Strokes that would be a disaster today...

[Luxilon Borg]

I think there are a bunch strokes that were owned by legendary players that would never get by today.

The first few that come to mind are:

-Edberg forehand

-Courier backhand

-Borg volley

-Gerulitus second serve

-Berustagui back hand

One I am on the fence about:
Graf back hand (only because she never came over it in matches)

Your thoughts and other strokes you think would not make it are welcomed.

 

[shawnbm]

The Connors FH against a Federer or Murray crosscourt biting slice. Ouch!

 

[brokenshoelace]

The Edberg forehand sticks out to me. He was such an elegant player with a beautiful game and a very appealing one handed backhand, but the forehand would be a major liability today.

I think Wilander's entire game would struggle today taken as it was back then. He moved well, was incredibly smart, but didn't particularly have a strong weapon.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The Connors FH against a Federer or Murray crosscourt biting slice. Ouch!

Yes, it would be rough going. But JC always seemed to find a solution. I think the heavy top would also be an issue.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The Edberg forehand sticks out to me. He was such an elegant player with a beautiful game and a very appealing one handed backhand, but the forehand would be a major liability today.

I think Wilander's entire game would struggle today taken as it was back then. He moved well, was incredibly smart, but didn't particularly have a strong weapon.

agree about Mats. basically a very clever pusher.

Edberg's forehand was an unmitigated disaster. Shovel city.

 

[britbox]

I'd agree with Edberg, but I did read Sampras' book which offers an insight into all of his rivals and he said that while Edberg's forehand didn't appear particularly good, it was much more effective than it got credit for.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

I'd agree with Edberg, but I did read Sampras' book which offers an insight into all of his rivals and he said that while Edberg's forehand didn't appear particularly good, it was much more effective than it got credit for.

I think Edberg's forehand was so bad sometimes it was "good" because it came off his racket in very awkward ways. But really it was a terrible stroke.

 

[shawnbm]

The Connors FH against a Federer or Murray crosscourt biting slice. Ouch!

Yes, it would be rough going. But JC always seemed to find a solution. I think the heavy top would also be an issue.

yes, Jimbo often did find a way--relentless attacking fiend that he was. Oddly, I don't think the topspin bothered him that much. To me, his biggest liability was the lack of free points off of his service. His gave him nothing and he had no advantage to serving, until about 1981 or so when he clearly added some mph to it.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The Connors FH against a Federer or Murray crosscourt biting slice. Ouch!

Yes, it would be rough going. But JC always seemed to find a solution. I think the heavy top would also be an issue.

yes, Jimbo often did find a way--relentless attacking fiend that he was. Oddly, I don't think the topspin bothered him that much. To me, his biggest liability was the lack of free points off of his service. His gave him nothing and he had no advantage to serving, until about 1981 or so when he clearly added some mph to it.

Agree. The reason Jimbo's serve was not a bigger liability was that he was a lefty. Even a weak, spinny serve is difficult to take advantage of. Very much the same with Nadal. If he was righty that serve would be among the worst in the top 50.