What are you talking about, Wawrinka's backhand is praised everywhere nowadays, on basically every social media platform lol

Dude, it is.

Also effectiveness, it was not a weakness for Warwinka. Hence why he defeated prime Djokovic and Federer numerous times

@@nate9198 Nadal as well!!!

@@nate9198 3-23 against Federer who has a supposedly weaker backhand, nothing to be proud about.

goat-mury

He is top 1, not just one of top 3. Way better than Federer and Gasquet. He is the only one who is not afraid of Novak's overload on backhand, while Federer is so prone to that. His offensive backhand is in much higher level than Federer's

@@minhtrinh5981 imo it's somewhat similar to Federer's backhand, but on a lot of steroids, more power and much harder to overload while retaining most of the beauty on the swing.

Exactly with this lethal weapon he should have won more titles.

Yeah he bloomed pretty late in 2013

Stan was very consistent tbh. The problem is that he only started reaching his highest level at 28.

Delpo?? Stan has more titles and grand slams than delpo

@@numbersindia5312 Wrong, Delpo has more titles than Stan.

False. Look closely or in slow motion.

😎😎😎 pre 2017 roger bh was just not good enough, that was his weakness

All this loop winded answering, NO roger doesn’t have a bh as good as stan. If Roger had stan’s bh, he would have won at least 5 more slams, if not 10 more

@@numbersindia5312 that's not true though. Wawrinka can't flick or half volley to save his life which Roger can. You think without that prestine ability he would have won anything with just his forehand?

@@TvRFReloadedjust forehand?? Are you a tennis player?? Not to brag, but i am a usta 5.0, roger has practically the best serve fh volley, early take, run around inside out shots, there is a lot in his game that made him with a weak bh, but that doesn’t mean his pre 2017 bh was ok, flick bh, cmon, that worked with sub standard players, not with the best. Again, he was repeatedly bullied on his bh side and his flick or half volley did not help him, while they look ok, his bh would barely hold up for more than 4-5 straight baseline rallies, if he had stan’s technique on the bh and the upper body strength to pull it off, i really doubt if nadal and novak would have even beaten him once

@@numbersindia5312 well it was basically me just pointing out the flaw in your argument. All good and well that stan has incredible technique and upper body strength. But he doesn't posses any of the defensive ability Roger has on the backhand side and if you are going to ask me if i play, then surely, as someone who plays at a decent level, you would know just having a powerful backhand isn't going to cut it. Or else Stan would have definitely won more than 3 slams 1 measly masters title. Don't forget besides Novak, Roger has the most wins against Rafa of any other player. Nadal bullied Roger on clay while picking and choosing his battles off it and thus got into Roger's head. Stan has only 1 real win over Rafa and that was against the worst version of him in 2015. That 1 set in the AO final means fuck all tbh. Just look at their 2017 RG final. That was peak wawrinka getting a beating similar to Roger's 2008 defeat. More variables come into play with their backhands and Federers backhand is far more useful for varying situations hence his overall success against all the different generations he faced.

Also his GTM

His bh just isn’t anywhere near as effective though.

@@louisjones5974 depends on the matchup

It's still the best one hander in history.

Most powerful is Thiem. Stan has great placement, but I don't know if it's physically possible to generate more power than Dominic. He is like a spring loaded whip that unloads on the ball

Agree 💯... Federer was much more versatile

Federer??? Federer's bh has always been his weakness

@@elektrik_exekutioner6822 So....Federer's weakness is still stronger than Wawrinka's strength 😂 Honeslty Federer had one of the best backhands too

@@geemy9675 That's bullshit. Federer's bh was mid-tier for most of his career.

@@geemy9675 Federer's backhand was the reason that he lost to Nadal else he was better than Nadal in every aspect. On his comeback in 2017, his backhand was massive improvement and Nadal couldn't cope up with him in AO.

Federer has a great backhand with super variety but it had a tendency to break down under constant pressure because no one go go after his forehand.

You may be correct... Gustavo or Roger for sure

I agree. Gasquet's backhand is even more devastating than Stan's, the problem is that he hasn't won anything and thus he has far less epic moments.

@@MikeHammerForEverYou only have to look at the last point shown in this very video that puts it in a nutshell: Wawrinka ends the match / wins the tournament by hitting his signature shot, the backhand down the line. Gasquet's backhand - despite its talent oozing beauty - also lacked one key ingredient: Stan's sturdy build & inherent body strength.

Gasquet's backhand looks nice but is very attackable because most of the time he shanks it half-high into the middle of the court.

@@elektrik_exekutioner6822 lol ok, the pro tennis player with one of the most highly regarded strokes in history “shanks most of his backhands”. Do you have any magic beans for sale btw? I’ll take them all 🤡

@@Wildwielder look up Gasquet 103 mph backhand. I’ve never seen Wawrinka hit it that hard. That Gasquet opts for more topspin over pace most of the time doesn’t mean his backhand is worse, if anything he is better able to construct points with it than Wawrinka because of that. But he can match Wawrinka for power if he chooses to