PDA

View Full Version : Is the k90 really going to be discontinued soon?


Pages : [1] 2

jakshemash
01-08-2008, 12:56 PM
I was looking through another thread in this section and one of the guys said that he read here that the k90 was being discontinued.

Please say it aint so.:cry:

samster
01-08-2008, 01:02 PM
You are kidding, right?

ChipNCharge
01-08-2008, 01:04 PM
I was looking through another thread in this section and one of the guys said that he read here that the k90 was being discontinued.

Please say it aint so.:cry:

Don't worry. I'm sure Wilson will soon release another 90" frame for the posers.

CAM178
01-08-2008, 01:04 PM
Don't worry. I'm sure Wilson will soon release another 90" frame for the posers.
Posers? WTF does that mean?

BaselinePlaya
01-08-2008, 01:39 PM
Posers? WTF does that mean?

Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

Ferrari1190
01-08-2008, 01:51 PM
i dont their going to discontinue it, it just came out. i mean the ncode line is still here after all this time

sargeinaz
01-08-2008, 01:54 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

Lol you sound bitter. While I agree that many people aren't good enough for the K90, if thats what they want to use then whats it to you, me or anyone else? If they like using it, because of Fed or not, and are having fun then it's all good to me.
________
N02 Vaporizer (http://no2vaporizers.com)

BaselinePlaya
01-08-2008, 01:57 PM
Lol you sound bitter. While I agree that many people aren't good enough for the K90, if thats what they want to use then whats it to you, me or anyone else? If they like using it, because of Fed or not, and are having fun then it's all good to me.

I was just answering his question about what a 'poser' is - to me most K90 users are textbook posers IMO.

BounceHitBounceHit
01-08-2008, 01:59 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

Allow me to suggest you sign up to play some of these posers on Jo11y's tennis board and let us know the results................ ;) CC

BaselinePlaya
01-08-2008, 02:09 PM
I'd love to!!! If only any of them were in MN!

BreakPoint
01-08-2008, 02:09 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?

BreakPoint
01-08-2008, 02:11 PM
I was just answering his question about what a 'poser' is - to me most K90 users are textbook posers IMO.
Let me take a wild guess. You weren't able to handle a K90, right? Thus, anyone else using one must be a "poser", right?

drakulie
01-08-2008, 02:15 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

I see just as many "posers" using babolats, heads, and prince frames. Although I hardly ever see anyone using Volkl. :)

RoddickistheMan
01-08-2008, 02:15 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

Yeah k90 is a great racquet one of the best out now. Dont call people posers if you havnt even seen most k90 owners actually playing with one.

AlpineCadet
01-08-2008, 02:24 PM
Correct. The k90 is going to be discontinued, in a few years.

JackSkellington
01-08-2008, 02:28 PM
I'd love to!!! If only any of them were in MN!

I'll fly you out and play you with a ps85/k90/whatever. If you lose you pay for your own flight. If I lose, I'll pay for you.

drakulie
01-08-2008, 02:30 PM
Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale

Interesting. Which for sale section are you looking at? Here are the facts, not rhetoric:

2 K90 (the only 2 for sale on the entire first page)
6 Babolat Pure Drive Plus

1 pair Nike Oscillate size 8 (guess the shoe size was too small). What a poser. :roll:

2 Head LM prestige mids
2 Head FXp mid plus
1 Microgel extreme pro
1 Babolat Pure Storm
1 POG OS
2 Wilson N95
1 Babolat Aero Strom
1 T-Fight 360
1 T-Fight 325
1 LM Instinct
1 Fischer M pro

AgassiGuy23
01-08-2008, 02:39 PM
Let me take a wild guess. You weren't able to handle a K90, right? Thus, anyone else using one must be a "poser", right?

I know I couldn't handle the K90, I didn't need to spend the money and buy it to find out... I'm going off the the 10 or so guys I beat last summer who obviously weren't suited for the K90. But hey it looked cool in their hands- I'll give them that.

BaselinePlaya
01-08-2008, 02:48 PM
I can't believe how many of you took offense to my definition of a poser- I apologize to all of the Roger Federer wannabes out there - epescially you BreakPoint!

drakulie
01-08-2008, 02:50 PM
I'm going off the the 10 or so guys I beat last summer who obviously weren't suited for the K90.

You give the frame a lot of credit. So what you are saying is that if these 10 or so guys were using another frame they would beat you. I wish tennis was as simple as that.

CAM178
01-08-2008, 02:54 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...
Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.
Who are you to judge what racquet people should or should not use? How good of a player are you? I'm asking because, how would you feel if a better player than you came up to you and said 'You're not good enough to be using that racquet'? That wouldn't feel too good, would it.

CAM178
01-08-2008, 02:56 PM
I wish tennis was as simple as that.
LMFAO!! You kill me, drak. Great way to bring the point home. :)

BreakPoint
01-08-2008, 03:31 PM
I know I couldn't handle the K90, I didn't need to spend the money and buy it to find out... I'm going off the the 10 or so guys I beat last summer who obviously weren't suited for the K90. But hey it looked cool in their hands- I'll give them that.
But how can you be so sure you wouldn't have beaten them anyway even if they were using a different racquet? :confused:

BTW, have you ever lost to anyone using a K90? If not, you probably haven't played anyone good who uses a K90.

BreakPoint
01-08-2008, 03:33 PM
Correct. The k90 is going to be discontinued, in a few years.
True, just about EVERY racquet gets discontinued in about two years these days and the K90 has been out for a year already.

BreakPoint
01-08-2008, 03:37 PM
I can't believe how many of you took offense to my definition of a poser- I apologize to all of the Roger Federer wannabes out there - epescially you BreakPoint!
But that's just it. Many K90 users couldn't care less what Federer uses. I can guarantee that if Federer switched to a KZero tomorrow that most of these people will continue using their K90's and will never switch to a KZero.

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCWILSON-KZERO.html

Sup2Dresq
01-08-2008, 03:43 PM
Interesting. Which for sale section are you looking at? Here are the facts, not rhetoric:

2 K90 (the only 2 for sale on the entire first page)
6 Babolat Pure Drive Plus

1 pair Nike Oscillate size 8 (guess the shoe size was too small). What a poser. :roll:

2 Head LM prestige mids
2 Head FXp mid plus
1 Microgel extreme pro
1 Babolat Pure Storm
1 POG OS
2 Wilson N95
1 Babolat Aero Strom
1 T-Fight 360
1 T-Fight 325
1 LM Instinct
1 Fischer M pro


Ha! Drakulie. Remind me .. if I'm going to call you out, to do my homework.

"Where you want it.. "

wmrhawk
01-08-2008, 03:53 PM
"Poser" is what is said to my friend at lunch today when he casually said "no problem" (or words to that effect) in chinese to our chinese waiter. my buddy knows about 10 chinese words total (btw, most of those words concern the acquistion and disposition of beer).

CAM178
01-08-2008, 03:57 PM
"Poser" is what is said to my friend at lunch today when he casually said "no problem" (or words to that effect) in chinese to our chinese waiter. my buddy knows about 10 chinese words total (btw, most of those words concern the acquistion and disposition of beer).
LOL. . . yeah, now THAT would be a poser. Next time you should have the waiter say something back in Chinese to your friend. . . . something like 'Would you like some more toilet water to drink?' :)

firstservethenvolley
01-08-2008, 04:21 PM
I see just as many "posers" using babolats, heads, and prince frames. Although I hardly ever see anyone using Volkl. :)

Stephanek Wannabe.

drakulie
01-08-2008, 04:26 PM
^^^ LOL, more like >>> NBMJ wannabe. :)

meowmix
01-08-2008, 07:29 PM
To answer the initial question, it's going to be discontinued eventually, but not anytime soon.

With regard to people using the k90's, you've got to think where you are. You're on tennis forum. I'll say that again. YOU"RE ON A TENNIS FORUM. The majority of people here are NOT your average 3.0 player. There are people here who are 4.5's, 5.0's, 5.5's, and a few 6.0's. I GAURANTEE that the majority of people playing the K90 on THIS FORUM CAN handle it. If you ever want proof, call up Breakpoint and play him. I want to know the results.

CAM178
01-08-2008, 07:42 PM
call up Breakpoint and play him. I want to know the results.
Is he pretty good? I've not heard much about him. I know that in reading a thread the other day on here that there is a satellite player who posts some. I can't remember the user name, so maybe that was him.

Mad iX
01-08-2008, 07:54 PM
N90 was out for about 2 years. Seems to be about the same for every other racket nowadays, so I assume the K90 is halfway through now.

Mick
01-08-2008, 08:18 PM
Playing well with a K90 is no problem for us international players (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1905462&postcount=1) :D

There are more demanding racquets out there in the world.

CAM178
01-08-2008, 08:23 PM
Playing well with a K90 is no problem for us international players (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1905462&postcount=1) :D
There are more demanding racquets out there in the world.
LOL about the international comment by that pro shop owner. . . that's good stuff. :)

Jack & Coke
01-08-2008, 08:35 PM
..to me most K90 users are textbook posers IMO..



From the thread: "More user friendly - K90 or LM Prestige Mid??? (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974526#post1974526)"

I haven't hit with the K90 but just picking one up - it feels heaveir right away. The Prestige has an easier feel to it IMO.

From the thread "Dunlop Aerogel 300 vs. Wilson [K]factor K-Six One Tour 90 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974518#post1974518)"

Day & Night....



doh! :oops:

Noveson
01-08-2008, 08:36 PM
To answer the initial question, it's going to be discontinued eventually, but not anytime soon.

With regard to people using the k90's, you've got to think where you are. You're on tennis forum. I'll say that again. YOU"RE ON A TENNIS FORUM. The majority of people here are NOT your average 3.0 player. There are people here who are 4.5's, 5.0's, 5.5's, and a few 6.0's. I GAURANTEE that the majority of people playing the K90 on THIS FORUM CAN handle it. If you ever want proof, call up Breakpoint and play him. I want to know the results.

I would like to try that. No doubt he's a decent player, but still, I would like to. Now Drak on the other hand, no thanks. Or slice backhand comp for that matter.

Mick
01-08-2008, 08:38 PM
my feeling (as an amateur) is it's better to lose to a superior player than to win against an inferior player. No doubt, BP and Drakulie are excellent players.

Noveson
01-08-2008, 08:50 PM
From the thread: "More user friendly - K90 or LM Prestige Mid??? (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974526#post1974526)"



From the thread "Dunlop Aerogel 300 vs. Wilson [K]factor K-Six One Tour 90 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974518#post1974518)"




doh! :oops:

Owned!.......

Mick
01-08-2008, 09:13 PM
LOL about the international comment by that pro shop owner. . . that's good stuff. :)

:D

http://i15.tinypic.com/7wpxmkj.jpg

sureshs
01-08-2008, 09:27 PM
I see just as many "posers" using babolats, heads, and prince frames. Although I hardly ever see anyone using Volkl. :)

What about BBs?

Zachol82
01-08-2008, 09:40 PM
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?

OMG?! 65 sq. in.?? That's godly right there.

AlpineCadet
01-08-2008, 09:47 PM
A few months back at work, I met a guy who was adding massive amounts of lead to his k90. I asked him if he needed any assistance, and if he played enough with the frame to know what he wanted. I also asked him what he would rate himself as, and he said he was a 4.5. Well, I actually ran into him at a public court this evening and had the opportunity to watch him play. He was far from a 4.5, and based on his footwork, racket prep, and shot execution, he was sub SoCal 3.5 to say the least.

____
01-08-2008, 10:06 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.


good one!!!!

skraggle
01-09-2008, 01:32 AM
From the thread: "More user friendly - K90 or LM Prestige Mid??? (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974526#post1974526)"



From the thread "Dunlop Aerogel 300 vs. Wilson [K]factor K-Six One Tour 90 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1974518#post1974518)"





doh! :oops:

Hate to say it, but: ouch.

federer_nadal
01-09-2008, 05:34 AM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

You have the word "playa" in your name and you are talking about posers....

tennis_hand
01-09-2008, 07:31 AM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

you are so right, man. :)

BaselinePlaya
01-09-2008, 08:29 AM
You have the word "playa" in your name and you are talking about posers....

BaselinePlayer was taken and I didn't feel like adding a string of numbers to the end of my name. Sorry I couldn't have picked a unique name like federer_nadal :roll:

BaselinePlaya
01-09-2008, 08:30 AM
Hate to say it, but: ouch.

What's your point?

Shangri La
01-09-2008, 10:08 AM
BaselinePlayer was taken and I didn't feel like adding a string of numbers to the end of my name. Sorry I couldn't have picked a unique name like federer_nadal :roll:

HAHA youre too funny =D

quest01
01-09-2008, 10:26 AM
You give the frame a lot of credit. So what you are saying is that if these 10 or so guys were using another frame they would beat you. I wish tennis was as simple as that.

Probably yes. Majority of people that use the K90 compared to a larger headsize play worse. So I can see why the K90 will be discontinued soon because only people that are at least a 5.0 plus can handle this racket.

Bud
01-09-2008, 10:41 AM
Lol! Playa, nice Rush Limbaugh rant, there... full of inaccuracies and generalizations. A racquet is a racquet. A K90 has a certain weight, balance and composition. One that is similar to a variety of other racquets that people play with.

The reason many people are ditching the K90 is because of the stiffness of the frame. I still love the feel of the racquet in my hand, though. I sold my two K90s for Aerogel 100's (also 90's). In addition, I'm also liking the Redondo mid (93) I purchased, recently. I initially purchased the K90 after reading the rave reviews in the customer comments section. It's a great racquet but too stiff for me.

Klatu Verata Necktie
01-09-2008, 11:04 AM
Those who think that posuers who play with K90s are damaging their game should keep quite and reap their "advantage" over their posuer opponents.

VGP
01-09-2008, 11:40 AM
Who's more poseurish?

A: Nike-wearing k90 wielding pusher

B: Lacoste-sporting PDR+ dinker

C: Nike baby doll dress donned O3 White swinging pit-a-patter

D: Leaded-up PS85 Air Oscillate dude of tennis

All are toting brand-matched 12-racket pack or gym bags.

Sup2Dresq
01-09-2008, 11:56 AM
Who's more poseurish?

A: Nike-wearing k90 wielding pusher

B: Lacoste-sporting PDR+ dinker

C: Nike baby doll dress donned O3 White swinging pit-a-patter

D: Leaded-up PS85 Air Oscillate dude of tennis

All are toting brand-matched 12-racket pack or gym bags.

I resent and resemble (A). LOL.

Should i paint job my racquet to calm the image?

CAM178
01-09-2008, 12:05 PM
Baselineplaya is way off base with this poser stuff. To put it into perspective, how would people feel if they drove a Porsche and someone like Baseline comes up to them and says 'Man, you shouldn't be driving that car. You're not a good enough driver to drive that car.' A racquet is a racquet. Same as any other product. Some people buy shoes because of how they look, not because of what they can do. So are they wrong for not appreciating what the shoe can do? And do you really think that Wilson gives a rat's *** if a player who buys a K90 is a good player? For Wilson, it's cha-ching, we made another sale. Let people buy what they want to buy. Would I feel badly if someone with a $500 racquet beats me versus a $50 racquet? No. Either way, I'm ****ed because I lost. :)

KFwinds
01-09-2008, 12:30 PM
Correct. The k90 is going to be discontinued, in a few years.

The sooner the better...

Sup2Dresq
01-09-2008, 12:34 PM
There is a side thread I put out a couple months ago. I wanted to know if anyone was actually winning competitively with the K90. I know i did much better with the K90 than the APDC. I've since gone back.

Since this thread is about the K90 and posers. Maybe some of you can chime in on the other thread.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=128288

CAM178
01-09-2008, 01:06 PM
As I said in the other thread, I'm surprised JollyRoger hasn't chimed in, as he plays with the K90's.

quest01
01-09-2008, 01:16 PM
The sooner the better...

I agree people that use this racket need to focus more on there game and not Federer. Majority of people would jump up an NTRP rating if they just switched to a larger headsize, thats all it takes.

BaselinePlaya
01-09-2008, 01:23 PM
Baselineplaya is way off base with this poser stuff. To put it into perspective, how would people feel if they drove a Porsche and someone like Baseline comes up to them and says 'Man, you shouldn't be driving that car. You're not a good enough driver to drive that car.' A racquet is a racquet. Same as any other product. Some people buy shoes because of how they look, not because of what they can do. So are they wrong for not appreciating what the shoe can do? And do you really think that Wilson gives a rat's *** if a player who buys a K90 is a good player? For Wilson, it's cha-ching, we made another sale. Let people buy what they want to buy. Would I feel badly if someone with a $500 racquet beats me versus a $50 racquet? No. Either way, I'm ****ed because I lost. :)

Ok, I think people are missing my point... there are people who use the K90 becuase they like how they play with it and thats fine. There is also a large segment of the population who kids themselves into thinking that they will eaither (a) play better or (b) play like Roger Federer when they use the K90. These are the same people who end up playing in a tournament full of 5.5 -5.0 players and then you play them and it's obvious their really like a 3-3.5 player...

drakulie
01-09-2008, 01:25 PM
Probably yes. Majority of people that use the K90 compared to a larger headsize play worse.

Really??? Where is your proof to back up this ridiculous comment?

So I can see why the K90 will be discontinued soon because only people that are at least a 5.0 plus can handle this racket.

I have seen 3.0 players use the K90, so how is that you have come up with the conclusion that only 5.0 players could handle it?

I agree people that use this racket need to focus more on there game and not Federer. Majority of people would jump up an NTRP rating if they just switched to a larger headsize, thats all it takes.

yet another ridiculous remark. So lets see. What you are saying is as follows:

If a 3.0 is using a K90, he would magically become a 4.0 if he used a 95. And would become a 5.0 if he used a 100. 6.0 if he used a 105.

Fact is, the only thing that gets you form one level to another is how good you swing what is in your hands >>> and not what is **IN** your hands.

BreakPoint
01-09-2008, 01:36 PM
Ok, I think people are missing my point... there are people who use the K90 becuase they like how they play with it and thats fine. There is also a large segment of the population who kids themselves into thinking that they will eaither (a) play better or (b) play like Roger Federer when they use the K90. These are the same people who end up playing in a tournament full of 5.5 -5.0 players and then you play them and it's obvious their really like a 3-3.5 player...

But what does their racquet have anything to do with it? They would still be 3.0-3.5 players and not 5.0-5.5 players no matter what racquet they used.

BaselinePlaya
01-09-2008, 01:38 PM
Fact is, the only thing that gets you form one level to another is how good you swing what is in your hands >>> and not what is **IN** your hands.

Exactly my point!!! That's what many of these delusional players don't seem to get.

BreakPoint
01-09-2008, 01:39 PM
Exactly my point!!! That's what many of these delusional players don't seem to get.
So if you truly believe that the racquet doesn't matter, then what's wrong with them using K90's? :confused:

BaselinePlaya
01-09-2008, 02:20 PM
po·seur
n. One who affects a particular attribute, attitude, or identity to impress or influence others.
- American Heritage Dictionary

JackSkellington
01-09-2008, 02:38 PM
You keep crying about the "posers," but who cares? I bet if Roger used a midsize Prestige, you'd call all those players posers, too. You're fighting a losing battle here.

skraggle
01-09-2008, 02:50 PM
I guess the real question is whether those people who can't effectively use the K90 should be the objects of derision.

I bought the K90, played with it long enough to realize that I'm not good enough to use it day in and day out, and sold it to a better player here on the forums. I lost $10 in the deal, the same it would have cost me to demo it from TW.

But I had a great time playing with it. Does that really make me a loser or a clown?

Mick
01-09-2008, 05:12 PM
But what does their racquet have anything to do with it? They would still be 3.0-3.5 players and not 5.0-5.5 players no matter what racquet they used.
What !?!

I am 5.0 with the racquet on the left and a poser with the racquet on the right :D

http://i18.tinypic.com/8bz2tqp.jpg
left k95, right k90

OrangeOne
01-09-2008, 05:21 PM
What !?!

I am 5.0 with the racquet on the left and a poser with the racquet on the right :D

It's the white wilson-pro (or similar) overgrip that screeeeaams poser :P

Mick
01-09-2008, 05:23 PM
It's the white wilson-pro (or similar) overgrip that screeeeaams poser :P
that is true.
but like the real mccoy, I have great successes against the nadal posers :D

LanEvo
01-09-2008, 07:52 PM
lol i dont know why but i also see so many posers of nadal and fed nowadays

Mick
01-09-2008, 08:41 PM
tonight there was this older guy with a K90 at the tennis courts practicing his serve. Too bad he came too late otherwise there could have been a Donnay Borg Pro vs K90 match :)

nickarnold2000
01-10-2008, 08:14 AM
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?
You've used this argument before but unfortunatly the ball speed has increased so much since the wood era - hell, it's even increased since Sampras retired - that people will not be going back to such small head sizes again or wood for that matter. Jollyroger points this out in his racket guide. That being said, I still love my rds 90s.

BreakPoint
01-10-2008, 12:21 PM
You've used this argument before but unfortunatly the ball speed has increased so much since the wood era - hell, it's even increased since Sampras retired - that people will not be going back to such small head sizes again or wood for that matter. Jollyroger points this out in his racket guide. That being said, I still love my rds 90s.
In that '91 AusOpen final that TTC has been showing, Lendl was hitting the ball as hard, if not harder, than most of the pros today and his racquet appeared to be about 70-75 sq. in.

BTW, I don't think ball speed has increased much at all since 2003, which is when Sampras retired. Sampras served harder than most pros today, and he still does today.

cknobman
01-10-2008, 12:39 PM
In that '91 AusOpen final that TTC has been showing, Lendl was hitting the ball as hard, if not harder, than most of the pros today and his racquet appeared to be about 70-75 sq. in.

BTW, I don't think ball speed has increased much at all since 2003, which is when Sampras retired. Sampras served harder than most pros today, and he still does today.

I wil agree with you hear. I was in shock when Lendle was pounding massive forehands. His forehand with a 70-75 had more pace than Roddicks and his 100'.

BreakPoint
01-10-2008, 02:38 PM
I wil agree with you hear. I was in shock when Lendle was pounding massive forehands. His forehand with a 70-75 had more pace than Roddicks and his 100'.
And not just forehands, Lendl's one-handed backhand was massive as well. Mostly fairly flat with tremendous pace and angle. Did you see some of those down-the-line backhand passing shots that he hit past Becker that landed right in the corner? Amazing!! Becker was also pounding his groundstrokes off of both sides, too. :)

CAM178
01-10-2008, 02:47 PM
I hit with Lendl's hitting partner (who hit the crap out of the ball himself), and he said that he never hit with or played against anybody who hit the ball as hard as Lendl did. This guy played tour for a while, so he saw some action. But that told me a lot about Lendl.

Shangri La
01-10-2008, 03:22 PM
We're not comparing two individual players -- Lendl vs someone today, but rather tow eras: overall today's players as a whole hit much harder than those 20/30 years ago. This is a fact. Undisputed.

CAM178
01-10-2008, 03:24 PM
^^^Uhhh. . . . I wasn't disputing that. . . ?? :confused:

Shangri La
01-10-2008, 03:30 PM
^^^Uhhh. . . . I wasn't disputing that. . . ?? :confused:

lol... that wasnt really directed to you =) Just found it misleading when Lendl was used to compare to today's players, rather than players of Lendl's era

J011yroger
01-10-2008, 03:31 PM
As I said in the other thread, I'm surprised JollyRoger hasn't chimed in, as he plays with the K90's.

Nothing to say, The K90 isn't gonna be discontinued soon, it should run another year and be replaced at the 09AO with some other bogus technology.

Anyone who wants to play me is welcome to, I will beat some of them, and lose to some of them.

Anyone who wants to question my racquet choice is welcome to, and if nearby can have a hit with me using my wilsons, and whatever other racquet they think I would play better with.

So, really no reason at all for me to chime in, everything is status quo on my end.

J

CAM178
01-10-2008, 03:35 PM
lol... that wasnt really directed to you =) Just found it misleading when Lendl was used to compare to today's players, rather than players of Lendl's era
Gotcha. While part of me doesn't think it's right to compare players of different eras, the other part wants to see it. The game has progressed so much, though, IMO. I'd like to see some matches, though. I'd love to see an in-form Mac or Lendl against the players of today. Would be fun.

BreakPoint
01-10-2008, 04:00 PM
We're not comparing two individual players -- Lendl vs someone today, but rather tow eras: overall today's players as a whole hit much harder than those 20/30 years ago. This is a fact. Undisputed.
lol... that wasnt really directed to you =) Just found it misleading when Lendl was used to compare to today's players, rather than players of Lendl's era
Lendl hit as hard (and Becker, too, for that matter), if not harder, as most of the players on the tour today. Blake might hit a bit harder, but on average, I'd say both Lendl and Becker would fit right in today with how hard the average player on the tour hits.

Recall that when Becker came on the tour in the mid-80's, McEnroe said he never saw anyone serve or hit the ball as hard as Becker did. That was the beginning of boom-boom hard hitting tennis.

Shangri La
01-10-2008, 04:02 PM
Gotcha. While part of me doesn't think it's right to compare players of different eras, the other part wants to see it. The game has progressed so much, though, IMO. I'd like to see some matches, though. I'd love to see an in-form Mac or Lendl against the players of today. Would be fun.

Those matches would always be great to watch. Maybe they can create something like 150m to make the match ...... fair? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sryuicuQyR0 that race was disappointing though... bet Carl Lewis in his prime can take them both in 150m

Shangri La
01-10-2008, 04:20 PM
Lendl hit as hard (and Becker, too, for that matter), if not harder, as most of the players on the tour today. Blake might hit a bit harder, but on average, I'd say both Lendl and Becker would fit right in today with how hard the average player on the tour hits.


Without hard numbers, (ave mph, rpm) it's hard to tell from perception. Even if they do hit as hard ......



Recall that when Becker came on the tour in the mid-80's, McEnroe said he never saw anyone serve or hit the ball as hard as Becker did. That was the beginning of boom-boom hard hitting tennis.

..... again we're talking about average players rather than individuals when comparing games of 2 different eras.

headfan91
01-10-2008, 04:23 PM
I have a question, without reading every post in this thread. How come every thread lately, about the k90 somehow turns into an argument about whether a lower level player should play with it? Players should be able to play with what ever racquet they want, even if it SLIGHTLY hinders their ablilty to play. They should use what ever they feel comfortable with. After all a racquet doesn't make the player. But who knows, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about.

racquetfreak
01-10-2008, 06:09 PM
So - it's settled. The answer to the question regarding the impending discontinuation of the K90 is that people using K90s may or may not be posers depending on what accesories they may or may not be using in conjunction with aforementioned K90.

J011yroger
01-10-2008, 06:17 PM
So - it's settled. The answer to the question regarding the impending discontinuation of the K90 is that people using K90s may or may not be posers depending on what accesories they may or may not be using in conjunction with aforementioned K90.

Correct, if you wear a bandana, the K90 will be discontinued.

J

Serve n' Volley
01-10-2008, 06:24 PM
^^ What if you eat a pear? :wink:

J011yroger
01-10-2008, 06:31 PM
^^ What if you eat a pear? :wink:

If that is a Mirka reference, then the first round is on me!

J

Serve n' Volley
01-10-2008, 06:39 PM
Hehe, I'll get back to you on that one real soon! :wink::lol:

Klatu Verata Necktie
01-10-2008, 07:28 PM
So - it's settled. The answer to the question regarding the impending discontinuation of the K90 is that people using K90s may or may not be posers depending on what accesories they may or may not be using in conjunction with aforementioned K90.

If you use a K90, legally change your name to "Roger Federer", qualify for ATP tournaments, rise up the ranks to #1, and wear a bandanna. . . you might be a poseur.

YULitle
01-10-2008, 07:34 PM
I know, let's have a go at guessing what letter of the alphabet Wilson will use next.

B6-1?
T6-1?
P6-1? for POWER!
S6-1? for SPIN!

Vermillion
01-10-2008, 07:36 PM
F-1 Tour 90
you heard it here first

Mick
01-10-2008, 08:18 PM
I wonder if twenty years from now, a new and unblemished K90 would be sought after by collectors like a new Max 200G or GTX Pro-T is today.

DropVolley
02-13-2008, 03:40 AM
Baseline Playa,

I found it interesting what you think of people who play with the K90 and then put it up for sale.
I'm just curious, which racquet do you play with?
I love my K90 but I can understand why people have bought it and then put it up for sale. It's extremely demanding. I also think it's a very good racquet though. Have you hit with one before? If so, what did you think of it?
I've been playing with mine for almost a year now and I'm still figuring out how to use it in all situations and what the right setup in terms of strings is best. What I really like about it is that it teaches you how to use it. I rewards you when you swing correctly, and punishes you when you don't. I think the rewards far outweigh the negatives.

Christian78
02-13-2008, 10:52 AM
N90 was out for about 2 years. Seems to be about the same for every other racket nowadays, so I assume the K90 is halfway through now.
Many were dissapointed with the N90 and it got a really bad review on TW. Wilson has probably sold multiple times more of the K90 already, so it's going to live on for longer.

quest01
02-13-2008, 01:07 PM
If I was in a tournament and I had to choose the opponent I feel I could have a better chance in defeating and one guy was using a K90 and the other guy was using a Pure Drive Roddick I would rather play against the guy using the K90 because its guaranteed that he has a weaker backhand. Every 4.0-4.5 player I have played who used the K90 or other mid racket always had the weaker backhand compared to people who use the Pure Drive Roddick or a larger headsize.

Zhou
02-13-2008, 01:31 PM
I'd love to!!! If only any of them were in MN!

Where do you live and how old are you?
I live in Woodbury, MN

BreakPoint
02-13-2008, 01:32 PM
If I was in a tournament and I had to choose the opponent I feel I could have a better chance in defeating and one guy was using a K90 and the other guy was using a Pure Drive Roddick I would rather play against the guy using the K90 because its guaranteed that he has a weaker backhand. Every 4.0-4.5 player I have played who used the K90 or other mid racket always had the weaker backhand compared to people who use the Pure Drive Roddick or a larger headsize.
I guess you've never played against me then. ;)

stormholloway
02-13-2008, 01:38 PM
If I was in a tournament and I had to choose the opponent I feel I could have a better chance in defeating and one guy was using a K90 and the other guy was using a Pure Drive Roddick I would rather play against the guy using the K90 because its guaranteed that he has a weaker backhand. Every 4.0-4.5 player I have played who used the K90 or other mid racket always had the weaker backhand compared to people who use the Pure Drive Roddick or a larger headsize.

I swear you say the most idiotic things. From where are you pulling out this guarantee?

You people who whine about the K90 being unrealistic would have been screwed in the 70s, when all racquets weighed as much if not more with smaller head sizes.

Droofin
02-13-2008, 02:22 PM
This forum is like Ground Hog Day. Same discussions...over and over again...

Zhou
02-13-2008, 02:24 PM
Yeah but once ground hog day comes. There are only 2 options.
1) Spring
2) More Winter...

Mansewerz
02-13-2008, 02:48 PM
k90 is a very advanced racquet. 90 in head w/ 12.5 oz weight, many tour players hate that racquet and are uncomfortable with it.

SFrazeur
02-13-2008, 03:03 PM
This forum is like Ground Hog Day. Same discussions...over and over again...

You're absolutely correct.

-SF

quest01
02-13-2008, 03:15 PM
I use the K90. Well I alternative the racket with another racket. I used the K90 today actually. So I have nothing against midsize frames when I actually use one. I like the feel and control that a midsize frame offers even though my 2 handed backhand kind of suffers compared to the other racket I use.

Bud
02-13-2008, 03:56 PM
I swear you say the most idiotic things. From where are you pulling out this guarantee?

You people who whine about the K90 being unrealistic would have been screwed in the 70s, when all racquets weighed as much if not more with smaller head sizes.

LOL! I hear ya. My HEAD XRC is such a sweet stick... it is still one of my favorite racquets, overall. It is 13.5 oz., 100% fiberglass and sports a 71 sq. in. head (this 'Standard' head size was NORMAL!). I'd like to see the 'playa' with that. I can hit just as well with that as with my old K90 or my AG100 or my POG OS or my HEAD PT630, etc... The disadvantage of a stick like that, these days, is you can't get much on the serve... and backhand slices are a bit more difficult.

drakulie
02-13-2008, 04:20 PM
Every 4.0-4.5 player I have played who used the K90 or other mid racket always had the weaker backhand compared to people who use the Pure Drive Roddick or a larger headsize.

The majority of tennis players from beginner to pro have a weaker backhand compared to their forehand, which is why you see players usually hitting it to their opponents backhand.

Do you even play much??? Seriously.

BreakPoint
02-13-2008, 04:26 PM
I use the K90. Well I alternative the racket with another racket. I used the K90 today actually. So I have nothing against midsize frames when I actually use one. I like the feel and control that a midsize frame offers even though my 2 handed backhand kind of suffers compared to the other racket I use.
Wait, so YOU use a K90? So do you think your opponents are thinking the same thing about you as you do about them?

BTW, I think the K90 is better suited for a one-handed backhand than a two-handed backhand so that may be your issue with it on backhands.

drakulie
02-13-2008, 04:34 PM
BTW, I think the K90 is better suited for a one-handed backhand than a two-handed backhand so that may be your issue with it on backhands.

BP, let's get serious>>> His issue with backhands is that he doesn't even play. :)

chiru
02-13-2008, 05:10 PM
how many times are we gonna have this freaking argument.
my word, just get your asses off the chair and go play some tennis instead of complaining about what racket your opponent uses. if you think teh k90 is hindering his level of play, you should be pushing for it harder than anyone so taht you win more matches right? holy crap. just DEAL WITH IT.

quest01
02-13-2008, 06:10 PM
BP, let's get serious>>> His issue with backhands is that he doesn't even play. :)

Wrong, if you read my previous post I said I used the K90 today, smart guy. So that means I do play.

Enlightened Coelacanth
02-13-2008, 06:14 PM
I hit with Lendl's hitting partner (who hit the crap out of the ball himself), and he said that he never hit with or played against anybody who hit the ball as hard as Lendl did. This guy played tour for a while, so he saw some action. But that told me a lot about Lendl.Athur Ashe said that Lendl deformed the ball when he hit his forehand.
And was with his tiny headed Adidas club.

Why do so many people care what other people hit with? Can you get the job done? Yes or no? That's the only criterion that matters. Some people have too much spare time to worry about junk like if someone uses the K-90 or not (I do).

drakulie
02-13-2008, 06:26 PM
Wrong, if you read my previous post I said I used the K90 today, smart guy. So that means I do play.

Judging from your previous post where you state certain players have weaker backhands because of the frame they use, leads one to believe you don't play much tennis. Fact is, most players from beginner to pro have weaker backhands. If you played tennis, you would know this.

movdqa
02-13-2008, 06:41 PM
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?

Men, women, children and babies were a lot stronger back then.

movdqa
02-13-2008, 06:54 PM
Lol! Playa, nice Rush Limbaugh rant, there... full of inaccuracies and generalizations. A racquet is a racquet. A K90 has a certain weight, balance and composition. One that is similar to a variety of other racquets that people play with.

The reason many people are ditching the K90 is because of the stiffness of the frame. I still love the feel of the racquet in my hand, though. I sold my two K90s for Aerogel 100's (also 90's). In addition, I'm also liking the Redondo mid (93) I purchased, recently. I initially purchased the K90 after reading the rave reviews in the customer comments section. It's a great racquet but too stiff for me.

I went with the Redondo on the specs but went over to the K90 on a suggestion from Anirut and someone else. I'm hoping that folks here won't think that I'm a Seppi wannabe. I really didn't have arm issues with my previous racquet (Dunlop Revelation Tour Pro) but was looking for something lighter than a pound that was flexible and that provide lots of control.

I think that there were a lot of PS85 users out there that didn't go to the nCode which Federer was using as the nCode didn't feel close enough to the PS85. I think that a lot of those users have gone over to the K90 as it's close enough. Not because Roger uses it.

AlpineCadet
02-13-2008, 07:00 PM
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?
Men, women, children and babies were a lot stronger back then.

Just because the only available option (back then) was the wooden racket with small head sizes, doesn't mean they were manageable/fine for everyone of all ages and sizes. How many of us cannot handle a +360 gram frame?

quest01
02-13-2008, 07:09 PM
Wait, so YOU use a K90? So do you think your opponents are thinking the same thing about you as you do about them?

BTW, I think the K90 is better suited for a one-handed backhand than a two-handed backhand so that may be your issue with it on backhands.

I agree that the K90 is better suited for people who use a one handed backhand. That may be a reason why I hit my 2 hander better with larger head sizes. However I can hit a mean backhand slice with a mid size racket, like a fart in the wind.

movdqa
02-13-2008, 07:19 PM
Just because the only available option (back then) was the wooden racket with small head sizes, doesn't mean they were manageable/fine for everyone of all ages and sizes. How many of us cannot handle a +360 gram frame?

I have three racquets around 465 grams that I used for many years. I did use a 108 sq in rocket launcher for a few years but at one point I developed pain in my arm and it grew exponentially until I had to stop playing.

I recall when the large-headed frames came out and it allowed many more people to play tennis. But I also noticed more and more and more arm braces in use by these players who had terrible stroke production but could hit with pace.

I hit with a guy that bought a Pure Drive a few years ago. After using it for a while, he referred to it as the Pure Pain. He's using the Redondo mid right now.

J011yroger
02-13-2008, 08:04 PM
BTW, I think the K90 is better suited for a one-handed backhand than a two-handed backhand so that may be your issue with it on backhands.

Not sure about that, my two hander is way better than my one hander with the K90. :)

J

Noveson
02-13-2008, 08:41 PM
Wait, so YOU use a K90? So do you think your opponents are thinking the same thing about you as you do about them?

BTW, I think the K90 is better suited for a one-handed backhand than a two-handed backhand so that may be your issue with it on backhands.

I guess you've never played against me then. ;)

BP you never answered me, how good are you? Do you have a ranking or anything like that? Some idea, so I can know if you can really back up that talk.

Why would any racquet be more suited to one backhand or another? Are there racquets especially good for forehands?

BreakPoint
02-13-2008, 09:01 PM
Just because the only available option (back then) was the wooden racket with small head sizes, doesn't mean they were manageable/fine for everyone of all ages and sizes. How many of us cannot handle a +360 gram frame?
But magically, they were. I was there and saw it with my own two eyes. :)

BreakPoint
02-13-2008, 09:03 PM
Not sure about that, my two hander is way better than my one hander with the K90. :)

J
I suspect your two-hander is way better than your one-hander with ANY racquet. :)

BreakPoint
02-13-2008, 09:08 PM
BP you never answered me, how good are you? Do you have a ranking or anything like that? Some idea, so I can know if you can really back up that talk.

Why would any racquet be more suited to one backhand or another? Are there racquets especially good for forehands?
For me, definitely yes. I've yet to find a racquet that's equally good for my forehand as my backhand. If it's good for my forehand, then it's usually not as good for my backhand, and vise versa. I think it's because I prefer a stiffer racquet for my forehand but a more flexible racquet for my backhand. That's why I've always said that I wish somebody made a racquet that can dynamically change its stiffness at the push of a button on the handle. :)

Oh, and to answer your question, I'm good enough to be able to hit a one-handed backhand with the K90. ;)

tlm
02-13-2008, 09:09 PM
Baselineplaya is exactly right, the majority of players using the k-90 are posers.

pow
02-13-2008, 09:21 PM
I was just answering his question about what a 'poser' is - to me most K90 users are textbook posers IMO.

and you're a textbook newb with the big bubba? :)

movdqa
02-14-2008, 08:51 AM
For me, definitely yes. I've yet to find a racquet that's equally good for my forehand as my backhand. If it's good for my forehand, then it's usually not as good for my backhand, and vise versa. I think it's because I prefer a stiffer racquet for my forehand but a more flexible racquet for my backhand. That's why I've always said that I wish somebody made a racquet that can dynamically change its stiffness at the push of a button on the handle. :)

Oh, and to answer your question, I'm good enough to be able to hit a one-handed backhand with the K90. ;)

Maybe a variant on the piezoelectricity feature on the Flexpoint Radical hybird model with a button and a battery? That would be a cool feature but an orientation or acceleration direction sensor should be able to figure out whether you're hitting a forehand or a backhand provided that you use the same side for the same stroke consistently.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 09:11 AM
Just because the only available option (back then) was the wooden racket with small head sizes, doesn't mean they were manageable/fine for everyone of all ages and sizes. How many of us cannot handle a +360 gram frame?

I have NO opinion on the K90 (haven't hit with one), but tennis is vastly different now than it was during the wood era. Same court, same ball, but much, much faster game and more focus on power baselining.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 09:12 AM
Where do you live and how old are you?
I live in Woodbury, MN

I'm in your neck of the woods - I'm an E. St. Paul type of guy.

movdqa
02-14-2008, 09:15 AM
I have NO opinion on the K90 (haven't hit with one), but tennis is vastly different now than it was during the wood era. Same court, same ball, but much, much faster game and more focus on power baselining.

Do you think that tendon and joint health should be a factor in the selection of a racquet? Given the use of steroids in other profession sports, perhaps short-term gain is the correct calculate decision. Until it bites you when you're older.

Azzurri
02-14-2008, 09:16 AM
BP you never answered me, how good are you? Do you have a ranking or anything like that? Some idea, so I can know if you can really back up that talk.

Why would any racquet be more suited to one backhand or another? Are there racquets especially good for forehands?

BP has playetested some racquets for TW, so I think he's atleast a 4.5 player. If you check his reviews, the guy knows what he is talking about. You may not always agree with him, but he seems to be a pretty good player based on his reviews and analysis. Do a search and you won't look silly questioning the guys ability.

I believe he was speaking in generalities. Haven't you noticed the tour has more players using a 2HBH and the racquets head size avg has also increased...that says something.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 09:20 AM
Do you think that tendon and joint health should be a factor in the selection of a racquet? Given the use of steroids in other profession sports, perhaps short-term gain is the correct calculate decision. Until it bites you when you're older.

I personally feel that tendon and joint health is paramount for amateur tennis players. I've gone through 6 frames in the past year trying to balance performance and arm safety, and hope that the search is done for me.

tennis_nerd22
02-14-2008, 09:44 AM
Then I guess 100% of the people had no business playing tennis at all back in the wood era since 65 sq. in. racquets were all that was available and everyone, including women and children, seemed to play fine with them?

no sh*t.. it was a completely different game back then, half the speed of todays game. Compared to today, you had an hour to set up for each shot.

you'd expect much better from a 16000+ poster... instead he's comparing apples to oranges.. go figure :rolleyes:

Cup8489
02-14-2008, 10:06 AM
no sh*t.. it was a completely different game back then, half the speed of todays game. Compared to today, you had an hour to set up for each shot.

you'd expect much better from a 16000+ poster... instead he's comparing apples to oranges.. go figure :rolleyes:

so why is it that even in today's age, with someone like federer using a 90 inch frame customized to weight probably closer to 15 oz than 14, with a gigantic swingweight, no doubt, he is at the top of the game? your statement of how the game was half the speed, it's true, but less time to prepare isn't really a good reason why the trend has been to switch to a 2hbh and a 95+ frame. it's a trend. more players on the tour now a days prefer midplus. that's it. problem solved.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 10:13 AM
no sh*t.. it was a completely different game back then, half the speed of todays game. Compared to today, you had an hour to set up for each shot.

you'd expect much better from a 16000+ poster... instead he's comparing apples to oranges.. go figure :rolleyes:

It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available. This is evident by the sales of other than midsize racquets today; given the option reasonable people will use what is most appropriate for the success of their game, not what strokes a myopic part of their egos. This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting then admit being wrong. I think that these people believe that they are playing a purer form of the game than others.

-SF

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 10:21 AM
so why is it that even in today's age, with someone like federer using a 90 inch frame customized to weight probably closer to 15 oz than 14, with a gigantic swingweight, no doubt, he is at the top of the game? your statement of how the game was half the speed, it's true, but less time to prepare isn't really a good reason why the trend has been to switch to a 2hbh and a 95+ frame. it's a trend. more players on the tour now a days prefer midplus. that's it. problem solved.

Federer is only one player. I believe that the original argument went across the board. The fact of that matter is that the game has gotten significantly faster all the way down to 3.0 in the past 20 years.

People should use the frame that they feel most comfortable with, but a 3.5 using the K90 simply because Fed uses it to great success is not a valid reason, IMO.

stormholloway
02-14-2008, 10:32 AM
I don't see what's so hard to understand. This racquet has classic feel. It's one of the few out there that does. Some people don't want to hit with plastic cannons.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 10:39 AM
I don't see what's so hard to understand. This racquet has classic feel. It's one of the few out there that does. Some people don't want to hit with plastic cannons.

As if there are not racquets in between?

-SF

Azzurri
02-14-2008, 10:40 AM
no sh*t.. it was a completely different game back then, half the speed of todays game. Compared to today, you had an hour to set up for each shot.

you'd expect much better from a 16000+ poster... instead he's comparing apples to oranges.. go figure :rolleyes:

sorryTN, but you are a bit off on your analysis. You talk as if players were hitting 30 mph shots...maybe the old ladies from a local club played that way, but not the pro's.

coloskier
02-14-2008, 11:21 AM
Don't worry. I'm sure Wilson will soon release another 90" frame for the posers.

Personally, I think that players who use a racket larger than a 90 are the posers, because they don't have the game to use that kind of racket.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 11:26 AM
I'd love to!!! If only any of them were in MN!

Level? Location?

I'll gladly hit with anyone from the TT boards.

quest01
02-14-2008, 11:44 AM
Personally, I think that players who use a racket larger than a 90 are the posers, because they don't have the game to use that kind of racket.

If that was the case there would be a lot of 5.0 and 6.0 posers out there.

movdqa
02-14-2008, 12:00 PM
It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available. This is evident by the sales of other than midsize racquets today; given the option reasonable people will use what is most appropriate for the success of their game, not what strokes a myopic part of their egos. This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting then admit being wrong. I think that these people believe that they are playing a purer form of the game than others.
-SF

I would hope that the success of their game would include long term joint and tendon health.

One of the reasons why the Redondo thread has so many posts is due to a lot of refugees from pain sticks and those that want to continue playing tennis without running into problems in the future.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 12:03 PM
I would hope that the success of their game would include long term joint and tendon health.

One of the reasons why the Redondo thread has so many posts is due to a lot of refugees from pain sticks and those that want to continue playing tennis without running into problems in the future.

It does stand to reason that someone who is a hard swinger is going to be drawn to more arm friendly racquets. I don't know how arm friendly the K90/N90,etc is, but I know that my old Pro Staff Classic made my shoulder feel not-so-hot when hitting 3-4 days per week.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 12:09 PM
I would hope that the success of their game would include long term joint and tendon health.

One of the reasons why the Redondo thread has so many posts is due to a lot of refugees from pain sticks and those that want to continue playing tennis without running into problems in the future.

What are you trying to argue (put forth)? I am not able to read into what it is you wrote.

Not all newer, modern headsize racquets are stiff and or cause pain.

-SF

movdqa
02-14-2008, 12:10 PM
I think that the K90 is okay - I don't have a problem with it but I think that some Redondoans found it a bit too stiff. I went to the Redondo to prevent problems in the future. I went to the K90 when the supply problems came up.

SlapShot
02-14-2008, 12:11 PM
What are you trying to argue (put forth)? I am not able to read into what it is you wrote.

Not all newer, modern headsize racquets are stiff and or cause pain.

-SF

True. The most comfortable racquet I've used so far is the FXP Prestige. The Fischer Pro 1's are really arm friendly as well, but have a different feel.

dork2tennisstud
02-14-2008, 12:12 PM
I'm a solid 4.5, now. I've started playing about 8 years ago for real with a Head TiS6, then a 110 ProStaff 6.5, then some PSC 6.1's that I still use, and now I have the n90 (never hit with a K90, though I imagine it's similar).

If you're in decent shape and you're fairly young, the weight from the n90 won't bother you at all once you hit with it for a few hours to adjust for timing, and the extra weight makes it just as forgiving on slight mis-hits as the oversized racquets.

If you're the average 3.5 player you should probably not being using a K90 (you'll be late on everything), but you don't have to be superman either.

movdqa
02-14-2008, 12:13 PM
What are you trying to argue (put forth)? I am not able to read into what it is you wrote.

Not all newer, modern headsize racquets are stiff and or cause pain.

-SF

I have noticed some of the newer racquets with larger headsizes that are light (under 12 oz) with nice flexibility ratings. When I bought the Redondos and the K90 later on, I didn't see many of these models. If I were choosing racquets again for the next decade, I think that I would have taken a good look at the K-Blade in its various sizes and weights.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 12:27 PM
I have noticed some of the newer racquets with larger headsizes that are light (under 12 oz) with nice flexibility ratings. When I bought the Redondos and the K90 later on, I didn't see many of these models. If I were choosing racquets again for the next decade, I think that I would have taken a good look at the K-Blade in its various sizes and weights.


The KBlade Team has some interesting specs. I've been tempted to take it for a demo myself. I'm interested to see how it plays.

-SF

quest01
02-14-2008, 02:20 PM
The KBlade Team has some interesting specs. I've been tempted to take it for a demo myself. I'm interested to see how it plays.

-SF

Are you a fan of Serena and Venus Williams?

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 02:56 PM
I have NO opinion on the K90 (haven't hit with one), but tennis is vastly different now than it was during the wood era. Same court, same ball, but much, much faster game and more focus on power baselining.
But that's only if you choose to play that way. Not everyone needs to choose to play a power baseline game. Serve and volley still works at almost all levels except maybe the very top ATP level. Sampras, Edberg, and McEnroe are still beating the baseliners they face today with their S &V games.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 03:04 PM
Are you a fan of Serena and Venus Williams?

And herer you caught me putting beads in my hair for that retro Williams sister look!

Seriously, just because I use a racquet that Babolat put Roddick's name on does not have anything to due with my choice of it, and neither does the Williams Sisters endorsement of the KBlade Team have any barring on my curiosity. I am teaching a lot of adults now, so I figure I need a better understanding of how more current sticks play; and considering that the Pro Shop at the facility I work at stocks mostly Wilson demos I see them the most.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 03:08 PM
no sh*t.. it was a completely different game back then, half the speed of todays game. Compared to today, you had an hour to set up for each shot.

you'd expect much better from a 16000+ poster... instead he's comparing apples to oranges.. go figure :rolleyes:
The top pros were serving almost as fast when they were using 65 sq. in. racquets as they do today. The game is NOT twice as fast today as it was when people used wood racquets. When I went back to using a 65 sq. in . wood racquet for a month last year, I was hitting the ball HARDER than with my nCode 90!!! The heavier weight allowed me to really POUND the ball, and I won just as much as did with my nCode 90. In fact, when I used a wood racquet back in the 70's and 80's, I was probably hitting the ball JUST AS HARD, if not harder, than I do today. Back then, people used to tell me that I hit the ball harder than anyone they've ever played against or they'd complain that they'd have to wear a cup to protect themselves to play against me. :shock: No one tells me those things today in the "modern, faster game" when I'm using my "modern, powerful" racquet.

For someone that wasn't even alive during the wood era, you sure seem to think you know how people played tennis back then. :roll:

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 03:14 PM
It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available. This is evident by the sales of other than midsize racquets today; given the option reasonable people will use what is most appropriate for the success of their game, not what strokes a myopic part of their egos. This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting then admit being wrong. I think that these people believe that they are playing a purer form of the game than others.

-SF
What's "wrong" is the ridiculous claim that tennis back then was "half the speed" of today's game and that "you had a hour to set up for each shot". Roscoe Tanner was serving in the 130's with a tiny racquet in the 70's. Even Borg served over 110 with a wood racquet.

Aren't you another guy that was not even born until the wood era was almost over?

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 03:34 PM
What's "wrong" is the ridiculous claim that tennis back then was "half the speed" of today's game and that "you had a hour to set up for each shot". Roscoe Tanner was serving in the 130's with a tiny racquet in the 70's. Even Borg served over 110 with a wood racquet.

Aren't you another guy that was not even born until the wood era was almost over?

Somehow my age has a barring on whether or not I am able to have an opinion? Find a Historian that would not tear that apart.

Wood was mostly gone by the time I was born, so what does this have to do with anything. You had timely,first hand experience, this can give someone great deal of perspective as well as cause someone's outlook to be blinded by "heyday" memories. I've got someone of that myself, I like Hypercarbons.

No, Tennis was not half the speed, but it was slower, and there was not the heavy spin, or at least the constant heavy spin of today. Yes, some people's Tennis exists in a bubble. However that does not mean it is better, nor that the Tennis outside of said bubble is better or worse than what is inside.

-SF

AlpineCadet
02-14-2008, 03:37 PM
Somehow my age has a barring on whether or not I am able to have an opinion? Find a Historian that would not tear that apart.

Wood was mostly gone by the time I was born, so what does this have to do with anything. You had timely,first hand experience, this can give someone great deal of perspective as well as cause someone's outlook to be blinded by "heyday" memories. I've got someone of that myself, I like Hypercarbons.

No, Tennis was not half the speed, but it was slower, and there was not the heavy spin, or at least the constant heavy spin of today. Yes, some people's Tennis exists in a bubble. However that does not mean it is better, nor that the Tennis outside of said bubble is better or worse than what is inside.

-SF
That's fair and balanced (unlike some statements.)

BaselinePlaya
02-14-2008, 03:39 PM
Level? Location?

I'll gladly hit with anyone from the TT boards.

4.0 South metro (Eagan/ Rosemount area). We should get a Twin Cities TW chapter going for this summer... where are you located?

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 03:40 PM
Somehow my age has a barring on whether or not I am able to have an opinion? Find a Historian that would not tear that apart.

Wood was mostly gone by the time I was born, so what does this have to do with anything.
Because I don't claim to know how tennis was played in the 50's because I wasn't there. So I have no idea how hard people hit their serves or groundies or how much spin they put on the ball because I wasn't on the receiving end of those shots. That's why someone's opinion is much more credible if they were actually there and experienced it first hand instead of just relying on "myths" and "hearsay" that have been regurgitated here and elsewhere.

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 03:58 PM
It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available.
They were available. Prince came out with their 110 sq. in. OS racquet in 1976, yet most pros as well as most recreational players continued to use 65 sq. in. wood racquets until the mid-80's. Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Vilas, Lendl, Gerulaitis, etc. all were still using tiny wood (or other) racquets in the early 80's even though they could have all switched to much larger "modern" racquets.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 04:04 PM
Because I don't claim to know how tennis was played in the 50's because I wasn't there. So I have no idea how hard people hit their serves or groundies or how much spin they put on the ball because I wasn't on the receiving end of those shots. That's why someone's opinion is much more credible if they were actually there and experienced it first hand instead of just relying on "myths" and "hearsay" that have been regurgitated here and elsewhere.

To reiterate a notion I made earlier; memories are sometimes recalled more fondly than than the reality of the occurrence. As in justice, eye witness testimony is not always accurate. It is very susceptible to time and influence. As well, when faced with reality people will often chose the more favorable interpretation.

-SF

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 04:12 PM
They were available. Prince came out with their 110 sq. in. OS racquet in 1976, yet most pros as well as most recreational players continued to use 65 sq. in. wood racquets until the mid-80's. Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Vilas, Lendl, Gerulaitis, etc. all were still using tiny wood (or other) racquets in the early 80's even though they could have all switched to much larger "modern" racquets.

My statement was in relation to recreational players. You left out a very important part of my quote:

It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available. This is evident by the sales of other than midsize racquets today; given the option reasonable people will use what is most appropriate for the success of their game, not what strokes a myopic part of their egos. This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting then admit being wrong. I think that these people believe that they are playing a purer form of the game than others.

-SF

I do not particularly see professional players as particularly reasonable people, they can be very superstitious.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 04:12 PM
To reiterate a notion I made earlier; memories are sometimes recalled more fondly than than the reality of the occurrence. As in justice, eye witness testimony is not always accurate. It is very susceptible to time and influence. As well, when faced with reality people will often chose the more favorable interpretation.

-SF
I'll take the opinion of what battle conditions were really like from someone that actually fought in Vietnam over someone that only saw a film about the Vietnam War. I think most people would agree with me.

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 04:15 PM
My statement was in relation to recreational players. You left out a very important part of my quote:



I do not particularly see professional players as particularly reasonable people, they can be very superstitious.

-SF
You mean pros are LESS concerned about the success of their games than the average recreational player is? :confused:

Besides, I did say that most recreational players also did not switch to bigger racquets until almost a decade after bigger racquets were available. Personally, I didn't switch away from my 65 sq. in. wood racquet until 1987.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 04:19 PM
I'll take the opinion of what battle conditions were really like from someone that actually fought in Vietnam over someone that only saw a film about the Vietnam War. I think most people would agree with me.

What are you trying to do, evoke hypothetical Veteran sympathy now? Just to try and win an argument? Yes, if I go off and try and make a flimsy connected comparison to another matter entirely and I can find people who will agree with me. Congratulations, you proved an earlier point I made. Moreover, If you are going to drag this discussion down this path you do it alone.

-SF

movdqa
02-14-2008, 04:35 PM
They were available. Prince came out with their 110 sq. in. OS racquet in 1976, yet most pros as well as most recreational players continued to use 65 sq. in. wood racquets until the mid-80's. Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Vilas, Lendl, Gerulaitis, etc. all were still using tiny wood (or other) racquets in the early 80's even though they could have all switched to much larger "modern" racquets.

The first Prince Oversize was a big spoon and rocket launcher. I borrowed one at the local courts and couldn't keep the ball from hitting ten to twenty feet over the baseline. Did Pam Shriver use this or did she start with the Prince II?

There were pros that went to Aluminum, notable the Head Pro. Offhand Bob Lutz comes to mind but I did see Head Pros in the qualies of some tournaments.

Colin Dibley held the world record for service speed at 148 MPH for 24 years. I think that Rusedski and Roddick have recorded 149 MPH serves. I recall Dibley using a Dunlop Maxply Fort which was an old woodie. I have one in my closet as an antique. I don't really want to hit with it as it would probably break.

movdqa
02-14-2008, 04:37 PM
To reiterate a notion I made earlier; memories are sometimes recalled more fondly than than the reality of the occurrence. As in justice, eye witness testimony is not always accurate. It is very susceptible to time and influence. As well, when faced with reality people will often chose the more favorable interpretation.

-SF

Then you should prove him wrong instead of using innuendo.

It's pretty easy to go to Wikipedia to see that the the pros of yesteryear could hit serves as hard as they hit them today with a wooden racquet.

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 06:03 PM
What are you trying to do, evoke hypothetical Veteran sympathy now? Just to try and win an argument? Yes, if I go off and try and make a flimsy connected comparison to another matter entirely and I can find people who will agree with me. Congratulations, you proved an earlier point I made. Moreover, If you are going to drag this discussion down this path you do it alone.

-SF
Huh? What are you talking about? :confused: "Veteran sympathy"? I just chose some arbitrary event in history. I could have said the Depression, the stock market crash of 1987, Watergate, the first moon landing, etc., etc. You are really grasping at straws here. I suggest you stop here while you're behind. Amazing that you're actually arguing that you know more about what was happening before you were even born than someone who was actually there doing it. Simply amazing! You'll never catch me arguing with a 60 year old about what life was like during the Eisenhower years.

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 06:07 PM
The first Prince Oversize was a big spoon and rocket launcher. I borrowed one at the local courts and couldn't keep the ball from hitting ten to twenty feet over the baseline. Did Pam Shriver use this or did she start with the Prince II?

There were pros that went to Aluminum, notable the Head Pro. Offhand Bob Lutz comes to mind but I did see Head Pros in the qualies of some tournaments.

Colin Dibley held the world record for service speed at 148 MPH for 24 years. I think that Rusedski and Roddick have recorded 149 MPH serves. I recall Dibley using a Dunlop Maxply Fort which was an old woodie. I have one in my closet as an antique. I don't really want to hit with it as it would probably break.
I believe Pam Shriver used the Prince Classic, the one with the green plastic throat. Did the Prince II also have the green plastic throat?

Yes, some pros and recreational players went to non-wood racquets like the Head Pro (red), Head Master (blue), Ashe Comp I & II, T-2000, etc., but they were all also very small and still around the headsize of a wood racquet and they were all still very heavy (>13 oz.)

movdqa
02-14-2008, 06:15 PM
I believe Pam Shriver used the Prince Classic, the one with the green plastic throat. Did the Prince II also have the green plastic throat?

Yes, some pros and recreational players went to non-wood racquets like the Head Pro (red), Head Master (blue), Ashe Comp I & II, T-2000, etc., but they were all also very small and still around the headsize of a wood racquet and they were all still very heavy (>13 oz.)

I think that the Prince II had a black throat. Maybe with green lettering. It was much stiffer (for aluminum) and afford much better control (from my recollection which is pretty musty).

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 06:30 PM
Huh? What are you talking about? :confused: "Veteran sympathy"? I just chose some arbitrary event in history. I could have said the Depression, the stock market crash of 1987, Watergate, the first moon landing, etc., etc. You are really grasping at straws here. I suggest you stop here while you're behind. Amazing that you're actually arguing that you know more about what was happening before you were even born than someone who was actually there doing it. Simply amazing! You'll never catch me arguing with a 60 year old about what life was like during the Eisenhower years.

I already ended this, and now you are trying to save face by trying to play the role of the gallant debater, please. You are the person who would rather continue fighting and be right in face of reality.

Amazing that you're actually arguing that you know more about what was happening before you were even born than someone who was actually there doing it. Simply amazing! You'll never catch me arguing with a 60 year old about what life was like during the Eisenhower years.

Show for everyone else to see that I have clearly stated that.

Then you should prove him wrong instead of using innuendo. Innuendo, I was hardly indirect.


It's pretty easy to go to Wikipedia to see that the the pros of yesteryear could hit serves as hard as they hit them today with a wooden racquet.
That is a overly simplistic, you must consider spin as well which greatly contributes to the heaviness of today.

-SF

movdqa
02-14-2008, 06:50 PM
> Innuendo, I was hardly indirect.

You provided no evidence of a counterpoint. Just that some recollections could be wrong. That's pretty indirect reasoning.

> That is a overly simplistic, you must consider spin as well which greatly
> contributes to the heaviness of today.

We're talking about the fastest serves which are flat bombs. To generate the fastest serves, you decrease spin. Go to Youtube and take a look at Roddick's videos with his flat serve.

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 06:50 PM
I already ended this, and now you are trying to save face by trying to play the role of the gallant debater, please. You are the person who would rather continue fighting and be right in face of reality.

That is a overly simplistic, you must consider spin as well which greatly contributes to the heaviness of today.

-SF
^^^^^ What were you saying about "saving face"? And why would I need to "save face" when I know exactly what I'm talking about because, guess what? I was actually there. Whereas, you're just speculating on something with which you have zero first-hand experience. That's the "reality".

BTW, people had a hard time returning McEnroe's serve because of the ridiculous spin he was able to generate with his tiny 65 sq. in. wood racquet with the denser than dense 18x20 string pattern.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 07:17 PM
> Innuendo, I was hardly indirect.

You provided no evidence of a counterpoint. Just that some recollections could be wrong. That's pretty indirect reasoning.

> That is a overly simplistic, you must consider spin as well which greatly
> contributes to the heaviness of today.

We're talking about the fastest serves which are flat bombs. To generate the fastest serves, you decrease spin. Go to Youtube and take a look at Roddick's videos with his flat serve.

I tried to make the best out of whatever point it was you were trying to make, I have a hard time understanding your meaning in somethings earlier today, as well, you might recall.

^^^^^ What were you saying about "saving face"? And why would I need to "save face" when I know exactly what I'm talking about because, guess what? I was actually there. Whereas, you're just speculating on something with which you have zero first-hand experience. That's the "reality".

BTW, people had a hard time returning McEnroe's serve because of the ridiculous spin he was able to generate with his tiny 65 sq. in. wood racquet with the denser than dense 18x20 string pattern.

A comparative statement, that was then, then is not now.

I will not wait for you to actually prove this claim you made against me.

Amazing that you're actually arguing that you know more about what was happening before you were even born than someone who was actually there doing it. Simply amazing! You'll never catch me arguing with a 60 year old about what life was like during the Eisenhower years.

-SF

movdqa
02-14-2008, 07:19 PM
I tried to make the best out of whatever point it was you were trying to make, I have a hard time understanding your meaning in somethings earlier today, as well, you might recall.
-SF

I think that I was responding to something that you responded to Breakpoint on; not a point that I made.

SFrazeur
02-14-2008, 07:39 PM
I think that I was responding to something that you responded to Breakpoint on; not a point that I made.

I do admit that I am not good at debating on multiple fronts so I could have misunderstood what was there.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-14-2008, 07:45 PM
A comparative statement, that was then, then is not now.
Was not McEnroe winning an ATP tournament at the age of 47 not "now"? Yes, he used a modern racquet but I'd bet if you gave everyone on that court a wood racquet that McEnroe would still be able to generate some nasty spin with it and he would have had an even easier time of winning.

I will not wait for you to actually prove this claim you made against me.

Right here:
It really is a silly argument to make. ......It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available.
How would you know it's "silly"? Were you there? If someone who lived in the '50's told me what tennis was like in the 50's, I would have no idea if it's "silly" or not because I was not around in the 50's.

And, how would you know that people would have used modern sized racquets if they were available? Were you there? As I said, they WERE available but most people avoided them like the plague.

Somehow my age has a barring on whether or not I am able to have an opinion? Find a Historian that would not tear that apart.

Wood was mostly gone by the time I was born, so what does this have to do with anything. You had timely,first hand experience, this can give someone great deal of perspective as well as cause someone's outlook to be blinded by "heyday" memories.
You can have an opinion, but your age has everything to do with whether or not you have a VALID opinion. I can have an opinion about how tennis was played in the 50's but it wouldn't be a VALID one because I was not there. Do you get it now?

So when I took out my wood racquet last year and hit the ball harder and played just as well as with my modern racquet, was I also blinded by heyday memories?

Sorry, but you cannot possibly make a valid and credible comparison between two eras unless you have lived in and played in both eras. That's just the way it is. Who do you think would have more credibility in making a valid comparison between the wood era and the modern era, McEnroe or Nadal? Case closed.

Azzurri
02-15-2008, 05:25 AM
What are you trying to do, evoke hypothetical Veteran sympathy now? Just to try and win an argument? Yes, if I go off and try and make a flimsy connected comparison to another matter entirely and I can find people who will agree with me. Congratulations, you proved an earlier point I made. Moreover, If you are going to drag this discussion down this path you do it alone.

-SF

these statements you tend to make (absurd ones) are getting old. If you are going to disagree with BP, then please rpovide arguements against him. He played wood, you did not. End of story.

Bubba
02-15-2008, 05:33 AM
I can't believe how many of you took offense to my definition of a poser- I apologize to all of the Roger Federer wannabes out there - epescially you BreakPoint!

You really are a dork aren't you.

J-lob
02-15-2008, 05:33 AM
If they discontinue the k90 they have to come up with some new tech for a new 90

SlapShot
02-15-2008, 05:38 AM
4.0 South metro (Eagan/ Rosemount area). We should get a Twin Cities TW chapter going for this summer... where are you located?

I'm in east St. Paul. Looking for a 4.0 team after playing a miserable 3.5 match last night.

I'm all about finding more people to hit with this summer - once it gets warm, we should have a TTW get together.

Bubba
02-15-2008, 05:39 AM
I tried to make the best out of whatever point it was you were trying to make, I have a hard time understanding your meaning in somethings earlier today, as well, you might recall.



A comparative statement, that was then, then is not now.

I will not wait for you to actually prove this claim you made against me.



-SF

BP was right on re: McEnroe... I had a chance to hit against him for a bit (Patrick as well) in a warm-up for an exhibition... he was using the 200g at that point, strung way low [we strung up 10 frames for him and I recall that we were doing them at about 42#. At any rate, the amount of spin he created was obscene... the ball would just sit in the loose string bed. He strung low for two primary reasons 1. Power w/ less effort required, and 2. Spin... oh, and he could put the ball absolutely anywhere he wanted on the court. It was truly incredible.

Droofin
02-15-2008, 07:41 AM
Hi Frazeur,

I see you are a teaching pro (from your profile)...so you must be a pretty darned good player! You owe it to yourself (and your students) to spend some quality time hitting with a good wood racket strung with fresh gut strings. The racket needs to still be lively and solid; not terribly hard to find one like this, but you do need to look around. Most are just dead now since they are 30 years old. String it at 50 lbs or less.

We know you haven't spent time with such a racket because of the things you are saying here. Trust me...with practice, you can knock the cover off the ball with pin-point accuracy. Of course, there are disadvantages...but there are also advantages. The biggest advantage is the smile a wood racket puts on your face when you crack a groundie. In fact, a couple days of wood tennis is a great way to help a burned out student regain his/her excitement for the game. Just tell him to swing for the fence...they can't knock it out.

As a teaching pro, you really need to broaden your horizons a bit...especially before voicing such a strong opinion. At the amateur levels (4.5 and below), the game really hasn't changed that much since the early 80s. I compete just fine with wood rackets at those levels now. Sure...I'd win more with graphite...but I'd be bored. You just can't feel the ball with a graphite racket.

Bottom line: at the amateur levels, no matter how good you are, there's always somebody better...so you might as well play with something fun. There's NOTHING sweeter than cracking a groundie with a wood racket.

BP...please stop suckering these kiddies into these wood debates. I know you feel the need to educate them...but, it's just a waste of time. One day, a good wood player will show up at their local tournament...and they'll see it first hand.

BaselinePlaya
02-15-2008, 08:46 AM
I'm in east St. Paul. Looking for a 4.0 team after playing a miserable 3.5 match last night.

I'm all about finding more people to hit with this summer - once it gets warm, we should have a TTW get together.

I started a thread for MN tennis players in the 'odds and ends' section of the TW boards- us MN people can keep in touch there...

Azzurri
02-15-2008, 10:40 AM
Your quote also added nothing to the conversation nor did it have a single ounce of truth in it.

I sent his posts to an admin. hopefully they delete his garbage so we can concentrate on the topic at hand. posting something that has nothing to do with this thread and lying about it irritates me.

SFrazeur
02-15-2008, 10:50 AM
Hi Frazeur,

I see you are a teaching pro (from your profile)...so you must be a pretty darned good player! You owe it to yourself (and your students) to spend some quality time hitting with a good wood racket strung with fresh gut strings. The racket needs to still be lively and solid; not terribly hard to find one like this, but you do need to look around. Most are just dead now since they are 30 years old. String it at 50 lbs or less.

We know you haven't spent time with such a racket because of the things you are saying here. Trust me...with practice, you can knock the cover off the ball with pin-point accuracy. Of course, there are disadvantages...but there are also advantages. The biggest advantage is the smile a wood racket puts on your face when you crack a groundie. In fact, a couple days of wood tennis is a great way to help a burned out student regain his/her excitement for the game. Just tell him to swing for the fence...they can't knock it out.

As a teaching pro, you really need to broaden your horizons a bit...especially before voicing such a strong opinion. At the amateur levels (4.5 and below), the game really hasn't changed that much since the early 80s. I compete just fine with wood rackets at those levels now. Sure...I'd win more with graphite...but I'd be bored. You just can't feel the ball with a graphite racket.

Bottom line: at the amateur levels, no matter how good you are, there's always somebody better...so you might as well play with something fun. There's NOTHING sweeter than cracking a groundie with a wood racket.

BP...please stop suckering these kiddies into these wood debates. I know you feel the need to educate them...but, it's just a waste of time. One day, a good wood player will show up at their local tournament...and they'll see it first hand.


First of all thank you for bringing this out of where it was.

I think things wind up getting off my original topic. I contribute this mainly to my own inability to keep myself on track, I distract easily by the meanderings of other people; and I windup misrepresenting myself to what I set out originally to say.

I have not hit with a wooden racquet, no. So my opinion on wood lacks integrity. I'm not in for a debate in my experience amounting to an educated hypothesis on how they do. When I was originally instructed I was basically taught from the Dennis Van Demeer book as well I was trained to teach solely in that style as well. It was only after self training that I learned to play and teach in the modern style. So I think I have a somewhat good deal of perspective in the area. I understand the power that linear momentum can have as well as the range of motion tha the more closed off style can offered for applying spin. The heaviest racquet I have used it a nearly 14oz leadup ps 85. I have always given credit in my thinking that a wood racquet, with gut is going to be even more powerful than that. I have seen lucky to have access to Tennisplayer.net's footage of golden area players such as Bill Tilden, he is getting some serious speed on the ball. You are correct, that the game of most 4.5 players and below really hasn't changed much for decades. That is a lot of what I do, I modernize people to preform better with modern strokes. I can do this confidently because of that understanding of how the old style works.

I disagree that I am in anyway myopic, however I concede that I have allowed myself to get off track, which has led to self-misrepresentation.
Also, I have disagree with the bottom line. It feels a bit defeatist to me. Yes, there will always be better players. But that should not stop someone from self improvement. If people wish to say in the wood era then that is fine. I have stated many times on these forums that I am not trying to take anyone's mids away or for that matter anyone's woods.
However, the love for playing with wood is an acquired taste.

-SF

Droofin
02-15-2008, 11:15 AM
no prob, sf.

Breakpoint is one of my favorite posters here, but the old guy loves to debate. Right BP?

SF, do us all a favor...get yourself a racket like I suggested above and play with it exclusively for 2 weeks. Play against people that are a level below you at first. And just hit the &$*#@ out of the ball. Then, come back and let us know what the experience is like. But don't bother unless you've got a new/old stock (NOC) racket strung with gut. You can pick them up from TW's Bosworth collection. It will be very different than your PS 6.0 85 experience.

Cheers!

kalidor
02-15-2008, 12:21 PM
Posers are people who use a racquet just becuase a pro-player uses a certain racquet regardless of weather or not they can actually handle the frame. Proof of this can be seen in the 'For Sale' section of the classifieds- there you'll find a ton of K90s for sale becuase someone just wanted to have the same racquet as Roger Federer and then realized that they'd probably never win another match in their lives...

Proof of posers can also be seen in the '90 Square in Club' - my guess is that about 90% of them have no business playing with the same head size the Federer uses.

I agree somewhat.

Rafanatic
02-15-2008, 12:32 PM
I agree with this too.

kalidor
02-15-2008, 01:39 PM
I have used and bought many different kinds of racquets:

1) Arthur Ashe Head Comp racquets: Because that is the second racquet I picked up in my life, the first being wooden Dunlop racquet in 1989. I bought two, comp I and II.

2) Wilson Pro Staff Classic 85: Because Pete was my second tennis idol after Becker. I bought two

3) Wilson Hyper Pro Staff: Because Federer is my all time favorite player and I wanted to try something slightly larger than 85 sqin. I bought two, lost one at the tennis courts and then gifted the other to a close friend. Now I bought a third one, so I have one in my bag.

4) Wilson nCode nSixOne Tour 90: Because Federer switched to this. I bought 3, and then when the KFactor came out I sold all three for decent prices.
Now I recently bought one, so I have one in my bag.

5) Wilson KFactor 90: Because Fed switched I bought two of these. At this point I realized that I was chasing a rainbow. Also I learned that Fed is not using the marketed KFactor but an older racquet (probably closer to the Hyper Pro Staff but with paint jobs that he had done to make it look first like the nCode a few years back, and now the KFactor).

Needless to say I hated the KFactors and found that they did not suit my game at all. I was disgusted in fact on the court. I sold both of them on e-bay for 217 bucks. I had used them for about 8 months. So I can definitely conclude that I was a poser for a long time.

6) Wilson Matrix: This one came before the Pete racquet did. I bought two of these but gifted them to beginner level freinds.

I started swinging with my old Sampras racquets recently and to my amazement I started finding the range with my shots especially the serve. So back to square one.

I now play with the two pro staffs 85s which I fortunately never sold (one narrow miss with a guy who nearly bogfht them) strung at 54 lbs. I also hit with my Hyper Pro Staff strung at the same tension. I am about a strong 4.0 and weak 4.5 player. I am new to stringing at different tensions and will do it for the first time to see how it feels.

-hs

BreakPoint
02-15-2008, 02:04 PM
Breakpoint is one of my favorite posters here, but the old guy loves to debate. Right BP?

Hey Droofin,

Thanks for the props! :)

I guess I just felt offended that someone who has never even hit with a wood racquet in his entire life claims that he's more knowledgeable about the differences between the wood era and the modern era than I am, and that he's right and I'm wrong (or was it "silly"?) about what can and cannot be done with a tiny wood racquet even today.

burosky
02-15-2008, 02:22 PM
:D

http://i15.tinypic.com/7wpxmkj.jpg

He's not even retired yet he has his own tournament already!

JUST KIDDING!

movdqa
02-16-2008, 06:26 AM
Hey Droofin,

Thanks for the props! :)

I guess I just felt offended that someone who has never even hit with a wood racquet in his entire life claims that he's more knowledgeable about the differences between the wood era and the modern era than I am, and that he's right and I'm wrong (or was it "silly"?) about what can and cannot be done with a tiny wood racquet even today.

I think that the teaching of logic and reasoning has vanished from high-school and college curricula in the last decade. Maybe the last two decades.

SFrazeur
02-16-2008, 11:10 AM
Hey Droofin,

Thanks for the props! :)

I guess I just felt offended that someone who has never even hit with a wood racquet in his entire life claims that he's more knowledgeable about the differences between the wood era and the modern era than I am, and that he's right and I'm wrong (or was it "silly"?) about what can and cannot be done with a tiny wood racquet even today.

You are either lying or deluded. Either which way you are misrepresenting me. I never claimed to have more knowledge than you.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-16-2008, 11:33 AM
You are either lying or deluded. Either which way you are misrepresenting me. I never claimed to have more knowledge than you.

-SF
If you don't think you know more than I do about the wood era than how could you even possibly accuse me of being "silly" and "wrong" in comparing the wood era to the modern era? :confused:

It really is a silly argument to make. While players such as him may not have changed since the 65" days the Tennis world around them has. It is quite obvious that people then would have used modern size racquets if they were available. This is evident by the sales of other than midsize racquets today; given the option reasonable people will use what is most appropriate for the success of their game, not what strokes a myopic part of their egos. This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting then admit being wrong. I think that these people believe that they are playing a purer form of the game than others.

-SF

SFrazeur
02-16-2008, 12:00 PM
Yes, I referred to the making of the argument as silly, as in silly to use. Your knowledge of wood is there. It was never my intention to state that you lacked knowledge or that I had more knowledge than you. You seem to have a different connotation of the post than as it was indented, as I myself probably have in regard to some of yours.

The variable that is Tennis has changed, and I do not believe it is accurate to make use the variable of Tennis in your comparison as Tennis is very different in the separate eras. That is why I believe it was silly. Thank you. Have a pleasant day, and please take it the right way when I say . . . Enjoy Your Wood.

-SF

vince916
02-16-2008, 12:52 PM
what happen to the n90 on tw? was there a sale and they were all sold out?

BreakPoint
02-16-2008, 04:38 PM
I guess you haven't been here long enough, have you? FYI, SF was a well respected moderator on these boards. As for BP, you'll see who he actually is, in time. As a fact, a lot of members even call him "Twistpoint" because at times, he prefers to lie, mislead, cheat, create facts and manipulate topics.
You mean like the way SF has tried to mislead people on topics he has no first-hand experience of? As in how different the wood era was and how larger racquets were not available back then?

You mean like the way KK is "well respected" because he's a moderator?

And speaking about lying and misleading people, how about you misleading people into thinking that Federer does not use a K90 without any proof whatsoever and that any racquet labled "ProStaff" means that it's double-braided?

SFrazeur
02-16-2008, 05:20 PM
You mean like the way SF has tried to mislead people on topics he has no first-hand experience of? As in how different the wood era was and how larger racquets were not available back then?

You mean like the way KK is "well respected" because he's a moderator?

And speaking about lying and misleading people, how about you misleading people into thinking that Federer does not use a K90 without any proof whatsoever and that any racquet labled "ProStaff" means that it's double-braided?

Let it be known that while I attempted to end things amicably between us, you instead continued by again misrepresenting that I have claimed things I have not. You either lack understanding for what I have just clearing outlined for you, or you are a lier. As I give you credit for being of sound mind and an intelligent man, I have no other recourse than to brand you a willful, and vindictive lier. I apologize for any backhanded insinuations I have made. I failed as I should have held myself above it. In contrast, you sir have shown yourself to be, till the end, a petty charlatan. Your hands drip.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-16-2008, 08:46 PM
Let it be known that while I attempted to end things amicably between us, you instead continued by again misrepresenting that I have claimed things I have not. You either lack understanding for what I have just clearing outlined for you, or you are a lier. As I give you credit for being of sound mind and an intelligent man, I have no other recourse than to brand you a willful, and vindictive lier. I apologize for any backhanded insinuations I have made. I failed as I should have held myself above it. In contrast, you sir have shown yourself to be, till the end, a petty charlatan. Your hands drip.

-SF
Here are your own words which I think can be aptly used to describe yourself in this instance:

This type of person would rather feel themselves to be right and keep fighting than admit being wrong.

-SF

So let me ask you this, when are YOU going to admit that you were wrong? My argument was anything but "silly". Others here in addition to myself have tried to explain that to you, but you act as if you know better although you were not even alive during the wood era and had never even hit with a wood racquet in your life. Now, who's the one the refuses to admit that he was wrong?

SFrazeur
02-16-2008, 09:31 PM
I never stated that I knew more about the wood era than you. I have already clarified my statement to once before. This is in its own right a statement that I believe my words were not easily accessible enough. This is the last correspondence you will receive from me on this or another matter. I find you uncivilized. I gave opportunity for an amicable parting, however, you rejected it by continuing to harp upon a twisted tune, a statement, I never made. With all respects that are due, I call you a Charlatan. If you feel that you need to have the last word, then by all means, be your own guest. Good evening to you.

-SF

BreakPoint
02-17-2008, 12:57 AM
Yet you still refuse to admit that you were wrong.

And I would appreciate it if in the future you did not falsely accuse others of being wrong about a subject that you personally have no experience in nor knowledge of. Thank you very much.

J011yroger
02-17-2008, 05:07 AM
Will one of the two of you please just shut up?

I don't really care who.

Or failing that send e-mails or call on the phone or take a flight and hug it out.

Because neither I nor the rest of the posters here want to be seeing this crap.

J

vincent_tennis
02-17-2008, 07:05 AM
BP were u ever in hk?
cuz wilson luk says ur pretty awesome at tennis

Droofin
02-17-2008, 07:07 AM
I would be willing to pitch in $100 towards the cost of flying BP and SF to a neutral tennis court for a wood versus graphite war. The match would have to be video'd and broadcast on the Internet for TW community viewing.

Anyone else wiling to pitch in? ;-)

J011yroger
02-17-2008, 07:20 AM
Where does SF hail from?

Might be cheaper to fly one to the other.

I got 50 to pitch in.

J

quest01
02-17-2008, 03:56 PM
Reading SFrazeur's posts reminds me of reading a book from the 1940's. It's not a bad thing, I find it kind of interesting.

AlpineCadet
02-17-2008, 04:03 PM
Where does SF hail from?

Might be cheaper to fly one to the other.

I got 50 to pitch in.

J
I'll put in $100 if the match goes through and if there is a video posted.

AlpineCadet
02-17-2008, 04:05 PM
Yet you still refuse to admit that you were wrong.

And I would appreciate it if in the future you did not falsely accuse others of being wrong about a subject that you personally have no experience in nor knowledge of. Thank you very much.

Hypocrite. The same could be same for you as well.
Ref: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=2096932

Richie Rich
02-17-2008, 04:07 PM
Will one of the two of you please just shut up?

I don't really care who.

Or failing that send e-mails or call on the phone or take a flight and hug it out.

Because neither I nor the rest of the posters here want to be seeing this crap.

J

in all fairness, and no malice intended, no one is forcing you (or any of us ) to read the thread.

BreakPoint
02-17-2008, 05:05 PM
Hypocrite. The same could be same for you as well.
Ref: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=2096932
Wait, did you link that thread so that you could show everyone here how you were wrong about the ROK and the K-Blade Tour having "totally different" string patterns although they are both 18x20? :confused:

Slightly wider spacing makes the string pattern on the K-Blade Tour SLIGHTLY different than the ROK. It's impossible for two racquets of the same headsize and both having 18x20 string patterns to have string patterns that are "totally different" from each other. "Totally" means "completely". The fact that they both have 18x20 patterns already means that they both have the same number of mains and the same number of crosses in common. Two string patterns that are "totally" or "completely" different from each other cannot have anything in common. Therefore, they cannot possibly be "totally different".

AlpineCadet
02-17-2008, 05:14 PM
Wait, did you link that thread so that you could show everyone here how you were wrong about the ROK and the K-Blade Tour having "totally different" string patterns although they are both 18x20? :confused:

Slightly wider spacing makes the string pattern on the K-Blade Tour SLIGHTLY different than the ROK. It's impossible for two racquets of the same headsize and both having 18x20 string patterns to have string patterns that are "totally different" from each other. "Totally" means "completely". The fact that they both have 18x20 patterns already means that they both have the same number of mains and the same number of crosses in common. Two string patterns that are "totally" or "completely" different from each other cannot have anything in common. Therefore, they cannot possibly be "totally different".
You've never even played with the frames before, so stop being blatantly ignorant. Secondly, lets review:
Deuce-
I really think you may have tried the early version of the Rok with "Wilson" on the side, which was half an ounce lighter than the later version and less stable. The later version was heavier and very similar to the PC 600, which I used for about 10 years and know
extremely well. I also used the prestige tour and grey and green prestiges. The later Rok is anything but a flimsy toy. And like you, I've been playing over 30 years at a high level, and I have hit with plenty of frames and owned dozens. At the same time, I may like flexier frames than you-- current favorite is the RDX 500 with customization.

BP-
The string density of the Rok is pretty different than the kBlade, believe it or not. Center mains practically touch, and the head shape is more squarish than the KBT. Not drastically different, but the frame is drilled differently than the Rok due to it's shape.

HZ

If you have at least seen the ROK 93 and the kBlade Tour in person, you'd know that the ROK 93 has a very dense concentration of mains near the center/throat. Because of this, the ROK 93 has a huge difference is ball response compared to the kBlade Tour--even though they are both 18x20.

What's so hard to understand?

J011yroger
02-17-2008, 07:06 PM
in all fairness, and no malice intended, no one is forcing you (or any of us ) to read the thread.

Ok, true, but I see this as me eating dinner at a restaurant and a husband and wife at an adjacent table screaming and arguing with each other while I am trying to eat.

No one is forcing me to eat there, but that still doesn't make it right. I shouldn't have to leave the restaurant on their account, and I shouldn't have to unsubscribe to this thread on the account of SF and BP.

If they want to bicker with each other, and nobody else on the boards wants to hear it, then it should be taken to e-mail.

If I went into the "See Breakpoint Argue" thread, and complained then it would be a different matter entirely. Just as it would be if I went into the bickering couple at the restaurant's home.

J

BreakPoint
02-17-2008, 08:28 PM
You've never even played with the frames before, so stop being blatantly ignorant. Secondly, lets review:

Yes, I have played with the ROK. Many times in fact. Almost bought a bunch of them for $49.99 on the bay when they were discontinued. No, I have not played with the K-Blade Tour yet.

Since when do you need to hit with a racquet to know what the string pattern is? :confused: Two different model racquets will play differently due to many factors besides the string pattern, such as weight, balance, stiffness, weight distribution, throat design, beam design and width, composition, layup, etc., etc. You can't just hit with the ROK and the K-Blade Tour as say - "Geez, these two racquets play differently only because they have different string patterns.". Of course, they play differently. They ARE different racquets! We're not comparing the nSix-One 95 16x18 with the nSix-One 95 18x20 here. We're comparing two different racquets. BTW, do you also have to hit with a racquet to figure out what color it is?

BreakPoint
02-17-2008, 08:33 PM
What's so hard to understand?
It's what you don't seem to understand. "Not drastically different" is far, far, far....did I say far....away from "totally different".

As for the topic I'm responding to, the kBlade Tour and ROK are nothing alike. Totally different string pattern, weight distribution, flex, construction, and feel. The ROK has more mass and feels like a solid frame--with the drill holes/string pattern being the only let down.


BP-
The string density of the Rok is pretty different than the kBlade, believe it or not. Center mains practically touch, and the head shape is more squarish than the KBT. Not drastically different, but the frame is drilled differently than the Rok due to it's shape.

HZ

kfactor/all/the/WAY!
02-17-2008, 09:05 PM
some one is probably just trying to be cool and trying to be the know it all and is just bluffing

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-17-2008, 09:31 PM
Hey Droofin,

Thanks for the props! :)

I guess I just felt offended that someone who has never even hit with a wood racquet in his entire life claims that he's more knowledgeable about the differences between the wood era and the modern era than I am, and that he's right and I'm wrong (or was it "silly"?) about what can and cannot be done with a tiny wood racquet even today.

Your thinking is flawed and not true. Many accurate assesments can be made about many things that dont require you to have lived in the past to be knowledgeable about the past. I never drove a model t ford, but i have a good idea what the performance would be like and nobody could say because i did not live in that era that a model t would take a current corvette off the line in a drag race. lol.. I think i've hit with a wood racquet but dont remember but i am pretty sure the power is laughable and i also dont believe roscoe tanner could serve 130 with wood. Did they even have radar guns back then? I dont think pete sampras could serve 130 with a wood racquet. And for the record i have NEVER-ever played anybody with a wood racquet.

BreakPoint
02-17-2008, 11:15 PM
Your thinking is flawed and not true. Many accurate assesments can be made about many things that dont require you to have lived in the past to be knowledgeable about the past. I never drove a model t ford, but i have a good idea what the performance would be like and nobody could say because i did not live in that era that a model t would take a current corvette off the line in a drag race. lol.. I think i've hit with a wood racquet but dont remember but i am pretty sure the power is laughable and i also dont believe roscoe tanner could serve 130 with wood. Did they even have radar guns back then? I dont think pete sampras could serve 130 with a wood racquet. And for the record i have NEVER-ever played anybody with a wood racquet.

What does comparing cars have anything to do with comparing how tennis was played? :confused: One is a machine, the other is a game/sport with many facets in strokes, spins, strategies, mental toughness, movement, speed, conditioning, etc.

I'll give you a better analogy. Someone who has never had sex knows nothing about what real sex is really like.

Your question about if they had radar guns back then clearly shows how little you know about the wood era.

Roscoe Tanner hit 153mph. Colin Dibley, who also used a Dunlop Maxply Fort woodie like I did, hit 148mph.


http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4875399.html

http://www.**********.com/forum/index.php?topic=7091.20
replace *** with tennis 4 you (no spaces)

http://nfsctour.com/big.html


Even I can hit harder with a wood racquet than with my nCode 90, so I have no doubt Sampras could as well.

[K]aotic
02-18-2008, 12:09 AM
What does comparing cars have anything to do with comparing how tennis was played? :confused: One is a machine, the other is a game/sport with many facets in strokes, spins, strategies, mental toughness, movement, speed, conditioning, etc.

I'll give you a better analogy. Someone who has never had sex knows nothing about what real sex is really like.

Your question about if they had radar guns back then clearly shows how little you know about the wood era.

Roscoe Tanner hit 153mph. Colin Dibley, who also used a Dunlop Maxply Fort woodie like I did, hit 148mph.


http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4875399.html

http://www.**********.com/forum/index.php?topic=7091.20
replace *** with tennis 4 you (no spaces)

http://nfsctour.com/big.html


Even I can hit harder with a wood racquet than with my nCode 90, so I have no doubt Sampras could as well.
huh...???
10 chars

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:19 AM
aotic;2098128']huh...???
10 chars
Do you have a question?

I used to serve tons of aces when I used a wood racquet, probably averaging at least two aces per service game. I can't do that with any modern racquet.

When I switched back to a wood racquet for a month last year, I was hitting my groundstrokes harder than I normally do with my nCode 90. All of the people I played against that month all said the same thing to me.

stormholloway
02-18-2008, 12:24 AM
Any video of the Tanner serve?

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-18-2008, 12:37 AM
Roscoe Tanner hit 153mph. Colin Dibley, who also used a Dunlop Maxply Fort woodie like I did, hit 148mph.


And you believe that? We have seen roddick hit 150+, was tanners serve anywhere near that fast? That's a big hell no. I have seen roscoe's serve and it's nowhere near.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:41 AM
And you believe that? We have seen roddick hit 150+, was tanners serve anywhere near that fast? That's a big hell no. I have seen roscoe's serve and it's nowhere near.
Um, were you there to see Tanner's serve?

AlpineCadet
02-18-2008, 12:41 AM
It's what you don't seem to understand. "Not drastically different" is far, far, far....did I say far....away from "totally different".So you're still going to hang onto your ignorant/subjective/loaded views by picking apart my diction? :rolleyes: Wait, what else is there to pick apart? (I can see through your pointless attempt to save face, not sure about the rest of the folks on TW though. If you don't want to admit that you were wrong, it's fine with me.)

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-18-2008, 12:47 AM
Um, were you there to see Tanner's serve?

Yes on tv-the same as roddick. You have seen it? You gonna tell me it was as fast as roddick? Heck it's not even on gorans level imo. He was probably hitting lower 120's imo.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:47 AM
Yes on tv-the same as roddick. You have seen it? You gonna tell me it was as fast as roddick? Heck it's not even on gorans level imo. He was probably hitting lower 120's imo.

Yes, I have seen both Tanner's and Roddick's serves in person.

Also, another point of view.

Excerpt from my 2nd link above:

"The system used to calculate Roddick's 155mph was different than the system used to calculate Tanner's 153mph. And those were different than the system used to calculate Bill Tilden's 161 mph. When Tanner was hitting 150mph very few other players were near 140mph. Tanner was in a different league speedwise. Was no one surprised when the current system went into use and suddenly everyone began having faster serves? Hasn't anyone considered the fact that pro tennis wants faster speeds to make the game seem more exciting? If a better system came along tomorrow that showed slower speeds would pro tennis adopt it? Of course not.

Then of course we have to consider the type of racket they used. If Roddick can pop 140 mph with a small headed wooden racket let him prove it. It will never happen.

About 10-12 years ago there was a guy who was compiling video of all the fastest servers and using a consistent method to evaluate their speed. I never saw the final results. The last I heard he couldn't find a good video of Tilden's serve or Vines but no one was even close to Tanner.

Finally, I've seen both Roddick and Tanner in person and Tanner was faster. I don't think it was that close either. Someone should ask Borg who is faster, assuming that Borg has even seen Roddick play. I put Roddick as faster than Chip Hooper but not by a hell of lot."

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-18-2008, 12:55 AM
Yes, I have seen both Tanner's and Roddick's serves in person.

Also, another point of view.

Excerpt from my 2nd link above:

"The system used to calculate Roddick's 155mph was different than the system used to calculate Tanner's 153mph. And those were different than the system used to calculate Bill Tilden's 161 mph. When Tanner was hitting 150mph very few other players were near 140mph. Tanner was in a different league speedwise. Was no one surprised when the current system went into use and suddenly everyone began having faster serves? Hasn't anyone considered the fact that pro tennis wants faster speeds to make the game seem more exciting? If a better system came along tomorrow that showed slower speeds would pro tennis adopt it? Of course not.

Then of course we have to consider the type of racket they used. If Roddick can pop 140 mph with a small headed wooden racket let him prove it. It will never happen.

About 10-12 years ago there was a guy who was compiling video of all the fastest servers and using a consistent method to evaluate their speed. I never saw the final results. The last I heard he couldn't find a good video of Tilden's serve or Vines but no one was even close to Tanner.

Finally, I've seen both Roddick and Tanner in person and Tanner was faster. I don't think it was that close either. Someone should ask Borg who is faster, assuming that Borg has even seen Roddick play. I put Roddick as faster than Chip Hooper but not by a hell of lot."


Nice link..But do YOU think tanners was faster than roddicks? With a wood racquet there is no way, impossible- for tanner to have come anywhere near. I'm curious what you think instead of that, seemingly biased link.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:56 AM
So you're still going to hang onto your ignorant/subjective/loaded views by picking apart my diction? :rolleyes: Wait, what else is there to pick apart? (I can see through your pointless attempt to save face, not sure about the rest of the folks on TW though. If you don't want to admit that you were wrong, it's fine with me.)
Um....exactly where was I wrong? :confused:

The string patterns for the ROK and for the K-Blade Tour are NOT "totally different". They are only slightly different. Both still have 18 mains and 20 crosses and are strung vertically and horizontally in a 93 sq. in. head. That alone negates ANY possiblity for their string patterns to be "totally different".

Look up the word "totally". It means "completely" or "in every way". That is obviously not the case here.

We're all still waiting for you to admit that you were wrong by calling them "totally different". Any time now.

AlpineCadet
02-18-2008, 01:02 AM
Um....exactly where was I wrong? :confused:

The string patterns for the ROK and for the K-Blade Tour are NOT "totally different". They are only slightly different. Both still have 18 mains and 20 crosses and are strung vertically and horizontally in a 93 sq. in. head. That alone negates ANY possiblity for their string patterns to be "totally different".

Look up the word "totally". It means "completely" or "in every way". That is obviously not the case here.

We're all still waiting for you to admit that you were wrong by calling them "totally different". Any time now.

Let's have a mini-review of what you wrote:

Well, they both are 11.8 oz. strung, have 93 sq. in. heads, and have 18x20 string patterns so I'm not sure how "totally different" the string patterns can be:

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCWILSON-KBL93.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20030801121553/www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpage.html?PCODE=ROK92

"Totally different" would be like 14x16 vs. 18x20 or diagnonally strung vs. horizontally/vertically strung. :shock:

You don't need to play with the racquets to know how different the string patterns are.

The nSix-One Tour 90 and the K90 both have 16x19 patterns that are only slightly different in the middle. The difference only being 5 crosses at the PWS versus 4 crosses at the PWS. The ROK and the K-Blade Tour both have 18x20 string patterns. For their patterns to be "totally different", they would have to be drastically different than the slight difference in patterns between the nCode 90 and K90, such as a huge hole in the middle of the stringbed with no strings whatsoever. I have never seen two racquets with the same exact headsize and the same exact number of mains and crosses to have "totally different" string patterns unless one of them was strung diagonally.

I'm not sure where you have any validation on the matter, other than from the stock of BS from which you are shoveling. The ROK and the kBlade Tour may have the same head size and 18x20 pattern, but they play nothing alike (especially from their different drill patterns) among other various differences in spec. Others have agreed with this statement, why haven't you? Seems fishy/odd, but then again, when have you been known to admit being wrong? And no matter how stubborn/ignorant you are, in trying to prove some moot point, you're not going to fool me into believing what you have to say on this matter--though I'm not sure about the rest of the drones. Next.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 01:04 AM
Nice link..But do YOU think tanners was faster than roddicks? With a wood racquet there is no way, impossible- for tanner to have come anywhere near. I'm curious what you think instead of that, seemingly biased link.
It's hard to tell because of course I saw Tanner 30 years ago. You need to see them side-by-side on the same court in the same venue. I've seen Roddick hit serves on a fast indoor hardcourt which seem pretty fast, but the fact that it was indoor makes it easier to serve faster and of course the fast hardcourt makes it skid faster. In addition, the sound of the strings hitting the ball sounds much louder indoors due to the sound waves bouncing inside the arena and the sound of his poly strings in also louder than Tanner's gut strings, so Roddick's serve may SEEM faster due to the loud "bang".

BTW, the radar gun does not lie and Tanner's serve was clocked by radar to be 153mph. The heavier weight of wood racquets really allow you to pound the ball. If you have the strength to generate the racquet head speed with a wood racquet, you can generate a ton of pace.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 01:08 AM
I'm not sure where you have any validation on the matter, other than from the stock of BS from which you are shoveling. The ROK and the kBlade Tour may have the same head size and 18x20 pattern, but they play nothing alike (especially from their different drill patterns) among other various differences in spec. Others have agreed with this statement, why haven't you? Seems fishy/odd, but then again, when have you been known to admit being wrong? And no matter how stubborn/ignorant you are, in trying to prove some moot point, you're not going to fool me into believing what you have to say on this matter--though I'm not sure about the rest of the drones. Next.
So, again, where's the proof that the string patterns are "totally different", i.e., completely different in every way possible?

Oh, I forgot, you don't have any. Therefore, you are wrong.

And what does playing with it have anything to do with it. You mean you're not able to tell a racquet's string pattern from just looking at it? :confused: Hmmm...maybe you're visually challenged?

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-18-2008, 01:16 AM
It's hard to tell because of course I saw Tanner 30 years ago. You need to see them side-by-side on the same court in the same venue. I've seen Roddick hit serves on a fast indoor hardcourt which seem pretty fast, but the fact that it was indoor makes it easier to serve faster and of course the fast hardcourt makes it skid faster. In addition, the sound of the strings hitting the ball sounds much louder indoors due to the sound waves bouncing inside the arena and the sound of his poly strings in also louder than Tanner's gut strings, so Roddick's serve may SEEM faster due to the loud "bang".

Roddick is the fastest on tour. Remember the Koelshrieber match? He was serving consistent 140's and that's the fastest i've ever seen anyone serve like that.. No way-impossible-tanners was like that. Or anyone else..

BTW, the radar gun does not lie and Tanner's serve was clocked by radar to be 153mph. The heavier weight of wood racquets really allow you to pound the ball. If you have the strength to generate the racquet head speed with a wood racquet, you can generate a ton of pace.

Stiffness and widebody technology BP. There is no way that a wood racquet is as stiff or as powerful compared to the ultra 2 with boron. Weight matters but stiffness is more important concerning power. Widebody plus pretty stiff like roddicks racquet is a big reason he hits those mph. Their is just no comparison in power between a woodie and a pure drive.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 01:25 AM
Roddick is the fastest on tour. Remember the Koelshrieber match? He was serving consistent 140's and that's the fastest i've ever seen anyone serve like that.. No way-impossible-tanners was like that. Or anyone else..
You mean like since you weren't alive to see the first moon landing so you think it's impossible for man to walk on the moon?

Stiffness and widebody technology BP. There is no way that a wood racquet is as stiff or as powerful compared to the ultra 2 with boron. Weight matters but stiffness is more important concerning power. Widebody plus pretty stiff like roddicks racquet is a big reason he hits those mph. Their is just no comparison in power between a woodie and a pure drive.
Did you read that first link?

Excerpt:

"Roscoe Tanner, a 140mph server in the 1970s and early 1980s, is convinced he would not serve any faster if he had a modern-day racket. Tanner used a metal racket and does not think that in his prime he would have served faster than Greg Rusedski and Mark Philippoussis if he had used one of their rackets.

"Serving fast is a combination of hand and racket speed," Tanner says. "But the reason they all serve so fast today is because they are so big. They are all giants of 6ft 4. I'm 6ft, which was about average when I was on tour. Now they keep growing."

Tanner used a wood Wilson Jack Kramer Autograph (one of the most widely used wood racquets of its time) before switching to an aluminum PDP racquet which had about the same headsize.

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-18-2008, 01:41 AM
You mean like since you weren't alive to see the first moon landing so you think it's impossible for man to walk on the moon?

But i have seen man on the moon and roscoe's serve.. If i never seen roscoe serve you would have somewhat of a point. And even if not, like tilden, you can prove scientifically the the racquet roddick uses is so much more powerful compared to any wood racquet by that alone nobody could serve faster even if they were more physically powerful than roddick.





[I]"Roscoe Tanner, a 140mph server in the 1970s and early 1980s, is convinced he would not serve any faster if he had a modern-day racket. Tanner used a metal racket and does not think that in his prime [B]he would have served faster than Greg Rusedski and Mark Philippoussis if he had used one of their rackets.


The prestige does not come close in power to a pure drive. Not even debateable. There is no question goran or philipouses or roscoe, would be able to serve faster, considerably, with a pure drive. If you had a big serve and served with a pure drive or another really stiff widebody you would know that.. Control is a different story. Believe what you will though.

Spector
02-18-2008, 02:55 AM
Roscoe Tanner hit 153mph. Colin Dibley, who also used a Dunlop Maxply Fort woodie like I did, hit 148mph.

On a side note all of these serve speeds are unofficial. The truth of these speeds are far from being valid.

thefederman
02-18-2008, 03:08 AM
hahaha after reading the last couple pages of this thread with arguments over the string density of the rok vs kbtour and who has the fastest serve and whether wood is better than graphite i scrolled to the top of the page and realized the title of the thread was... "Is the k90 really going to be discontinued soon?"

AlpineCadet
02-18-2008, 03:21 AM
hahaha after reading the last couple pages of this thread with arguments over the string density of the rok vs kbtour and who has the fastest serve and whether wood is better than graphite i scrolled to the top of the page and realized the title of the thread was... "Is the k90 really going to be discontinued soon?"

And it all revolves around someone named Breakpoint. To be honest, it's not the first time this has happened, and it's definitely not the last.

Richie Rich
02-18-2008, 04:36 AM
Ok, true, but I see this as me eating dinner at a restaurant and a husband and wife at an adjacent table screaming and arguing with each other while I am trying to eat.

No one is forcing me to eat there, but that still doesn't make it right. I shouldn't have to leave the restaurant on their account, and I shouldn't have to unsubscribe to this thread on the account of SF and BP.

If they want to bicker with each other, and nobody else on the boards wants to hear it, then it should be taken to e-mail.

If I went into the "See Breakpoint Argue" thread, and complained then it would be a different matter entirely. Just as it would be if I went into the bickering couple at the restaurant's home.

J

i hear you but the bickering couple have just as much right to be at the restaurant as you, don't they? like these forums they are public places.

however, it does seem a certain poster gets into these "debates" quite often on these forums which does detract from the overall experience. a private "debate" through personal email doesn't seem to be what this person wants.

i'm not sure what the solution is :sad:

hmj66cn
02-18-2008, 05:09 AM
just like ps 85

NoBadMojo
02-18-2008, 07:57 AM
i hear you but the bickering couple have just as much right to be at the restaurant as you, don't they? like these forums they are public places.

however, it does seem a certain poster gets into these "debates" quite often on these forums which does detract from the overall experience. a private "debate" through personal email doesn't seem to be what this person wants.

i'm not sure what the solution is :sad:

the big difference is that in a public restaurant, if patrons are being disruptive and being an annoying nuisance detracting from the dining experience of others, the owner/manager of the restaurant can just give them the boot and make them leave the restaurant. that doesnt happen around here.

Richie Rich
02-18-2008, 08:58 AM
the big difference is that in a public restaurant, if patrons are being disruptive and being an annoying nuisance detracting from the dining experience of others, the owner/manager of the restaurant can just give them the boot and make them leave the restaurant. that doesnt happen around here.

good point. i agree. it's pretty clear nothing will be done about it (lord knows they have had a few years to do so). the behavior keeps repeating itself over and over.

i guess the only solution is not to respond to this persons posts. if they aren't getting a reaction then maybe they'll go away?

loubapache
02-18-2008, 09:46 AM
good point. i agree. it's pretty clear nothing will be done about it (lord knows they have had a few years to do so). the behavior keeps repeating itself over and over.

i guess the only solution is not to respond to this persons posts. if they aren't getting a reaction then maybe they'll go away?

Good lord, I just came back to the forum after a few months of absence due to the person mentioned but not named and what did I find? The same person has been doing the same old things over and over. Yes, not responding is one way.

The other way is to have some advanced features so OP can either include or exclude members, like some group features.

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:12 PM
And it all revolves around someone named Breakpoint. To be honest, it's not the first time this has happened, and it's definitely not the last.
Um...who introduced the ROK and its string pattern into this thread?

Oh yeah, some guy named AlpineCadet. Ever heard of him? :roll:

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:15 PM
the big difference is that in a public restaurant, if patrons are being disruptive and being an annoying nuisance detracting from the dining experience of others, the owner/manager of the restaurant can just give them the boot and make them leave the restaurant. that doesnt happen around here.
But in the real world, nobody forces anyone to go to a restaurant frequented by people they don't like.

There are many restaurants that I avoid because I don't like the "atmosphere".

NoBadMojo
02-18-2008, 12:25 PM
But in the real world, nobody forces anyone to go to a restaurant frequented by people they don't like.

There are many restaurants that I avoid because I don't like the "atmosphere".

how odd/ironic you would respond. i think many of the people here like the TW restaurant, except for a few patrons who constantly ruin the overall experience for others and who cause people to quit visiting the restaurant all together

Mick
02-18-2008, 12:28 PM
the restaurant comparison is not valid.

people would go to a restaurant to eat and not to debate
whereas, people would go to a forum to talk about stuff and to debate.

if everybody agrees with one another then that forum is useless.

AlpineCadet
02-18-2008, 12:33 PM
the restaurant comparison is not valid.

people would go to a restaurant to eat and not to debate
whereas, people would go to a forum to talk about stuff and to debate.

if everybody agrees with one another then that forum is useless.

I agree. :lol:

Droofin
02-18-2008, 12:37 PM
Ok...NOW our exhibition is becoming a true Thilla in Amelia!

We've raised $250 thus far. If we add in NoBadMojo, then I'm sure we can raise at least $1,000 and probably much more. The three players can work out the terms for how the purse is split.

The venue will be beautiful Amelia Island, Florida. The format will be a round robin...each match is best of 3 sets. Choice of racket/technology/decade is up to the each player; but, extra harassment/style points are awarded for any wood racket play.

This is a must see match equal to The Great Battle of the Sexes (Riggs versus BJ King). Sampras/Federer exhibitions are a pitiful yawn compared to this!

The Internet feed will be available to all who donate to the purse. Others will have to buy access to the feed for a small fee. Proceeds of the Internet feed will go directly into the pockets of the players per the terms arranged by the players themselves.

We've got $250, but it will take much more to entiece the two TW G.O.A.T's and the whipper-snapper to the table for talks. Who else is in?

BreakPoint
02-18-2008, 12:38 PM
how odd/ironic you would respond. i think many of the people here like the TW restaurant, except for a few patrons who constantly ruin the overall experience for others and who cause people to quit visiting the restaurant all together
There are thousands of restaurants (threads) here on TTW. No one is being forced to go into the ones they don't like. There are plenty to choose from.