of course, we can't forget Feli's monster of a backhand

Not really a contender, but Blakes SHBH could really rip it when it looked like it shouldnt

Nalbandian had the best dhbh for me. He can do anything with it, such variety, more so than anyone else imo.
SHBH is a toughy. Gasquet when he is on has the best shbh but he lets himself down with his shot selection and court positioning.

Personally I'd pick a double hander. Better defensively, and if this is to pick the best all round backhand it has to be a two hander.

Of the modern era Novak's and Andy's backhands stand out. Very close between them. Andy has a far superior backhand slice, and maybe just edges it in terms of producing from a defensive position. However I feel Novak's BH is a touch more explosive from most positions so I would edge it overall to Novak.

But I think overall I'd give it to Agassi. Novak is better at getting a racquet on the ball, but when it's in the Agassi hit zone... Wow. Minimum effort, like he's just fooling around. But pinpoint accuracy and depth time and time again. If I broke it down into component parts in not sure he'd beat Novak, but aesthetics are ruling my head on this one.

Agassi for me.

There's an old urban myth that, according to the laws of physics, a bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly.

I feel like something similar could be applied to Agassi's backhand! That shot shouldn't be able to come from such a small, nonchalant backswing.

I was pretty close to picking Agassi but I think Novak just edges it.

Only the foolishly talented or the foolish would attempt a backhand when they could get their forehand into play. Compared to having a great serve or great forehand it's just the icing rather than the cake. And as such my vote goes to IMO one of the most beautiful shots in the game - Gasquets backhand.

Honorable mention to Federer's backhand. It's not given the credit it deserves as he stubbornly tried to beat Nadal's forehand with it and that is what it's remembered for.

Of the ugly doubly handers I used to really like Nalbandians. He was able to get the sort of angles off it that are more often seen with single handers. Djokovic's BHDTL when he accompanies it with a roar is good too.

Agassi
Warwrinka isnt a slouch either

DH - Connors or Agassi
SH - Wawrinka, Gasquet, Edberg

I swear I can't even swing my arm as fast as Wawrinka even without trying to hit a ball at the same time.

I think most of the important names have been mentioned. It's actually a difficult question to answer in pure "shot" terms. For instance, Gasquet can hit ridiculous winners from way behind the baseline, which I'm not sure anyone else can do on that wing (plenty can hit great passing shots, but none has the ability to leave their opponents stranded at the baseline the way Gasquet's does). However, due to his tactics, etc. his BH is actually a far less effective weapon than Djokovic's or Murray's. Wawrinka a decent shout too.

From the past, Agassi, obviously. Edberg had a sublime BH (OK I'm a bit biased on that one). Borg deserves a shout (hasn't had much of one so far). Nalbandian's BH was an excellent shot of course.

Still, overall I'll give it to Djokovic, maybe doesn't quite have the variety of a few others, but for sheer consistency and devastating effectiveness it's hard to look past.

Do we need to draw a distinction between "best" and "most beautiful"?

I ask because there's a lot of SH backhands being thrown out. And every player in the world today when playing a single hander tries to push them back into that corner as it's very difficult to avoid errors or short shots for the single hander.

On the front foot a single hander looks beautiful. On the back foot it's a weakness. In neither case is it "the icing rather than the cake".

hawkeye wrote:Only the foolishly talented or the foolish would attempt a backhand when they could get their forehand into play. Compared to having a great serve or great forehand it's just the icing rather than the cake. And as such my vote goes to IMO one of the most beautiful shots in the game - Gasquets backhand.

Honorable mention to Federer's backhand. It's not given the credit it deserves as he stubbornly tried to beat Nadal's forehand with it and that is what it's remembered for.

Of the ugly doubly handers I used to really like Nalbandians. He was able to get the sort of angles off it that are more often seen with single handers. Djokovic's BHDTL when he accompanies it with a roar is good too.

Good stuff HE. I don't want you to think I just pick on your points of view.

For me, Agassi. Seemed so effortless. And yet deadly. Watching him return Ivanisovic's serve with it at Wimbo always used to defy the boundaries of what should be possible in a tennis match for me.

Johnyjeep wrote:For me, Agassi. Seemed so effortless. And yet deadly. Watching him return Ivanisovic's serve with it at Wimbo always used to defy the boundaries of what should be possible in a tennis match for me.

That's a very significant point.

I said Novak but overlooked that Agassi operated in the era of fast courts and booming serves.

Hmmmm, this is a tough one...

Interesting how on the backhand we draw a distinction between beauty and effectiveness but on the forehand debate it was all about effectiveness.

My choice would be Agassi for all the reasons discussed, but I'd be pretty happy for Novak to get it. His backhand isn't too shabby.

In response to beauty v effectiveness that is really for you to decide. I think HE made a superb point that in the context of the complete player that the BH might be thought of in less context because of the frequency it is used in a match though some do more than others. Hence why BH is interesting, do you bring the slice debate in as Agassi and Djokovic themselves are not great slicers. Makes it interesting.

I would certainly have Agassi as a certain with Djokovic a close second.

Good calls on Edberg and Borg from Julius/MfC, I think they should be included too. Edberg's going to be in a fair few categories surprisingly, already in the serve and surely he'll make the volley shortlist too! Good to see

Borg was so good all-around that aside from his court speed, nothing stands out massively...but his backhand was very, very efficient and consistent.

I think HE's backhand comment is very flawed (Sorry HE!)

The backhand is less important so we may has well have a pretty shot rather than an effective shot?! I thought we were building the perfect player here?!

Should I point out that a player recently notched up 100 weeks at number 1 by having the backhand as his main weapon?

Should I also point out that said player's backhand is the only shot in the game with any record of blunting the forehand we picked as our perfect forehand?

Should I point out that one of the greatest players ever, with a forehand capable of breathtaking brilliance, has lost significant titles because of having a weaker backhand?

I can't believe the levels of forehand snobbery I'm seeing on here!

Murdoch - Backhand Defender!

Murray for me. I can't ignore the fact neither Novak or Agassi had a decent slice. At its peak, Murray's backhand is rock solid and he can hit it with incredible power. As an all-round shot its the best two-hander I've seen.

With you on that Murdoch.

Together we are the army of the backhand defenders!

BS - Murray should certainly be up there. Even as a Murray fan I would put Novak and Andre slightly ahead though.

Thought Agassi would walk this: Ridiculous hand-eye on the backhand. Would throw in Safin as well, that back hand could get big, as big as any nominee, I feel.

Danny, we must hold the line against this forehand fascism!

If you gave a football player a good left foot and then decided the right foot wasn't as important, you'd end up with Savo Milosevic!

I don't know why people are doing something similar with forehand and backhand.

Marat Safin had a great backhand, also it will never be picked but I like watch Benoire Paires backhand, a guy who actually runs around his forehand with it!

HM Murdoch wrote:

Murdoch - Backhand Defender!

Ha ha! You can defend with your backhand or defend the backhand but you won't stand a chance against a forehand

HM Murdoch wrote:Danny, we must hold the line against this forehand fascism!

If you gave a football player a good left foot and then decided the right foot wasn't as important, you'd end up with Savo Milosevic!

I don't know why people are doing something similar with forehand and backhand.

poor old Savo.

because their forehands are regarded as the two greatest shots in history, Federer and Nadals backhands will always be overlooked. Nadals passing shot backhand is incredible, and Federers backhand flick is a trademark, plus when you add in his slice that makes his backhand more versatile than even Gasquest or Wawrinkas, they have great one handers but not the best slices.

Murray has everything, pace, finesse, and also a great slice which is rare for a double hander these days.

Having said that, Djokovics sliding backhand is still one of my favourite shots in the game though!

Can I suggest Lendl, McEnroe, Laver, Ungur, Hanescu, Ljubicic?

And this guy... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvDWfuGcWzY

(Not Federer ).

Agassi for me. His game was the perfect antidote to the SV dominance of the 90s fast courts and his BH formed an integral part of that game. He could hit hard with maximum disguise and also guide the ball back accurately using the opponents power against him. The short backswing was the only way such a shot could work with the little time he had on the ball during his era of fast courts and he nailed it in a unique way. It was devastating and brought him success that took him to the top. For me it therefore has to be considered the best for building the perfect player.

Djoko, Nadal and Murray are up there fore me also. Not convinced for a gasquet case here, purely due to reliability

The great shots leave certain amount of awe and the sense of impossibility - many a time i remember seeing an Agassi BH return go cross court for a winner before the SV player had taken two steps in. This contradicted the dominant game plan of the time and arguably laid the bedding for the way the game has evolved in the 2000s to the way it is most successfully played today.

some Agassi clips:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3uiZvHN9f8

all are good, but theres some around 5 mins vs Nadal in his losing final in Canada 2005. These probably show a good reference with which to compare to the modern lot.

The BH slice should be a seperate category.

Completely different shot requiring a different grip.

Agassi wins this one, closely followed by Nalbandian, Safin and Djokovic.

Murray - no way, not in a million years. He has a great BH but seldom uses it to great effect. Not aggressive enough.

 

emancipator

emancipator wrote:Agassi wins this one, closely followed by Nalbandian, Safin and Djokovic.

Murray - no way, not in a million years. He has a great BH but seldom uses it to great effect. Not aggressive enough.

 

emancipator

You're ruling Connors out of the top 4?

No, you're right, Connors deserves to up there as does Edberg.

But considering everyone else is using this as more of 'the current/recent best shot is the greatest shot of all time' I thought I'd respond in kind.

For example, not in a million years should the Nadal FH be considered better than the peak Federer FH. Hell, right up to 2012 most people would have gone for the Federer FH. Peak for peak, it's not even close.

Well, I'm pretty sure you can hit a better BH with a modern racket/strings than a Wilson T2000
Maybe the best backhand award should go to the manufacturers

Obviously BH means not only beseline counterpunching shots as it is mostly used today, but also approach shots, slice, dropshots etc. All considered Edberg's has to be considered the greatest bh ever. It was a consistent, powerful shot from the baseline and also a deadly accurate bh slice, when approching the net, often a winner in itself. Edberg won big time in a tough tennis era with a mediocre forehand and that I think says it all.

Honorable mention: Borg, Agassi, Vilas, Federer (prime); Ljiubicic, Kafelnikov, Connors, Djokovic.

Here is a reminder for the newbies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpZnZlXWxQw

For me it is Edberg though I admit I may be biased.

To me, he distanced himself from his contemporaries further than any of the current players, which to me is one argument in his favor.  Also, it is difficult to compare as comparisons against today's era are not like-for-like.

Edberg's backhand was good at answering questions that players were asked at that time - he had great variety and could hit lovely shots with it.  But I am sure he could not rally with it anywhere near as well as a host of today's players could.

On the other hand, someone like Djokovic is mentioned here as a candidate for a potentially best backhand even though his BH slice is mediocre at best and even though he does not have anywhere near the variety that some of the players of old had.  But Nole's backhand is good for what backhands need to do today - he can play excellent power baseline tennis with it.

The difference in what constitutes a desirable backhand now vs then makes it difficult to compare which one is "better" on an objective basis.

The last two days have been an eye-opener vis-a-vis a DHBH and Del Potro. He was killing the so-called current best FH and almost had current #2 in trouble. Murray's comes close, but not as effective.

Danny called it the liquid whip, and I quite agree, but that is a different topic and my senility gets in the way, sometimes.

Del Potro has indeed given us food for thought.

We've seen the "best ever" forehand totally dominated by another forehand and not even able to get into the game.

We've seen the "less important" backhand be a weapon that can punch through against a howitzer forehand.

We've seen the "best tactician" on tour attempt pretty much nothing  against an onslaught of big hitting (well, apart from a total of 8 net approaches).

Juan Martin Del Potro - Myth Buster!

Good though Del Potro's backhand is, I don't think it is quite at the same level as Djokovic and Murray. He did 90% of the damage to Rafa with his forehand. Against Novak, Novak regularly came into the net on the DP backhand, knowing that the big man's backhand pass is relatively weak. I dont think Potro managed to get one backhand pass by him - hence the phenomenal net stats. That strategy would simply be unworkable against Novak or Andy because their backhand passing shots are considerably better. Potro's backhand slice is also relatively ineffective.

I think for me the shortlist would be:

Single-handers:

Edberg
Rosewall
Laver
Korda
Wawrinka

Double-handers

Agassi
Connors
Safin
Djokovic
Murray

I think Summerblues' point above is a very good one.

Edberg had a standout backhand in his time but I can't help feeling it is exactly the kind of shot that would be mauled by Nadal in the modern era.

Likewise, give Novak an old racket and put him in Edberg's time and I expect his backhand would look rather limited in comparison.

I'm finding the backhand much harder to compare across eras than the forehand.

laverfan wrote:The last two days have been an eye-opener vis-a-vis a DHBH and Del Potro. He was killing the so-called current best FH and almost had current #2 in trouble. Murray's comes close, but not as effective.

Danny called it the liquid whip, and I quite agree, but that is a different topic and my senility gets in the way, sometimes.

I was quite proud of liquid whip. Glad you noticed LF.

Danny_1982 wrote:I was quite proud of liquid whip. Glad you noticed LF.

I'm not surprised that whips are a metaphor you use so easily....

HM Murdoch wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:I was quite proud of liquid whip. Glad you noticed LF.

I'm not surprised that whips are a metaphor you use so easily....

Should always talk about what you know Murdoch!

HM Murdoch wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:I was quite proud of liquid whip. Glad you noticed LF.

I'm not surprised that whips are a metaphor you use so easily....

Should always talk about what you know Murdoch!

@Danny..     Happy to see such a comparison.

@HM... What are you saying, HM?      

Is that the only language Danny understands? Where is my whip... CCCCCRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCKKKKKKK.... argh....

BTW... not seen or heard from SoCal for a bit (has me concerned for his well-being), wonder where he is, planning a revolution somewhere?

Danny... are you also in the 'bush' like KR (double-posting) or is it an iStutter?

PS: Or is it the whip...