View Full Version : Too much technology?

nw tennis
04-22-2005, 12:01 PM
I was reading a recent post by someone asking why Head doesn't incorporate several of its technologies into one racquet - in that particular case, incorporating Liquidmetal with the Flexpoint holes. While they're at it, why don't they add the piezoelectric fibers - that would be something.
But seriously, it made me think about how much of a difference these technologies actually make in a person's game. IMHO, good players could hit with a 2-by-4 if they had solid mechanics, mental toughness and good fitness. No amount of technology can replace those things.
Am I alone here?

Gaines Hillix
04-22-2005, 12:13 PM
Except for the flexpoint, which is designed to provide better directional control, the rest of these technologies are all about power. They stiffen the racquet, but then they have to add shock absorbing technology to dampen them so they don't ruin your arm, but that takes a lot of feel out of the frame.

04-22-2005, 12:14 PM
pluse rackets are way to expensive over 200 strung

04-22-2005, 12:18 PM
IMO, the technology is a good way to sell tennis racquets. If companies never came out with new racquets, they wouldn't sell them. For the advanced player, the technology doesn't matter as much as it may to a beginner with bad form.

04-22-2005, 12:57 PM
Isn;t the Flexpoint, the Liquidmetal Flexpoint? seems to me, the one i briefly hit with had both graphics on it..wouldnt surprise me if they didnt have those piezo electric thingies in there too..personally, i think most of this stuff is just fancy names and they have cooler cosmetics now, but many of the frames are made more cheaply but cost more.

04-22-2005, 01:03 PM
I'm not sure I believe Head's claim of these intelligence fibers stiffening upon impact as if it were something organic.

However, Head definitely put *something* in these intelligence rackets to get that type of feel, it's not just all graphite.

As for the liquidmetal hype, I tend to think it's just hot air.

Brent Pederson
04-22-2005, 01:09 PM
I read somewhere in a head document that the latest incorporate both the intelligent fibers and liquidmetal as well as flexpoint...

04-22-2005, 01:09 PM

Some good info on piezoelectric materials that isn't too technical.

04-23-2005, 02:57 PM
Nasa is actually using some liquidmetal alloys for its ships or at least experimenting with them.


joe sch
04-23-2005, 03:56 PM
I read somewhere in a head document that the latest incorporate both the intelligent fibers and liquidmetal as well as flexpoint...
Im glad to hear that Head was smart enought to use the intelligent fibers in the liquidmetal since otherwise the dumbfibers may have drown and caused a new age warping issue

04-23-2005, 04:17 PM
Have there been improvements in racquet technology from 1970-2004? Yes.
Do I consider my RD7 and improvement over my old T2000? Yes.

It's easy to be a reactionary and say all new technology is crap. But tennis equipment has definitely evolved and changed the way the game is played.

Liquid Metal, Intellifibers... these are jokes ...but... graphite was a joke to many when it first came out.

History produces alot of waste, but it also hits a few homeruns.

Stay away from simplifications.

04-23-2005, 08:09 PM
It depends on what you want in tennis racquet technology. If you are a great tennis player like some on this board, feel free to stick to old POGs and Prestiges. But if you're are a tennis elitist like some on this board, I don't think it is fair to call all the new technologies crap. To each his own. All of them work to some degree for what they are designed. Whats wrong with trying to expand a sweet spot or give tweener players more power? Each of these new technologic innovations increases aspects such as these even if slightly. Obviously they have an impact as you can see there are many more Babolats being used on tour than ProStaff 85s (none that I know of). This is what the game has become. It will continue to change. Anyway, as I recently dicovered on this board, the flexpoints have liquidmetal in them.

04-23-2005, 10:19 PM
^Yeah what he said.

04-24-2005, 12:03 AM
As usual, people are confusing DIFFERENT with BETTER. But this is how people are conditioned by the marketing - which tells them - INSISTS - that every DIFFERENCE is an IMPROVEMENT. It's total BS, of course - but, to the joy of the racquet companies, that is lost on the majority. Every time a company comes out with a 'new technology' (which is about every six months these days), it promises more (usually 'more power and control') than the previous technology. In effect, the companies are persistently telling us "Hey, you know that technology that we came out with last year that we told you was so great? Well, it's not that great after all. But wait 'till you see our NEW technology - it's GREAT!" And this is repeated every year, because dumb people believe it. Hell, if their claims of 'more power and control' were true, then, after going through several generations of 'more power and control', we'd all be hitting with pinpoint accuracy and canon-like power on every shot...

Give a given player a frame made today - with the 'newest, bestest technology' - and give the same player a 10 or 15 year old racquet, and, if you do this on a significant scale - say, at least 100 people - it would prove that there are no advantages in today's racquets over yesterday's.

The gimmicks today are embarrassing.

One of these days, one of the racquet companies is going to have the balls to come out with a new technology and name it 'Gullible Technology'.

And even then, the majority won't catch on...

04-24-2005, 10:29 AM
The longer their product cycle, the better their racquet produced.

04-24-2005, 03:33 PM
in the end, its mostly just graphite... i think head's marketing department comes up with these technologies, not the "engineering" department

04-24-2005, 04:02 PM
I read somewhere in a head document that the latest incorporate both the intelligent fibers and liquidmetal as well as flexpoint...

dont forget twintube and those electric piezzo thingos