PDA

View Full Version : Beginners who did NOT use os rackets


megaman
08-14-2007, 03:22 AM
Calling all beginners who did not start out with the conventional os racket.

Please relay your experiences. Was starting out with a smaller head size great or do you regret that you did?

dave333
08-14-2007, 03:39 AM
102 from wal-mart...

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 03:41 AM
Well, in a galaxy far far away, and before the invention of the whimpy modern day tennis player. We all learned to play on this amazing thing called a "tennis racquet".. Surprised you must be I know. But this magical piece of sporting equipment was made of wood. Too heavy to lift when you were about 4 years old, and had a head size around about 60 inches.... ect ect......

PackardDell
08-14-2007, 04:12 AM
I always played with 95/98 sq inch. Exceptions are when I broke my strings. I then borought the racket from my father. It was about 100 sq inch i think. Could hit great balls with it I must admit.

mrw
08-14-2007, 04:17 AM
Considering I grew up in the wooden racquet days, I very definitely did not use an over size racquet.

sharp*shooter
08-14-2007, 04:20 AM
I started with a 98" slazenger which weighed about 10-11 ounces. Very easy to use.

Mad iX
08-14-2007, 04:27 AM
95" for me. Before that I played badminton and squash so the head size was not a problem for me. The hardest thing was learning to hit "topspin".

andreh
08-14-2007, 04:48 AM
I learned tennis in....that's right...the 80s. All that was available was straight box beam graphite frames with mid size (90 sq.in or less) heads. Or aluminim frames. I think that when I bought my first stick as a kid wood frames were still being sold, although they were not common.

My stick for most part of my childhood was a Wilson Matrix.

I think the results were good. I can do stuff many players today can't do (well). I can play S&V, chip n' charge, slice-attack, hit flat shots etc. This seems to bewilder many modern topspin players.

Char
08-14-2007, 04:51 AM
I started out with a pretty heavy wooden racquet. Does mean pretty much the only racquets I am comfortable with these days are ~95 sq inch players' racquets. Not necessarily a good or a bad thing.

nickb
08-14-2007, 04:53 AM
I started with a pro staff classic....no OS for me.

jjjosh
08-14-2007, 05:03 AM
wilson staff, i believe is it 85-90 head size. Tiny sweetspot so it was frustrating to learn with but I think it helped my game in the long run.

Char
08-14-2007, 05:05 AM
I can play S&V, chip n' charge, slice-attack, hit flat shots etc.

That's my game too. I'm simply happy in that mode. I can hit topspin, but its not the modern whippy style.

Not to imply starting to learn on a mid/mid-plus nowadays would necessarily send you down that path though. Its simply more a function of the way I have always played.

To the OP, I'd probably recommend starting to play on a racquet around 95-100 sq in. Never been a fan of racquets any larger. If you start on a lower powered racquet, its going to teach you by default the technique you need to generate the pace you want while simultaneously learning the game and finding your style. I never saw a problem with that personally, but your mileage may vary and I dont doubt that the initial months would be significantly more challenging.

Craig Sheppard
08-14-2007, 05:27 AM
Calling all beginners who did not start out with the conventional os racket.

Please relay your experiences. Was starting out with a smaller head size great or do you regret that you did?

I started around age 12 with a Dunlop Max 200g. Yes, I got it b/c Mac & Steffi used it, but that's beside the point. It probably wasn't the easiest thing to learn with... shanks, mishits, heavy, not much spin, and not much power. That's what I remember about it (besides it hitting really sweet). It took me a year or two to learn how to hit with it, but it felt really good when I did. You either hit it well or just shanked it. My game became very "low" early on -- I hit very flat with a very small margin of error over the net. Not all attributable to the racket though, but probably some.

I'd like to think learning w/ an 82 sq in frame helped my hand-eye coordination, but I can't go back and re-learn with a 100 sq in, so I can't say for sure. Maybe playing baseball really is what honed my coordination? Would I be a wild hitter if I grew up w/ 100 sq in? Who's to say.

I think if the learning curve doesn't bother you (i.e. can put up w/ all the mishits) and you keep improving, then I think using a smaller frame can help you in some way. If you're not improving much and just getting frusrated, move up to a larger head size.

Nuke
08-14-2007, 05:41 AM
There were no OS racquets when I started playing.

Bengt
08-14-2007, 05:48 AM
I started using both. However, it was the OS that allowed me to learn the Western forehand and one handed topspin backhand. I didn't have the eye/hand coordination and timing to hit those strokes with the narrower racket face of the midsize.

nyc
08-14-2007, 05:52 AM
same here, started with tiny wooden frames, then aluminum....
so: started with 90, then 95 for years, now 97.

Also played squash in my teens, and never had a size issue, if you know what I mean....

nasastevo
08-14-2007, 05:58 AM
The first racket I ever hit with was my Dad's trusty Bancroft woodie. He was so ****ed when came home from work and I had scraped it up on the driveway hittin' balls against the garage... My first racket that I bought on my own was a Wilson aluminum midsize of some type. I think it was called an ACE. I wore that sucker out before I started buying the graphite/composite frames that I collect now. I didn't play with an OS until after college, and still prefer mids over OS's...

Kirko
08-14-2007, 06:59 AM
Considering I grew up in the wooden racquet days, I very definitely did not use an over size racquet.

me too I started out with the kramer auto. 1965 & used that model until 1982. funny near the end of my kramer days a lot of guys had switched to either the prince graphit or alu. pro and I never felt I was disadvantaged. there were even a few guys who were rock solid 6.0 players where I lived in Reno,NV who used wood reg. rackets also, but times change and by 1983 nobody used reg. wood size rackets.

gsquicksilver
08-14-2007, 07:12 AM
started out with the wilson sting 85, then switched to the ps85 about a year or two later. damn, can't believe that was 14 years ago.

SlapShot
08-14-2007, 07:18 AM
I started on a Prince Precision Mono - 80-something SQ in head, and almost no power. Maybe that's why I hit the ball so hard nowadays.

akatim
08-14-2007, 08:26 AM
I also played with wood and then aluminum in the late '70s and '80s. When I returned to tennis this spring OS racquets didn't look or feel right. Even my APD with a head size of 100 feels a bit bulky. 98 feels better to me.

Loco4Tennis
08-14-2007, 09:24 AM
i started with a wooden racquet, for the first 10 years of my life, then i got a handme down from my ant, gave me a 93" head graphite, then started using 98" wilson metal frame when the strings broke, all up until the time when i was able to buy the 110" prokennex

czech09
08-14-2007, 09:28 AM
I started with some walmart racquet. It was about MP size. My first 'real' racquet was a Hyper Hammer 4.0. I'm not sure whether I regret it as I don't know if OS would have helped me. I didn't take any lessons and just really learned the game on my own...so progress was slow at that point.

superstition
08-14-2007, 10:10 AM
I started on a Prince Precision Mono - 80-something SQ in head, and almost no power. Maybe that's why I hit the ball so hard nowadays.
The Mono's specs:

97", 27", 11.5 oz, 12.6" HL, 20 mm, 16x21

jdelcue
08-14-2007, 10:42 AM
I started playing recently, actually, so it's really too soon to tell in regards to all these other posters who have seen the advantages/disadvantages of learning the game with a given head size...

But when I first started playing, I was using a LM Rad OS. That didn't last long, though, as I felt myself wanting to come to the net more often (sorta naturally) and hitting a lot of balls long (probably because I didn't really hit topspin too well -- still not the best at it, but considerably better now)...

Also, the weight bothered me (too light), I wanted to try something more head-light, and the instability really got to me when I was rallying with my friends who know how to play and generate some pace...

Soon thereafter, I picked up a FXP Radical MP Tour. That pretty much solved all my troubles. But about a week after I picked one up used, TW stopped carrying them, and just about everyone who was still carrying them was doing so at 179.99+ -- so I decided to start trying other racquets, too...

Recently picked up a used 9/10 Wilson PS 6.0 95 and added a Babolat leather grip and Wilson overgrip......
All I can say is: :D

Pretty much sticking with the Wilson these days (looking to make it my main stick and become proficient with that beast of a racquet!), but on occasion, when I'm looking for a little more forgiveness and pop to compare to my progress with the Wilson, I'll pull out the 100" Head...

I'm pretty comfortable with both. I think it pretty much boils down to the kind of game you feel inclined to try and play on the courts...

For me, I like a head size in the 90s. But, to be honest, that's not really the primary thing on my list of 'wants' in a racquet...

SlapShot
08-14-2007, 10:53 AM
The Mono's specs:

97", 27", 11.5 oz, 12.6" HL, 20 mm, 16x21

Wow - the head looks a slot smaller than that.

Not bad for a 13 year old to swing, though, eh? ;)

Andres
08-14-2007, 10:57 AM
I started with my dad's customized Head Vilas, when I was 9, with a headsize of 68 and 18.6 oz. Played with it exclusively, until I was 17, when I demoed some modern frames, and fell in love with the ProStaff 6.1. And I've been using it for the past 5 and a half years.

I got lot of mockings when I was a kid and a youngster, being the only one hitting with a woody, while almost everyone used POGs or Prestiges or ProStaffs

And I don't regret a single bit! :D

hjminard
08-14-2007, 11:04 AM
I learned with wood and metal many moons ago, but had a long layoff (20+ years) until recently. Upon my "comeback" two months ago, my skill level had definitely reverted to beginner. Started out with an OS (Head Liquidmetal 8), but became quickly frustrated with that launching pad and demo'd a few "players" racquets and mid-plus tweeners. Ended up with an APD Cortex and couldn't be happier. Still provides some pop but I experienced an immediate increase in control ... leading to an immediate increase in confidence with shot-making.

Perhaps I just had the wrong OS racquet?

johnv_pr
08-14-2007, 01:24 PM
I started with a Head Prestige Classic. I think starting out with a racquet that demands full swings helps the beginner in developing proper technique.

Richie Rich
08-14-2007, 04:09 PM
Well, in a galaxy far far away, and before the invention of the whimpy modern day tennis player. We all learned to play on this amazing thing called a "tennis racquet".. Surprised you must be I know. But this magical piece of sporting equipment was made of wood. Too heavy to lift when you were about 4 years old, and had a head size around about 60 inches.... ect ect......

me too. first racquet was dunlop maxply.

Redflea
08-14-2007, 05:44 PM
me too. first racquet was dunlop maxply.

I learned on woodies as well, in the early 70's. One of my first few racquets was the beloved Maxply woodie. <sigh>

Still enjoy hitting w/one once in a while...but am perfectly happy w/my modern racquet.

My sons both learned on 100"+ racquets...Head LM Rad OS and Head Fire.

es-0
08-14-2007, 05:49 PM
I started playing just a year ago and I started with my parent's old Head Tournament Pro with a 89.5 sq in head. I think it helped quite a bit, I still hit with them on occasion, them and an old wooden Slazenger.

QuietDaze
08-15-2007, 03:59 AM
My dad let us play around with his wooden racquet but when I got my own racquet (which I still play with today) it's a Prince CTS Synergy Mid-Plus. I'm shopping for a new racquet now and can't bring myself to try the big ole OS. They look.....too big. lol

Ronny
08-15-2007, 05:30 AM
98sq inch from babolat

BreakPoint
08-15-2007, 10:38 AM
Started with a 65 sq. in. wood racquet which I used for about 13 years before I switched to the 82 sq. in. Dunlop Max200G, which I used for another 13 years. Then briefly went to a 98, then to a 95, and now back down to a 90. :D

ps60
08-15-2007, 10:40 AM
it's so much easier to learn tennis nowadays.

when i learnt it with my Maxply McEnroe, it took me yrs to sustain a short rally.

VS_Power
08-15-2007, 01:20 PM
i started off with an i.prestige mid.

i demo'd it and bought it because it was the first racket i ever hit a real forehand with... and it felt @#$% good.

to this day it is still my favorite racket, after extensive demoing

so no i have no regrets.

badmice2
08-16-2007, 10:44 AM
i started with a Prince Graphite Lite XB Oversize for about 2-3 months; than my coach took it away from me and made me learn from a wooden racket. After that, i never went back and stayed with a racket that's no bigger than a 98 in...my evolution went something like this...

Graphite Lite XB 110
Jack Kramer Wood
Jack Kramer Graphite
Head Trisys 270 (93)
Wilson Original Prostaff (85)
Head Ti Classic (98)
Dunlop 200g (MW + HM - 95)

Ambivalent
08-16-2007, 10:53 AM
I started with an unknown Sports Authority Head racquet, then ditched it after 2 days when my parent's friend gave me a n6.1 tour 90. Yeah, in my early days, i'd head to the club, all the adults would look at me expectingly seeing the tour 90, and then it'd be total meltdown.

kanjii
08-16-2007, 11:03 AM
I started in the 80s myself with popular baseliners and those racquets...Borg Pro, GTX Pro-T, F200...until the Agassi craze was when I went OS with Donnays and Heads, but went back down with the APDC and PDR which I like a lot better. Took out the GTX a month ago to hit and wow...that was fun!!

Serve em Up
08-16-2007, 11:11 AM
First played a cheap wooden Wilson raquet. The thing had trampoline strings and was a like swinging a log. Moved up to a Wilson Advantage real wood when I got to high school. Don't know what size the head was, surely less than 90sq in.

Gmedlo
08-16-2007, 12:02 PM
An OS racquet was bigger than me when I first started playing:-D

First racquet I played a tournament with was a Wilson Hyper Hammer 5.2 w/ ROLLERS! 95 sq. inch head. But my first racquet that was actually mine (i.e. not father's/brother's) was/were 2 prince O3 Tour OS, but by then I was not a beginner.

MaximRecoil
08-16-2007, 12:10 PM
Biggest racket I've ever owned is a Puma Becker (92 sq. in.). Had a Bancroft Borg wooden racket briefly when I was 7 but didn't do much with it. I got a Wilson Rally midsize aluminum racket when I was 10 and liked that quite well at the time. Got a Puma Becker when I was 12 and I keep going back to it to this day. In fact, I just bought another one in a more appropriate grip size than what I used when I was 12.

Seansaysrawr21
08-16-2007, 06:16 PM
my first stick was that 98 inch Npro which got me pretty far till i decided to go yellow

superstition
08-16-2007, 07:45 PM
The first racquets I used were:

1. A generic woodie from a department store's irregular section. I think it had some warp. I hit tennis balls against a wall a few times with it.
2. A Donnay composite 110 junior racquet. This had no power or stability. I didn't play tennis for many years after I tried it and thought I had no ability at all.
3. A Billie Jean King woodie. This was a friend's racquet. I liked it a lot, even though it had some warp. When the warp became bad, I quit using it.
4. Prince Graphite 110. This hurt my wrist, so I only used it once.

When I started playing regularly, I did have a Wilson Prostaff 6.0 110, but it wasn't the "real" 6.0, it was the light fiberglass widebody. It was the only one I could afford at the time. It was strung with nylon. I could slice well with it, but had trouble keeping other shots in the court. I couldn't hit topspin at all at the time. The handle snapped in two so I got a Prince Precision 730 (longbody Graphite II). It was better but the string pattern is too open so I had trouble directing shots. I got a Prince Mono and a Prince Ripstick, both on closeout. I gave away the Ripstick and played with the Mono. Then I switched to the Prostaff 6.0 85 which I used until this year (although I played with several other racquets sometimes, including a Wilson Advantage woodie, a Seamco Ken Rosewall aluminum, a Head Classic Tour midplus, a Wilson Ultra II standard, a Prince Comp 110, the mono, etc.) I've demoed quite a few other racquets, too.

superstition
08-16-2007, 07:46 PM
Moved up to a Wilson Advantage real wood when I got to high school. Don't know what size the head was, surely less than 90sq in.
It's a standard wood size, not even close to 90. The only Wilson woodies with larger than standard heads are the Legacy and the Jack Kramer Autograph mid. Mid in those days meant 75 sq in, I believe.

The Advantage is a nice racquet.

Sixpointone
08-16-2007, 07:48 PM
I started with a Wood Racquet which was Midsize.

Rafa freak
08-16-2007, 09:57 PM
First racket head graphite edge.

aznspongehead
08-17-2007, 01:47 AM
I started about 13 months ago with a Head Liquidmetal Prestige mid.
Learning tennis with that racket was quite frustrating, my consistency was horrible. As a result I think it affected my overall self-confidence in tennis. A year later, consistency is still the weakest part of my game, even after I've switched to a 98 sq in. racket. I have to really get myself prepared mentally before matches or it'll be a total mess.

To make up for my poor groundstroke results though, I was really motivated to practice serves. I have a good serve (by the standard of others who have played around 1 to 2 years) thanks to that. I am able to pretty consistently hit flat and slice serves.. occasionally I can hit a kick serve but it's not very consistent.. Usually when my serve is on I can hit 10+ aces in a set, and I can force a lot of errors from my the other varsity players on my team. (to give you an idea of how effective it is) I think I wouldn't be half the player I am without my serve...

Another advantage of starting out with a demanding racket is that I think I really have a solid form on all my strokes. I look at some of the other players on my HS team, and their strokes are just strange looking. I'd attribute that to less demanding rackets letting them get away with too much, and since what they were doing was working for them they never bothered to learn the right way to hit the shots. This can hinder future improvements.

I do not regret starting out with a demanding frame. I probably did it back then because of my ego. I wasn't really willing to admit that I needed a "game improvement" racket... I thought it was insulting, haha. I actually went online and specifically looked for rackets labeled as "demanding," with a kind of "stick it to the man" attitude. I think while it gave motivation to improve faster (since a player's racket really lets you know how bad you are by punishing you for your imperfect strokes), it did take a toll on my consistency. I might have gotten used to the idea of hitting balls out so that it doesn't seem as big of a deal...

Thepowerofchoice
08-17-2007, 07:46 PM
I started playing tennis about less than a year ago and my first racquet was a prostaff original 6.0 mid with 85 sq in head. Yes I started with one of the highest demand racquets but I love the way it feels best. I have been playing paddle tennis for the pass 3 years between 3-5 times per week before I ever picked up a tennis racquet so I think that might be the reason why I like the smaller head tennis racquet better since the paddle tennis racquet only has a 45-50 sq in head. I am now using a Prince Spectrum with 90 sq in head and I love it. I've tried many larger heads and I find that anything larger than 95 sq in is very difficult to play (for me). I can only hit one handed backhand well with a smaller head and the thin beam.

Seems like everything I described here is backwards compared to most people. Does it sounds strange or make sense to anyone??? Any input would be great!

10nisDude~
08-17-2007, 08:08 PM
i started with a gamma racquet i think...i was like five...it was like 98 sq. in. then i switch to a wilson roller thing...i started to create my own power at like ten i mean like power for like winners from anywhere on the court. Then i bought a babolat it was nice cuz i had alot of spin and it help control my shots...now the babolat has too much power for me...now im with the wilson ncode 90 many people say i hit the ball very clean so the head size was fine for me...

BreakPoint
08-17-2007, 09:39 PM
I started playing tennis about less than a year ago and my first racquet was a prostaff original 6.0 mid with 85 sq in head. Yes I started with one of the highest demand racquets but I love the way it feels best. I have been playing paddle tennis for the pass 3 years between 3-5 times per week before I ever picked up a tennis racquet so I think that might be the reason why I like the smaller head tennis racquet better since the paddle tennis racquet only has a 45-50 sq in head. I am now using a Prince Spectrum with 90 sq in head and I love it. I've tried many larger heads and I find that anything larger than 95 sq in is very difficult to play (for me). I can only hit one handed backhand well with a smaller head and the thin beam.

Seems like everything I described here is backwards compared to most people. Does it sounds strange or make sense to anyone??? Any input would be great!
Not strange at all and makes total sense to me!

I also hit 1HBH's better with smaller heads and thinner beams. :grin:

scorpion2103
08-17-2007, 10:09 PM
i started out with a head liquidmetal heat.....102sq in
it was alright but back then i thought having a light racquet was the coolest thing out there but i was wrong:(

ced
08-18-2007, 05:28 AM
Xmas 1945 received my first racket , a Harry C. Lee (wood, of course)

Thepowerofchoice
08-18-2007, 06:35 AM
Not strange at all and makes total sense to me!

I also hit 1HBH's better with smaller heads and thinner beams. :grin:

Thank you for your input. I'm new to the message board and have read many of great info from you. I feel better now because many of my friends try to switch me to a bigger racquet and my form breakdown with OS racquet. I guess sometime you need to go by what feels good to you. I'm going to hit with wood racquet today for the first time so that should be fun. I wish I take up tennis sooner (I'm in my late 30's but very fit) because I love it so much...

Salsa_Lover
03-03-2008, 05:51 AM
Not strange at all and makes total sense to me!

I also hit 1HBH's better with smaller heads and thinner beams. :grin:

Me too,

I played when I was 12 on a wooden raquet, the game didn't catched my attention then so I didn't do it for many years.

Then I really started with a nCode 6.1 90 and now I only play with K90s

1HBH and long and fast swing all the way from the beginning.

I picked up once a light 6.2 100 and it feels like a toy raquet to me.

Once you get the feeling of the small head, heavy and hard raquet, you can't go back.

FH2FH
03-03-2008, 06:15 AM
Light and small - 300G (98 s/i). Great control even with fast swings. Now I like more weight behind the ball.

Sentinel
03-03-2008, 06:19 AM
First few days played with an OS. Gave me elbow problems. Shifted to a 98" for 3 weeks. Then bought a 95" (PS 6.0).
Never looked back. Would never play with an OS again. The feel of the PS is just too good.

( I am now even toying with a T2000 - haha - not bad at all. Its 70 inches I hear. Makes my 95 feel like an OS.)

shatoon
03-03-2008, 08:08 AM
I started with and old Dunlop Maxply that belonged to my dad when i was about 9 (i'm 26 now). Then moved onto a Bog standard Head graphite (can't remeber the model though) After this wound up using my coaches PS85 for a while, so although i didn't take it home with me it was my main stick from about the ages of 10 to 12

Inherited a Donnay Cynetic 90 wehn i was about 14 (amazing stick)

Eventually moved to a Yonex Rd-5 when i was about 16 then a Pro Staff 5.1 (not the Surge) Finally after a brief rest from tennis came back to 90 sqi and dont think i'll go back!!!

I'm a firm believer in starting with decent and heavy players sticks. Its the best way to hone your strokes.

Alexio92
03-03-2008, 08:29 AM
My first full length was a 27 inch, 95" prince tt bandit.

jackson vile
03-03-2008, 09:34 AM
Calling all beginners who did not start out with the conventional os racket.

Please relay your experiences. Was starting out with a smaller head size great or do you regret that you did?

First racket I ever picked up and play was LMP+ with NXT Max 17g. Best thing I ever did:)

Ichiryu
03-03-2008, 09:40 AM
My first racquet was some Prince O3 OS, I think it was a 107 or somthing. 1 week later I hated it and bought an APD haha

JacKKyKung
03-03-2008, 10:06 AM
I borrowed a racquet from my friend that i don't know it's DUNLOP 200G MW. God! too heavy for biginner. I strung with wilson stamina @58. But i don't think it's too heavy because it's really smooth. I played with that stick for 3 months then switch to PD+. I thought it's harder to swing than 200G MW due to more head heavy. Now i want it back but my friend had sold it to sum1 i didn't know. Sh*t why didn't i tell my friend that "Sorry Bud, i lost it some where".

Silvermurpher
03-03-2008, 10:06 AM
Began with wood racquet, I'm that old, but then a pretty awful "sporting good store special"... think it may have been Dunlop, an aluminum/magnesium "masquerading" as a graphite/fiber. But it wasn't an oversize, and I could hit with it. My racquets since, largely Head, have been mid or mid-plus (but now "real" ones).

My point here, though...is I think salespeople can do a disservice to beginners by selling them a "super oversized, super power" frame... so the player never learns what real swing and feel are.

I'm thinking of my wife (before I met her)... she bought a racquet in Japan (she was living there)... and it's in the Head Pyramid line from about 14 years ago, absolutely HUGE, and the ball just rockets off of it.

You can play with the thing...but if she had really stuck with tennis (didn't, but...), she would have "grown out of it" within about 5 sessions. It's just a ball-trampoline.

Point being, I think "recommenders" have to be careful not to take the attitude, "You're a beginner, you're weak, you're lame...here's a giant thing you barely have to swing with and it'll go over the net." Anyone with basic coordination and strength is going to need something smaller, more control oriented, pretty darn fast. Or they'll be hitting over the fence...

JacKKyKung
03-03-2008, 10:14 AM
Began with wood racquet, I'm that old, but then a pretty awful "sporting good store special"... think it may have been Dunlop, an aluminum/magnesium "masquerading" as a graphite/fiber. But it wasn't an oversize, and I could hit with it. My racquets since, largely Head, have been mid or mid-plus (but now "real" ones).

My point here, though...is I think salespeople can do a disservice to beginners by selling them a "super oversized, super power" frame... so the player never learns what real swing and feel are.

I'm thinking of my wife (before I met her)... she bought a racquet in Japan (she was living there)... and it's in the Head Pyramid line from about 14 years ago, absolutely HUGE, and the ball just rockets off of it.

You can play with the thing...but if she had really stuck with tennis (didn't, but...), she would have "grown out of it" within about 5 sessions. It's just a ball-trampoline.

Point being, I think "recommenders" have to be careful not to take the attitude, "You're a beginner, you're weak, you're lame...here's a giant thing you barely have to swing with and it'll go over the net." Anyone with basic coordination and strength is going to need something smaller, more control oriented, pretty darn fast. Or they'll be hitting over the fence...

That's TRUE.

I thought i'll play better with Dunlop 200g MW, borrowed racquet. Began with Dunlop, then traveled with modern-racquet, now back to the beginning, Dunlop stick with Modern tennis is my best.

HoboWithARolex
03-03-2008, 10:15 AM
im still a beginner but im using a MP turbo shark and it works fine