What do you guys prefer?
WW has more spin, and Classic is a bit better for winners.
Do you alternate and use it occasionally in certain situations?
????:)
Printable View
What do you guys prefer?
WW has more spin, and Classic is a bit better for winners.
Do you alternate and use it occasionally in certain situations?
????:)
Tentative, or returning possible high bouncers, WW to slow the pace, add some topspin, to keep it short of the baseline.
Aggressive, go flat as you can to make it go as fast as you can to make winners.
You play both each match, so choose.
IMO, the Classic is NOT better for winners. Why? Because it has very little spin. You can give a WW winner attempt MUCH more oomph, and still keep it in. Plus, it'll flatten out just as much as the classic if you hit it hard enough. It'll also be harder to get back even if your opponent reaches it, since they might as well be returning a shot put. IMO, the WW is the forehand to learn, and the forehand to use in all situations.
^Agreed, it takes a lot of concentration to hit it, and when you get 80 mph per hour ball machines coming at you, you tire pretty quickly. (I'm saying this by experience)
I use the WW finish about half the forehands, and classic when I want the ball to go fast without expending my energy. Both are useful, the WW for it's higher bounce and more spin, while the classic low followthru for it's faster moving ball.
I don't think you can consistently supply enough energy to always hit your hardest while keeping the ball in play, so both AND a defensive slice is needed.
We don't all have Nadal's energy and physique, and notice he is starting to break down.
Both good strokes. I recommend hitting the heavy spin forehand for rallying and working the point and then when you get the easier shot or the setup shot, flatten it out a bit and extend toward the target more. Nadal hits many forehand winners with his "windshield wiper" forehand. It is really up to you. Both work great.
I'll dare say that the effort and effectiveness relies a lot on your racquet. I usually play with a 320 gram racquet, and i can hit WW forehands for hours on end without getting tired. However, if i switched to my old 265 gram, i know from experience my arm would be out for the count within 30 mins, perhaps because with the heavy racquet, i force myself to generate pace with ALL of my body instead of just whipping the racquet around with my arm.
And IMHO, a good WW forehand is worth two good classic forehands, because on clay, against a 1-handed backhand, it's bloody murder :D
Nah, on clay, against TommyHaas's slice backhand, you'd get owned and gobbled up.
Probably on clay, against a GIRL like SteffiGraf, you'd get owned and breakdown.
You just don't play anyone good with a good sliced backhand!:eek::eek:
Which wouldn't be because of their backhands, just the fact that they are both world class players - Nadal (who i detest, do not mistake me for a fan of that moaning, groaning THING) gobbles one, and would gobble the other, regularly.
I just find him boring. He's like Wozniacki, all fighter, zero showman.
I'd rather watch horrible sportsmen like Gonzo and Safin any day, or better yet, Santoro (who, given, was a fantastic sportsman), because they actually do interesting stuff. All the time. Nadal just gets the fuzzy yellow thing back over the net.