Interesting article on Fed backhand

[stroke]

The Federer Backhand That Finally Beat Nadal

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal first met on court in 2004, and they contested their first Grand Slam final two years later. The head-to-head has long skewed in Rafa’s favor: Entering yesterday’s match, Nadal led 23-11, including 9-2 in majors. Nadal’s defense has usually trumped Roger’s offense, but after a five-set battle in yesterday’s Australian Open final, it was Federer who came out on top. Rafa’s signature topspin was less explosive than usual, and Federer’s extremely aggressive tactics took advantage of the fast conditions to generate one opportunity after another in the deciding fifth set.

In the past, Nadal’s topspin has been particularly damaging to Federer’s one-handed backhand, one of the most beautiful shots in the sport–but not the most effective. The last time the two players met in Melbourne, in a 2014 semifinal the Spaniard won in straight sets, Nadal hit 89 crosscourt forehands, shots that challenges Federer’s backhand, nearly three-quarters of them (66) in points he won. Yesterday, he hit 122 crosscourt forehands, less than half of them in points he won. Rafa’s tactics were similar, but instead of advancing easily, he came out on the losing side.

Federer’s backhand was unusually effective yesterday, especially compared to his other matches against Nadal. It wasn’t the only thing he did well, but as we’ll see, it accounted for more than the difference between the two players.

A metric I’ve devised called Backhand Potency (BHP) illustrates just how much better Fed executed with his one-hander. BHP approximates the number of points whose outcomes were affected by the backhand: add one point for a winner or an opponent’s forced error, subtract one for an unforced error, add a half-point for a backhand that set up a winner or opponent’s error on the following shot, and subtract a half-point for a backhand that set up a winning shot from the opponent. Divide by the total number of backhands, multiply by 100*, and the result is net effect of each player’s backhand. Using shot-by-shot data from over 1,400 men’s matches logged by the Match Charting Project, we can calculate BHP for dozens of active players and many former stars.

* The average men’s match consists of approximately 125 backhands (excluding slices), while Federer and Nadal each hit over 200 in yesterday’s five-setter.

By the BHP metric, Federer’s backhand is neutral: +0.2 points per 100 backhands. Fed wins most points with his serve and his forehand; a neutral BHP indicates that while his backhand isn’t doing the damage, at least it isn’t working against him. Nadal’s BHP is +1.7 per 100 backhands, a few ticks below those of Murray and Djokovic, whose BHPs are +2.6 and +2.5, respectively. Among the game’s current elite, Kei Nishikori sports the best BHP, at +3.6, while Andre Agassi‘s was a whopping +5.0. At the other extreme, Marin Cilic‘s is -2.9, Milos Raonic‘s is -3.7, and Jack Sock‘s is -6.6. Fortunately, you don’t have to hit very many backhands to shine in doubles.

BHP tells us just how much Federer’s backhand excelled yesterday: It rose to +7.8 per 100 shots, a better mark than Fed has ever posted against his rival. Here are his BHPs for every Slam meeting:
Match RF BHP 2006 RG -11.2 2006 WIMB* -3.4 2007 RG -0.7 2007 WIMB* -1.0 2008 RG -10.1 2008 WIMB -0.8 2009 AO 0.0 2011 RG -3.7 2012 AO -0.2 2014 AO -9.9 2017 AO* +7.8 * matches won by Federer
Yesterday’s rate of +7.8 p

[don_budge]

[h=1]
Federer’s backhand is neutral: +0.2 points per 100 backhands. Fed wins most points with his serve and his forehand; a neutral BHP indicates that while his backhand isn’t doing the damage, at least it isn’t working against him.

This is the article condensed down to two sentences. I describe my tactics to a pupil in condensed form..."I play tactically with my backhand and try to play good defense or neutral shots. I wait until I get the ball on my forehand and try to be aggressive whenever possible."

There is just one question I have about this backhand hype...how has the bigger equipment changed his grip. I'll wager a million bucks (which I don't have) and say that he has strengthened it somewhat. Peter Fleming said as much yesterday during the Sock match. Interesting how Federer took the Sock forehand out of play.

Federer's serve and forehand have improved at least as much as his backhand has. But I repeat myself.

[stroke]

I was not surprised that Agassi had a "whopping 5.0" BHP Metric. He was such a ball striker off both sides. Kei is in that mold I think. Fed at AO at 7.8. as Dick Enberg might have said, oh my.

[don_budge]

I was not surprised that Agassi had a "whopping 5.0" BHP Metric. He was such a ball striker off both sides. Kei is in that mold I think. Fed at AO at 7.8. as Dick Enberg might have said, oh my.

Oops...I actually missed that when I read it. That is impressive.

[don_budge]

Stan Wawrinka's backhand grip...

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/wawrinka-thiem-indian-wells-2017-thursday

Roger Federer's backhand grip...

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/federer-nadal-indian-wells-2017-wednesday

How do they compare? There was another picture in another article...oh here it is:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2017/03/roger-federer-racquet-change-backhand-rafael-nadal-indian-wells/64840/

Nobody has bothered to respond to my inquiries about the grip...I suspect that the larger equipment allows him shut down the face of the racquet when he needs to like the picture in the last article.

Anyone?

[don_budge]

I wonder if Roger Federer might just be a threat at Roland Garros with the ability to handle the higher balls more efficiently and less defensively.

[stroke]

I think it is very possible that Roger is so good that he can make very slight adjustments to a stronger BH grip when he feels the necessity to do so. I am still thinking his BH grip, like Dimitrov, is more toward the Continental than Stan, but who knows? As far as French Open, I cannot see him winning it, but I would not be surprised if he was the oddsmakers favorite to win Wimbledon.

[arturohernandez]

Interesting idea about the grip from don_budge. It could be a slight change. I see the difference in that he used to hit a very orthodox backhand most of the time. Yesterday, I saw a couple of instances where was hitting balls up high on his backhand and not stepping in but actually looping it back.

He was defending incredibly well. Before it seemed like he was always shortening points.

The only question is how he would fair against Djokovic. Could Novak attack the backhand and put pressure on Fed?

But I think that Novak has hit his 30s and that the rest of his tennis playing days will be like Nadal's.

At this point I would not put anything out of Fed's reach. He is really playing with no pressure.

No one thought he would win another Major. Roland Garros is not out of reach at this point.

Mentally, he is really fresh.

Here is a quote from tennis.com this morning.

“What I don’t want to do,” he said on Saturday, “is overplay and just get tired of traveling and tired of just playing tournaments.”

“I want to play, if people see me, that they see the real me and a guy who is excited that he’s there. So that’s a promise I made to myself that if I play tournaments that’s how my mindset has to be and will be.”

[bdole]

To that end, I think he ought to sit out Miami this week and recover. Hardcourt matchplay cannot be too forgiving on the body in one's mid-thirties.

The commentators seemed to be suggesting the improved backhand was due to stepping in and taking the ball earlier, as opposed to equipment or technique changes. I myself would surmise it is technique, and that he and Ljubicic drilled extensively on it during his layoff until he had a better feel for the shot in defensive situations.

[arturohernandez]

I think it is both. Ljubicic had a very good backhand and might have done his homework about how to improve Roger's backhand. My sense is that he does not come across the ball as violently as he used to. He used to almost touch his shoulder blades. Now he seems to come up the ball more and the finish is not as extreme as it was with the 90 in frame. Fed has stated at the new frame is too powerful. But in this case the extra power has given him a lot more options under duress.

[stotty]

Roger's backhand grip seems to be further behind the handle than in his earlier days. This might be a natural progression (maybe subconscious or deliberate) of moving to a bigger frame. I remember watching Federer play Nadal in the 2008 Wimbledon from just 10 rows back and noticing just how conservative his backhand grip seemed compared to other pro's. His grip has definitely moved around quite a bit since then. The amazing thing for me is how flat he is hitting some of those backhands recently. The man has insane feel and ball control...the two qualities don't always go hand-in-hand.

But, yes, I blame the racket...and so does Federer by all accounts. The bigger surface area has made all the difference and did from day one of using the bigger frame. He volleys and serves better with it too. His second serve seems to have more work on it and he misses fewer volleys than he used too. The bigger frame has visibly helped his low forehand volley, which for me has always been his weakest shot (an audacious comment I know...how can I call one of Roger's shots weak).

[don_budge]

Roger's backhand grip seems to be further behind the handle than in his earlier days. This might be a natural progression (maybe subconscious or deliberate) of moving to a bigger frame. I remember watching Federer play Nadal in the 2008 Wimbledon from just 10 rows back and noticing just how conservative his backhand grip seemed compared to other pro's.

Let's have a look. Maybe we can detect something here Dr. Watson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IOjmN_ZAbM

[don_budge]

Ivan Ljubicic...The Racquet and The Grip

To that end, I think he ought to sit out Miami this week and recover. Hardcourt matchplay cannot be too forgiving on the body in one's mid-thirties.

The commentators seemed to be suggesting the improved backhand was due to stepping in and taking the ball earlier, as opposed to equipment or technique changes. I myself would surmise it is technique, and that he and Ljubicic drilled extensively on it during his layoff until he had a better feel for the shot in defensive situations.

I think it is both. Ljubicic had a very good backhand and might have done his homework about how to improve Roger's backhand. My sense is that he does not come across the ball as violently as he used to. He used to almost touch his shoulder blades. Now he seems to come up the ball more and the finish is not as extreme as it was with the 90 in frame. Fed has stated at the new frame is too powerful. But in this case the extra power has given him a lot more options under duress.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...anceFront1.pct

Conventional wisdom might surmise that it would be wise to sit out Miami this week...but on the other hand, strike when the iron is hot! Hot it is...Roger Federer has bagged an Australian Open and an Indian Wells Championship in two out of three tries (loser in Dubai). He's got it going on so he must proceed...without caution. He should go for it now...this week could be a huge week with the other two pretenders out of action. The draw sheet is wide open. With his newfound "ownership" of Rafael Nadal he must clear the Argentine hurdle and march!

Stepping in and taking the ball earlier strongly suggest a grip change to me...maybe nothing discernible to the average shmoe. But I strongly suspected a change in the offing when he changed to the new equipment.

In order to step in and take it early he has to shut down the racquet face and feel like he can take it through the path of the ball as it leaves his racquet. Additionally he seems to be able to flatten out the higher ball and at the same time "tee off" on the lower ball by lowering the racquet head below the ball. Even more dramatically so than he used to with the old equipment.

It's interesting what just that much difference can make in the confidence of a stroke. Tilden could have cut his arduous winter in half if he had just switched to the Prince Graphite when he went indoors in 1920 to beef up his backhand from his chapter of "The Value of Intensive Practice" in the Bible of Tennis "Match Play and the Spin of the Ball". Federer seems to have taken a page out of the Tilden book as well as he used the time off for his "injury" to beef up his game. It's amazing how as my dear old tennis coach used to say..."The chain is only as strong as it's weakest link". Federer by doing a little "nip and tuck" throughout his game has come out smelling like a rose.

I can understand how all of the attention is drawn to the backhand and it makes me very happy if it only just validates my teaching paradigm. You know...William Tilden is the book. Richard Gonzales is the model with the Don Budge backhand. Harry Hopman is the coach. Roger Federer is the living proof. Federer by beefing up the backhand connects the dots way back to Richard Gonzales who's only discernible weakness was his backhand. Roger in the process had more or less corrected this tiny flaw in the puzzle and strengthened the chain of his game immeasurably. The one thing that is beyond my comprehension is his incredible fitness and quickness. Oh...never mind.

auturohernandez throws us another clue when he mentions his new "Brain"...Ivan Ljubicic. Take a look a Ljubicic's backhand and compare it to that of Stefan Edberg's. This may have been a weakness in the Edberg coaching influence. Ljubicic brings the modern backhand technique whereas Edberg learned his tennis in the classic game and applied himself in the transition game. That era between the classic and the modern game. It was era when grips were evolving to the new equipment and new court engineering.

Yes...it only makes sense that Roger Federer has beefed up the grip on his backhand in order to handle the high ball and to punish the short ball with flatter trajectories. It all makes sense...deep inside the Gold Mine paradigm. If you know what I mean.

But don't kid ourselves regarding the backhand. While that may have been the most obvious of the "weak links" in the Federer composite game it his relative strengths that have likewise strengthened and I am talking about the whole ball of wax. The serve with the complimentary tactics is the best in the game. Likewise the forehand...it is tough to say that there is a better forehand out there pound for pound. There may be "bigger" forehands or serves out there but none that have the versatility and tactical striking capability. The backhand now lines up like a duck in a row with the serve and the forehand. We haven't even mentioned the play in the forecourt which gives the Federer game the aura of invincibility now. His volleys are much more secure and even his approach game is more solid.

Yeah...I say strike while the iron is hot. I sure hope he shows up to play Del Potro and this is another chance for him to showcase the "new" beefed up backhand. Along with the myriad of other shots...and strokes!

[arturohernandez]

Really nice take on Fed as a package. He might have been TOO good in his prime to change this much. It's as if he could compensate for his slight weakness with all the other parts of his game. But losing a step and not being as explosive led him to reconstitute his game. I think this serves as a parable for all players that want to improve and get better.

Think of how Novak improved his serve, how Nadal tinkered with his game. Murray has worked incessantly not just to practice more but to bring whatever is necessary to play better.

It requires change and accepting that good can always be better.

Sometimes a certain configuration gets players so far but eventually they need to reshuffle things and adapt.

Fed is perhaps not just the GOAT but also the GAAT. The greatest adapter of all time...

[don_budge]

Relative Strengths and Weaknesses of the Roger Federer Game...The Inconvenient Truth About Racquet Size

What a match. Federer versus Kyrgios. Too bad these two aren't the same age. What a rivalry this could be. It has the possibilities. I like the contrast in personalities. The white light of Roger Federer versus the brooding darkness that surrounds Nick Kyrgios. It doesn't make him bad necessarily either. Even the behavior has its roots in the evolution of the person. We don't know the circumstances. Let's not be too judgmental. Make allowances...for the other man.

It was a psychological drama. One that was written in the cosmos for our examination. To learn from and to grow from. By example. To watch Roger under those circumstances and under the physical, psychological and EMOTIONAL strain we can surmise that he was being tested as only competitive tennis can test a human being...on every level of humanness. Did he pass? Yes...with flying colors. I really admire the guy and how he keeps his cool and his composure. I was happy to see him become reduced to his inner "William Tell" and fight from the bottom of his being. Like an animal. Resisting the ultimate fate. Death to a younger, stronger and faster predator. A match like that can be a last hurrah. What can be left after you fight down to the last of your DNA? Not much...unless you are Roger Federer. He might be getting an assist...a boost. But it's only speculation that we will never be privy too. There are secrets...and then there are secrets on top of secrets.

Regarding the relative strengths and weaknesses and the relationship of racquet size...please consider the following. Much of the attention has been focused on the improvement of his drive backhand and it is my theory that the larger racquet face allows Roger to strengthen his grip in order to do a number of things that help him on that side. Number one...it allows him to take the ball higher and therefore earlier. This is a key considering that his mobility must be somewhat on the decline (although you would never know it) and if such mobility is on the decline then he must take the ball earlier so he doesn't have to cover as much court. At the same time his slice backhand was a key in his match with the younger, stronger and faster Kyrgios...it kept him in points and it changed the pace and spin of the ball. The match was so close that it is hard to attribute what the mitigating factors were in the difference between winning and losing...but it comes down to intangibles. These can come and go in the wink of a young girls eye.

The Federer serve was a work of art. As in the Berdych match and every other match we have witnessed since his remarkable comeback the perfect motion holds up under pressure and as a matter of fact...it gets a bit better under pressure. The perfect motion allows him to serve with enough speed, with acute precision and a variety of spin. When it comes down to a tense situation he just falls back on the motions perfection and lets it work its magic. He even has a bit of reserve power because he is not serving at full machine all of the time. He serves at the appropriate speed that is designed to get the job done...efficiently. With a minimum of friction. Energy saved is energy in the tank.

For me the biggest mitigating factor is the forehand and more specifically...the reverse crosscourt (inside out to most). You can throw in the reverse down the line (inside in?) too as it is the threat of this shot that makes the reverse crosscourt so deadly and so involved in so many points. This tactic of playing his strength (the forehand) into the relative weakness (the backhand) of his opponent is what often gives him the advantage in any given point or any given rally. He is constantly setting the table with shot and once he gets this one on his racquet he really ups the ante and increases the pressure on his opponent. The forehand in general is the real weapon...combined with the serve...in the Federer game. Now that the backhand is in place to the point where is ability to play good solid defense on that side he has increased his overall capability to wreak havoc on his opponents game. Tactically speaking. Here we have it...technique is a means to the end and not the end itself. Tactics are the end...the end that justifies the means.

When the ball gets over on the forehand side of the court in the Federer paradigm things get even more dicey for the hapless opponent. When he goes down the line aggressively he isn't fooling around. He is playing his strength directly into the relative weakness of his opponent but his ace in the hole from that side of the court is his cross court forehand which he can play aggressively in a number of ways. Once he plays aggressively then he has opened up the other side of the court on his opponents backhand and he often will be able to get the reverse crosscourt forehand but now he has a suped up backhand that can be played much more aggressively than the Federer of before.

The serve return game of Federer is now a completely different animal as well. No longer if the backhand a source of weak top spinned balls to the middle of the court. Now Roger is taking the ball early here (another benefit of a strengthen grip) and from the deuce side of the court he has started to exploit a favorite doubles game return of serve. Instead of feeling that he must run around his forehand he merely steps in and takes the ball early and drives it reverse crosscourt into his opponents forehand side. Most of the modern players are hitting big serve and immediately "cheating" a bit to hit the big forehand followup shot on the second ball. Roger is taking this tactic out of play at times which is just another way of him mixing up the play and never allowing his opponent the luxury of getting his feet firmly under him.

A couple of thoughts.