PDA

View Full Version : Mid Size v MidPlus or greater?


VolklVenom
06-05-2005, 01:22 AM
This question is as old as the ages. What do most think? Is a Mid really worth the effort anymore?
I know it provides a little more control and better feel, but has the pace of the modern game rendered them obsolete?

AndrewD
06-05-2005, 03:25 AM
This has been 'debated' quite a number of times on the board and as it usually degenerates into a bun-fight it would probably be better for you to do a search and see what has been said previously.

nViATi
06-05-2005, 06:27 AM
it's pretty much preference

Gaines Hillix
06-05-2005, 08:05 AM
There are trade offs and there is no one size that fits all players. I personally find that a racquet of about 100 sq. in. in the 11-11.5 oz range is the best compromise for me between maneuvarbility, sweetspot size and power. 95 and below can be too demanding for me and some of this has to do with the weight of most frames that small and smaller. Larger feels sort of unwieldy(not maneuverable) on volleys and at net. Frames that are too light or heavy for my game throw my timing off. It is certainly possible for players to work on their conditioning and technique and move from larger to smaller head sizes with a better result. I am not one of those that believes in giving a PS 6.0 mid to a beginner and telling them to stick with it because it will force them to play better.

fist pump
06-05-2005, 09:18 AM
theres a lot of factors to consider really . gaines mentioned them already .
use what will work for you and later on you can try to experiment on racquets that will further improve your game and style of play.

VolklVenom
06-05-2005, 02:49 PM
yes, but if your game (technically) was complete??
You had all the shots and could handle heavy weight and in fact, small heads, wouldn't you still opt for the 100 sq. inch?

For the minor inconvenience at the net, shorely, the benefits in most other areas (serve, groundstrokes) would outweigh the disadvantages?

Honestlybad
06-05-2005, 03:16 PM
About half a year ago this 15 year old boy, a friend of one of my pupils came to me a said that he wanted to learn to play tennis and make his his school team. Since he seemed to be very talented and motivated I agreed to help him. Since he needed to make up a couple of years in a couple of months I decided that we should take a risk and asked him to buy a very demanding racquet. We settled on a i.prestige mid. Yes the 93. I gave him two hour lessons every morning before he went to school for and on the weekends. Aditionally he played with some of his friends. Let me tell you - he made amazing progress! Not only did he make his highschool team, he played #1 doubles and he is now beating amateur players that have been playing tennis their whole lives! Oh yeah, his team got second place at a huge european highschool tournament. He won all his matches. His technique is excellent and he get's lots of power on his forehand with the small head. He is not tall or very athletic but talented. I am a big believer in small head sizes and this is all the proof I need! This would not have been possible with a less demanding racquet.

Gaines Hillix
06-05-2005, 03:21 PM
About half a year ago this 15 year old boy, a friend of one of my pupils came to me a said that he wanted to learn to play tennis and make his his school team. Since he seemed to be very talented and motivated I agreed to help him. Since he needed to make up a couple of years in a couple of months I decided that we should take a risk and asked him to buy a very demanding racquet. We settled on a i.prestige mid. Yes the 93. I gave him two hour lessons every morning before he went to school for and on the weekends. Aditionally he played with some of his friends. Let me tell you - he made amazing progress! Not only did he make his highschool team, he played #1 doubles and he is now beating amateur players that have been playing tennis their whole lives! Oh yeah, his team got second place at a huge european highschool tournament. He won all his matches. His technique is excellent and he get's lots of power on his forehand with the small head. He is not tall or very athletic but talented. I am a big believer in small head sizes and this is all the proof I need! This would not have been possible with a less demanding racquet.

If I was 15 years old and had somebody with good tennis knowledge working with me for 2 hrs. everyday I could play with a 93 sq. in. racquet too, but this kind of situation is not typcial of the average adult recreational player.

Honestlybad
06-05-2005, 03:30 PM
Age has nothing to do with it. If you work at it you can have much better results using a demanding racquet.

MChong
06-05-2005, 03:41 PM
To tell you the truth, the reason I'm using a mid though I'm only 16 is because I prefer the heavier racquets and the feel of it. In the midplus ones, I couldn't find one with the feel that I liked so I just went with the one that had the feel and control I was looking for; it was just coincidence that it was also a mid.

newnuse
06-06-2005, 12:35 AM
What's a bun-fight? some sort of Aussie slang?

It's all a matter of preference. I've played with a 100" racket for several years but could never become one with it. It never gave me the feel and control of a smaller racket.

In highschool, I would occasionally warm up with a small wooden racket before a match. It always seem to help my ground strokes when I switch back to my midsize. My strokes were full and smoother.

And no, the modern game will never render the midsize frame obsolete. Aggresive attacking players will tend to favor smaller heads, baseline bangers will favor larger heads.

AndrewD
06-06-2005, 12:48 AM
I suppose it is just Aussie slang (always hard to know where you get expressions from). Its basically where things just degenerate into a messy situation with one side throwing insults at the other side the other side retaliating in kind.

BLiND
06-06-2005, 01:10 AM
I speak from a older person's POV. I started playing tennis at the age of 26... I started with a LM Radical OS... and quickly started down-shifting to smaller heads as I had a lot of power.

as I progressed, I settled on a i.Prestige MP (95" 18x20)... then LM Prestige Mid (89.5" 18x20).

I had a lot of fun and sucess with these racquets, this is where I learned my techniques and the grounding for my strokes.

However, I improved very rapidly. At the start of this tennis season, I found I was picked for all of the leagues, and was picked for the higher ranked teams, not just the bottom teams... I was really pleased.

but I'd not played at such a high level, and I relised that I started to struggle against the very best players... notably I had less time to prepair for strokes, My trusty LM Prestige started to feel slow and sluggish against quality players, and I looked to change.

I played with many many racquets (RDX, nCode, Diablo, X1) but found most success with a custom Vantage 111110 (90", 320g, 12pts, 63RA). It had the flex simular to a Prestige, but because it was lighter, I could swing it faster, meaning I wasn't rushed as much, and also the added bonus I could generate more spin.

After a couple of months, I noted that on heavier days (damp), I couldn't generate much power, plus on surfaces I wasn't use to (shale/clay) I could miss-hit a bit too often.

So I tried the exact same frame, but in 95" head size... I didn't want to loose the control, so opted for the 18x20 pattern. I figured it wouldn't effect me at all, since I'd pretty much learned all my tennis with an 18x20 pattern racquet.

So for the past 3 weeks I've been playing with this frame, and really, so-far its got everything. Its light enough to whip around, its heavy enough to handle boomers, its stable, its got spin, control, everything. Sometimes I look at it and think it just looks a little wrong because the head is larger than I am use to... but it does everything I want. Even on very heavy balls I have no problem generating pace... yet with new balls on a dry day, I'm not hitting the back fence.

What I'm trying to say is, that I prefer small heads... but actually I ended up compromising to a 95"... and really I can't pick a fault with it, other than its not a 90". The 18x20 pattern I just love, and it didn't take me long to get back into the technique of hitting with a dense pattern over a loose one... even with full 1.3mm strings it spins well... next week I'm changing it to 1.1mm x 1.3mm hybrid to see just how much spin I can get... I'm really looking forward to playing with this frame.

So... while a small head is great... don't forget as you improve and play better players, your racquet requirements will change.

GregOz
06-06-2005, 01:53 AM
Honestlybad, that is patently ridiculous. Of course age has something to do with it. If I gave one of the veterans I coach a small headed frame their game would suffer immensely.

You choose the racquet best suited to your game, that's all. You just dont make a blanket statement and expect it to apply to everyone, that's ridiculous.

Im sorry, but I think that whole post is what we in Australia call 'a whopper'.

tom4ny
06-06-2005, 03:17 PM
mr. andrewD - you can phrase things whichever way you wish because your knowledge comes thru clearly and your points are solid.

and mr. gaineshillix ditto for you.

listen to THESE guys!

(suggest to check out wildsmoose31's last thread.)

Kaptain Karl
06-06-2005, 05:05 PM
"It's the carpenter; not the tool."
- Unkown

... Since he needed to make up a couple of years in a couple of months I decided that we should take a risk and asked him to buy a very demanding racquet. We settled on a i.prestige mid. Yes the 93. ... Let me tell you - he made amazing progress!It's the carpenter; not the tool.

I am a big believer in small head sizes and this is all the proof I need! This would not have been possible with a less demanding racquet.No. I think it's more the, "I gave him two hour lessons every morning before he went to school for and on the weekends. Aditionally he played with some of his friends."

Here's my trip down Memory Lane:
When I was a HS Senior, the Prince aluminum was pretty new -- and generally scoffed at by us "purists". A rival team's Coach worked a deal with one of the local tennis shops and outfitted the whole Girls team with Prince rackets. Their Girls won the Championship that year, and our girls (who've won about 95% of the Conference Titles, before and since) *still* say that coach (just about) cheated by doing that.
______________

Grimjack - I think this is the first post of yours I can "take issue" with....
- Kick Serves! "I have a huge kicker!" Nobody worth a crap on the tennis court will ever tell you they have a huge anything. ... At 4.5+, a kicker isn't a weapon, it's a necessity. But all it does is give you a reliable 2nd serve that isn't too easy for an opponent to flat-out attack. Anyone who talks about a kick serve as some kind of weapon is playing 4.0 ball, tops.

- "I have a big serve, in the 120 mph range." Multiply all service speed claims by .75 to get an accurate reading.I am known for my BIG serve. I'm good at placing and jamming people with it. (And I'm a 5.0.) I've never had it clocked....

My Kick Serve *is* a weapon. I use it as my first serve plenty of times ... maybe 15%. I especially like jamming Righty's on their FHs in the Ad Court.
______________

Hmm I don't get the sense that people get things instantly at all. They keep asking the same questions over and over again if you read this board for a long time.Agreed. Kana - You're still kinda new. You'll be amazed to see how many people return with "I know you helped me with this before, but it's a mess again" questions.

I am sure that there are those who can serve 100-120 mph on this board, but the ones that don't (i.e the vast majority) tend to not talk about their service speed.Hmmm. I haven't noticed many TW folks boasting about 120+ serves. I've thought the ones who *could* didn't need to brag about it.

- KK

Morpheus
06-06-2005, 05:44 PM
I speak from a older person's POV. I started playing tennis at the age of 26... I started with a LM Radical OS...

So you are 28 now?

Morpheus
06-06-2005, 05:46 PM
"I
Hmmm. I haven't noticed many TW folks boasting about 120+ serves. I've thought the ones who *could* didn't need to brag about it.

- KK

KK, he may have meant KM/H not MPH, so technically he may not have been bragging...;)

BLiND
06-07-2005, 04:16 AM
Yes I'll be 28 in 2 months... started playing just as the LM Radical came out.

muaythai
08-28-2005, 06:39 AM
Yes I'll be 28 in 2 months... started playing just as the LM Radical came out.

Ouch! 28 can speak from "an older person's pov??" Please direct this 44 yr old to the geriatric ward. I didn't think I had yet hit the older person's pov! Clearly I'm in denial.

Age may have a little to do with a person's perspective on this. I played with wood racquets through high school (disco was king and old man BLiND was in diapers;)). Had plenty of stroke time with that 78 sq in head. 90 sq inches feels more normal than "challenging." 100 plus feels like just too much real estate to control. Once I do get to being an "older person," I may want to go a little bigger just for the sake of arm comfort and some added pop; but I'm not at that point yet.