Henman's style was exciting and beautiful, and sometimes very effective, but just didn't have the consistency and solidity of ground strokes to win a slam,
@@jamesbedukodjograham5508 No it wasnt his competitive drive...he lacked weapons to hurt the opponent to win easy points. Give him a slightly bigger forehand or serve (or both) and he's a 2-3-4 major winner. Give him a Federer like forehand or Sampras like serve and he's a 10x major winner.
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee i agree with that completely. Henman had incredible hand-eye coordination, all-round touch, athleticism and he was so good at reading opponents and using the whole court to gain advantage. Very smart player and excellent volleys. It's just that it's difficult to play that cute game, relying exclusively on precision, when you are under pressure. With a big first serve, I think Henman wins Wimbledon at least three times.
Mentally tough. Not an artist. A meat-and-potatoes player. Similar to Pat Rafter but without Rafters speed and athleticism. Got the most out of his limited abilities. He had no weapons, he was not very athletic. He rarely beat himself but lost when he should: against more gifted players. Would be a good coach
Which says a lot. Becker beat Henman twice in the late 90s despite Boris being well past his prime and peak. Henman was a perfunctory serve and volleyer at best-essentially a journeyman. And his rather average serve and volley game still gave Fed problems. A prime and peaked Becker - a true master of the art of serve and volley-(along with Edberg,McEnroe and Sampras) would have taken Fed to the cleaners.
@@birdoffire983 He was far above a journeyman. A beautifully classic player with supreme volleys. Every bit the volleyer Sampras or Becker was. Also no holes in his game. He just didnt have the weapons....the serve, the forehand, the god gifted power. I agree though...Becker or Sampras would have taken the initiative and given a prime Roger problems on fast courts that he didnt see against the likes of Roddick or Hewitt. Sampras especially...outside of clay...was every bit the mover Federer was and had that serve, and the weapons off the ground.
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee Respectfully acknowledge your opinion. I had to double check the records - I do see that Henman had a good 2004 reaching the semis of the French,Wimby and the US Open. But that would be the only time he would fare well consistently across the majority of the surfaces in one season. Every other year he failed to make a dent on any of the other slams outside Wimby. And specifically with regards to Wimby, I would argue that he had an extra helping hand from the explicitly partisan crowd , who at times would be rather unsporting towards Tim's opponents, many of which were not of the calibre of Becker,Edberg,Mac or Sampras.......to withstand the distractions(clapping during double faults, shouting support during important points ect ect). Goto 3:05:53 of the following video: czcams.com/video/8W7d2J61xz4/video.html It's the match between Haarhuis and Henman at Wimby in 1997.......where the fans cheered Paul's double fault on match point! As for his volleying skills, I stand by my initial remark - they are not bad but ultimately they are still perfunctory - definitly not of the standard of the 4 aforementioned players who dominated Wimby for the best part of 2 decades. Here is Tim getting schooled by Edberg in 1996, literally Stefan's swansong......and despite being well past his prime and peak.....you can see a clear delineation in Edberg's volleying techniques with respect to Henman. czcams.com/video/8HV6ANe4TAY/video.html
@@birdoffire983 Fair enough on the partisan crowd. British crowds are ever polite...until they aren't. They did similar favors for Roger over the years, especially vs Djokovic. Regarding the Edberg match...you're comparing a very young Henman (who would become a much better volleyer in the next 5 years) with one of the two best volleyers in the open era (along with Mac). Neither Sampras nor Becker can lay claim to being as good as Edberg at net (Sampras later in his career might have been knocking on the door of all time great volleys, but in his younger days good, but not great). There was some article from the mid-late 2000's where they asked Federer who's shots he would take if they weren't his and he picked Henman's volleys. Wish I could find it but can't. Anyways that's a pretty good compliment from the guy who was then the dominant force on tour. Anyways, I stand by my view that while I wouldnt put Henman in the McEnroe, Cash, Edberg, Rafter tier, he's up there with Pete and Becker for the totality of his career. It's just the rest of his game was nowhere near as dangerous. Becker and Sampras had huge serves and huge ground games which gave them a lot more free points or a plan B to resort to. Henman didnt have that luxury. He was sort of the little engine that could in that department. No matter...I think we agree that Henman was not of the same calibre as those guys as a total player. For the record comparing to another Brit, i think he'd wipe the floor with Andy Murray at Wimbledon if their careers had overlapped though!
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee Yeah I think I definitely agree on there being a distinction between Edberg and Mac......and then Sampras and Becker.....when it came to volleying prowess. Of course we are ultimately splitting hairs because all of them were exceptional in this department. Becker had a slight stoccatto or step and volley approach(same too with Sampras)......wheras Edberg had a more fluid gesture as he neared the net. But whether it be Edberg,Becker or Sampras, it's that kind of volleying quality that has been sorely missing from the last 20 years of top flight tennis. Maybe I am being a bit harsh on poor ol' Tim, but I take your point, he certainly had competent skills at the net......and certainly better than Murray. Turns out they(Andy and Tim) did meet a few times......and Henman actually beat him on the one occasion. Again, it's a bit difficult to compare given the fact that Henman was nearing the end of his career , whilst Murray was in the ascent with respect to his..........in a not dissimilar way to the old Edberg outsmarting the young Henman, 10 years prior. czcams.com/video/stvBjYTsfrw/video.html I'll give Tim credit.....as he was still trying to serve and volley where he could against these baselining behemoths.......but he was a little too long in the tooth by that point....... in 2005. LOL Murray won the last point with a volley!
Henman’s hand skills were amazing
Just passing through on my journey to watch every Federer match.
I’m doing the same with Sampras then I’ll start on Federer. I have seen most of Federer a live though. Samprasisgoat
@@Wheredyougoimissyouso Very cool man, Hopefully you can find as much footage as you can, good luck with it all.
8:28 23 years old and having only 3 slams but they already put him in the GOAT debate.
This is my GOAT of course ❤
8:35 Already talking about Federer's goat status having only 3 slams.
Great match from Federer!
Henman's style was exciting and beautiful, and sometimes very effective, but just didn't have the consistency and solidity of ground strokes to win a slam,
2004 was Henman's best ever year, one thing he lacked throughout his career was a killer instinct when it counted
@@allthekingshorses7178 Almost everyone respected his serve and Volley ability and he was a great competitor you know.
@@jamesbedukodjograham5508 No it wasnt his competitive drive...he lacked weapons to hurt the opponent to win easy points. Give him a slightly bigger forehand or serve (or both) and he's a 2-3-4 major winner. Give him a Federer like forehand or Sampras like serve and he's a 10x major winner.
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee i agree with that completely. Henman had incredible hand-eye coordination, all-round touch, athleticism and he was so good at reading opponents and using the whole court to gain advantage. Very smart player and excellent volleys. It's just that it's difficult to play that cute game, relying exclusively on precision, when you are under pressure. With a big first serve, I think Henman wins Wimbledon at least three times.
Mentally tough. Not an artist. A meat-and-potatoes player. Similar to Pat Rafter but without Rafters speed and athleticism. Got the most out of his limited abilities. He had no weapons, he was not very athletic. He rarely beat himself but lost when he should: against more gifted players. Would be a good coach
Roger Federer found Tim Henmann a tough but to track back in the early 2000s.
Which says a lot.
Becker beat Henman twice in the late 90s despite Boris being well past his prime and peak.
Henman was a perfunctory serve and volleyer at best-essentially a journeyman.
And his rather average serve and volley game still gave Fed problems.
A prime and peaked Becker - a true master of the art of serve and volley-(along with Edberg,McEnroe and Sampras) would have taken Fed to the cleaners.
@@birdoffire983 He was far above a journeyman. A beautifully classic player with supreme volleys. Every bit the volleyer Sampras or Becker was. Also no holes in his game. He just didnt have the weapons....the serve, the forehand, the god gifted power. I agree though...Becker or Sampras would have taken the initiative and given a prime Roger problems on fast courts that he didnt see against the likes of Roddick or Hewitt. Sampras especially...outside of clay...was every bit the mover Federer was and had that serve, and the weapons off the ground.
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee
Respectfully acknowledge your opinion.
I had to double check the records - I do see that Henman had a good 2004 reaching the semis of the French,Wimby and the US Open.
But that would be the only time he would fare well consistently across the majority of the surfaces in one season.
Every other year he failed to make a dent on any of the other slams outside Wimby.
And specifically with regards to Wimby, I would argue that he had an extra helping hand from the explicitly partisan crowd , who at times would be rather unsporting towards Tim's opponents, many of which were not of the calibre of Becker,Edberg,Mac or Sampras.......to withstand the distractions(clapping during double faults, shouting support during important points ect ect).
Goto 3:05:53 of the following video:
czcams.com/video/8W7d2J61xz4/video.html
It's the match between Haarhuis and Henman at Wimby in 1997.......where the fans cheered Paul's double fault on match point!
As for his volleying skills, I stand by my initial remark - they are not bad but ultimately they are still perfunctory - definitly not of the standard of the 4 aforementioned players who dominated Wimby for the best part of 2 decades.
Here is Tim getting schooled by Edberg in 1996, literally Stefan's swansong......and despite being well past his prime and peak.....you can see a clear delineation in Edberg's volleying techniques with respect to Henman.
czcams.com/video/8HV6ANe4TAY/video.html
@@birdoffire983 Fair enough on the partisan crowd. British crowds are ever polite...until they aren't. They did similar favors for Roger over the years, especially vs Djokovic. Regarding the Edberg match...you're comparing a very young Henman (who would become a much better volleyer in the next 5 years) with one of the two best volleyers in the open era (along with Mac). Neither Sampras nor Becker can lay claim to being as good as Edberg at net (Sampras later in his career might have been knocking on the door of all time great volleys, but in his younger days good, but not great). There was some article from the mid-late 2000's where they asked Federer who's shots he would take if they weren't his and he picked Henman's volleys. Wish I could find it but can't. Anyways that's a pretty good compliment from the guy who was then the dominant force on tour. Anyways, I stand by my view that while I wouldnt put Henman in the McEnroe, Cash, Edberg, Rafter tier, he's up there with Pete and Becker for the totality of his career. It's just the rest of his game was nowhere near as dangerous. Becker and Sampras had huge serves and huge ground games which gave them a lot more free points or a plan B to resort to. Henman didnt have that luxury. He was sort of the little engine that could in that department. No matter...I think we agree that Henman was not of the same calibre as those guys as a total player. For the record comparing to another Brit, i think he'd wipe the floor with Andy Murray at Wimbledon if their careers had overlapped though!
@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee
Yeah I think I definitely agree on there being a distinction between Edberg and Mac......and then Sampras and Becker.....when it came to volleying prowess.
Of course we are ultimately splitting hairs because all of them were exceptional in this department.
Becker had a slight stoccatto or step and volley approach(same too with Sampras)......wheras Edberg had a more fluid gesture as he neared the net.
But whether it be Edberg,Becker or Sampras, it's that kind of volleying quality that has been sorely missing from the last 20 years of top flight tennis.
Maybe I am being a bit harsh on poor ol' Tim, but I take your point, he certainly had competent skills at the net......and certainly better than Murray.
Turns out they(Andy and Tim) did meet a few times......and Henman actually beat him on the one occasion.
Again, it's a bit difficult to compare given the fact that Henman was nearing the end of his career , whilst Murray was in the ascent with respect to his..........in a not dissimilar way to the old Edberg outsmarting the young Henman, 10 years prior.
czcams.com/video/stvBjYTsfrw/video.html
I'll give Tim credit.....as he was still trying to serve and volley where he could against these baselining behemoths.......but he was a little too long in the tooth by that point....... in 2005.
LOL
Murray won the last point with a volley!