PDA

View Full Version : Explain This...


TennsDog
06-27-2005, 07:28 AM
Everyone here rants on and on about how pros don't use the racket they advertise. However, many new technologies have some physical difference that cannnot be made with paint: TCS ridges of LM, the rounded throat of Williams nCodes, O-Ports on O3, V shape on VE, and more, I'm sure. These looks cannot be mimiced. Thus, the pros seen with these rackets must be using them in reality.

Also, do pros regularly demo new models of rackets at all? If not, they could be hurting themselves. I understand "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." However, I personally am glad medical professionals don't follow this methodology because then we would never get new and better medicines if doctors never ventured to risk prescribing new medications. Some new racket technologies may have benefits to some pros, and they may be missing out if they don't try some of them out. I know I have played with a racket and loved it, but then tried a new one and it was almost exactly the same only better. So if a pro could demo a similar racket to what they like, only it has a new quality that makes it better, his/her game could legitimately improve.

Just a couple of things that have been kind of bothering me lately.

TwistServe
06-27-2005, 07:30 AM
Somethings cant be faked like the O-Ports on the O3... And somethings like the ridges on the LM are just plain FAKE!

ambro
06-27-2005, 07:31 AM
Everyone here rants on and on about how pros don't use the racket they advertise. However, many new technologies have some physical difference that cannnot be made with paint: TCS ridges of LM, the rounded throat of Williams nCodes, O-Ports on O3, V shape on VE, and more, I'm sure. These looks cannot be mimiced. Thus, the pros seen with these rackets must be using them in reality.

Also, do pros regularly demo new models of rackets at all? If not, they could be hurting themselves. I understand "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." However, I personally am glad medical professionals don't follow this methodology because then we would never get new and better medicines if doctors never ventured to risk prescribing new medications. Some new racket technologies may have benefits to some pros, and they may be missing out if they don't try some of them out. I know I have played with a racket and loved it, but then tried a new one and it was almost exactly the same only better. So if a pro could demo a similar racket to what they like, only it has a new quality that makes it better, his/her game could legitimately improve.

Just a couple of things that have been kind of bothering me lately.

Of course pros use what they advertise. Many also use paintjobs. LM ridges can be painted, but the rest of the things you mentioned cannot be mimicked. Also, I think it is in their contracts that they have to at least demo the new models, but they don't necessarily have to switch.

TennsDog
06-27-2005, 07:45 AM
The look or shadowing of the ridges can be faked, but if you see a closeup and actually see ridges coming up off of the frame (as you sometimes can), you know it is real.

nViATi
06-27-2005, 07:48 AM
tennis racquets are nothing like medicine.

TennsDog
06-27-2005, 09:13 AM
They are in the sense that new advancements can only make a difference to people who are willing to try them...some work, some don't; some work for some people, others work for other people; simple as that.

BreakPoint
06-27-2005, 09:47 AM
Some new medicines will kill you or have terrible side effects, too! Look at all the medicines that have been taken off of the market recently.

I think it's well known in the locker rooms that the older racquets are better for the pros's level games than the new racquets. The new racquets are designed for us recreational players, not for the pros. The pros just don't need all of these new technologies to help their games.

Just remember that technology cannot change the laws of physics, and that's what you're dealing with when a racquet strikes the ball. That ball's specs don't change no matter how many times you change your racquet's specs. Think about it.

NoBadMojo
06-27-2005, 09:56 AM
thats simply not true BP as evidenced by the number of PureDrives on Tour and other frames by Babblelot who wasnt even making racquets until a few years ago, and there are a very small handful of the WTA girls using classic frames..it's a mixed bag out there..the game has changed and even the pros are going lighter and larger headsized..seems like it is certain recreational players who should be changing who wish to stand tall with their classic inappropriate bats.
Disclaimer: This is not a personal attack on anyone using an inappropriate classic racquet, and everyone is sure welcome to use whatever they like.

nViATi
06-27-2005, 09:57 AM
They are in the sense that new advancements can only make a difference to people who are willing to try them...some work, some don't; some work for some people, others work for other people; simple as that.
tennis racquets are jus that... tennis racquets. medicines save people's lives.
totally different. you can't use that analogy.

TennsDog
06-27-2005, 10:26 AM
I don't understand your disapproval of my analogy. I am not saying tennis rackets are like medicine, just that they follow the same process of keeping old ones that work and then trying new ones that some will work as well. As for being killed: exactly, those are the medicines you take off of the market and the rackets you demo once, hate, and never touch again. No harm, no foul. You can compare this process with anything else. Why bother making new materials for anything when what he have now works just fine

BreakPoint
06-27-2005, 10:41 AM
NBMJ,
I hope you're not saying that Babolat has figured out a way to change the laws of physics, are you? Yes, I agree that there are many pros today that use Babolats or other lighter racquets, but I think most of them lead them up quite a bit (or some use ones without the Woofer system). Also, there are trade-offs with using a lighter racquet, as you know, such as elbow and wrist injury (as we've seen with many of the pros using the lighter racquets), lack of stability, lack of directional control, too much power (as with some Babolats). As I said, the weight of the ball does not change no matter how light or heavy your racquet is. So when the racquet strikes the ball, the laws of physics take over. And those laws cannot be repealed. :)

NoBadMojo
06-27-2005, 11:08 AM
BP you said that the pros are mostly using the classic frames..i disagreed and gave you a very valid example by saying there are tons of players using not classic frames like Babblelots. players like Roddick and Nadal don't really add much lead to their post classic Babblelot frames from what we know. twist this around to suit you any way you like. even when they do weight them up, they are still far stiffer and have larger heads than the classic frames..but maybe you will disagree with thse facts too. pretty funny.

BreakPoint
06-27-2005, 12:33 PM
NBMJ,
I think you may have misread my original post. I said pros prefer "older racquets", not classic frames. "Older racquets" does not necessarily mean classic frames. For instance, Myskina is using an older racquet in the LM Instinct painted to look like a Flexpoint Instinct. I would hardly call the LM Instinct a "classic frame". I think there are lots of pros using older models that are not necessarily classic frames (like Moya's old non-Woofer Pure Drive or Grojean's Twin-tube Radical Tour) because they don't feel the latest technology does anything for their games. That was my point and I think the point of the discussion in this thread, if I'm not mistaken.

NoBadMojo
06-27-2005, 01:42 PM
zzzzzzzzz...yawn. everyone of your posts is a real s-t-r-e-t-c-h to try and make you feel as though you are somehow right. it's really boorish.

southpaw37
06-27-2005, 02:00 PM
I know some pros probably do use painted rackets -- but who are we specifically talking about? And why do we really care what the pros use? If I'm going to drop $200 on a new racket I'm not basing my descision on what someone else is using. Personally, I think my game is a little different from Federer -- but that's just my opinion :-)

Ztalin
06-27-2005, 02:09 PM
zzzzzzzzz...yawn. everyone of your posts is a real s-t-r-e-t-c-h to try and make you feel as though you are somehow right. it's really boorish.

Every one of your posts has been a childish attempt to get the last word in. Grow up, he has some valid points.

NoBadMojo
06-27-2005, 02:40 PM
thats not true..in fact, it's the other way around

Nyl
06-27-2005, 02:46 PM
pros' contracts to their racquet sponsors do not force them to change their racquet of preference however they are responsible for testing out new models and racquet development.

BreakPoint
06-27-2005, 03:27 PM
Every one of your posts has been a childish attempt to get the last word in. Grow up, he has some valid points.

thats not true..in fact, it's the other way around

LOL. Hahahaha. Too funny. I think NBMJ just proved Ztalin's point himself. :D

southpaw37
06-27-2005, 03:28 PM
Who are all these pros using painted rackets????

BreakPoint
06-27-2005, 03:33 PM
Who are all these pros using painted rackets????

The question should be, "Who are the pros that are NOT using painted racquets?". That would be a much shorter list and easier question to answer.

NoBadMojo
06-27-2005, 03:51 PM
see what i mean? classic examples of BP's need to always have the last word. this happens repeatidly with him. as for you Ztalin, your comment was not appropriate or accurate. maybe you are actually Breakpoint in disguise.

southpaw37
06-27-2005, 03:53 PM
How about this--name FIVE ranked pros currently using painted rackets. What are they ACTUALLY using and what is it painted like? Please enlighten me.

The_Dark_Knight
06-27-2005, 04:37 PM
How about this--name FIVE ranked pros currently using painted rackets. What are they ACTUALLY using and what is it painted like? Please enlighten me.

1. Federer-Totally custom racquet
2. Agassi- could be an old twin tube, or even the donnay pro
3. Safin- Prestige classic 600
4. Hewitt-Super Rd tour
5. The Bryan Brothers- prostaff classic 6.1
i was in disbelief when i found out too, bud

ikon
06-27-2005, 04:43 PM
u guys need a life. a racquet is a racquet, play the game and have fun. who cares about what people think its a "game" and ment to have "fun" ok?

southpaw37
06-27-2005, 04:49 PM
I'm not in disbelief--honestly just don't care. I've been using the same racket since I was 15 so it doesn't surprise me one bit that the pros like to hang onto whatever it is they like.

I would be interested in a source for your info though.

southpaw37
06-27-2005, 05:03 PM
nm...did some looking into the painting conspiracy posts and found my answers. So touring pros like custom molds of rackets -- big deal. Back to caring about MY racket.

SHUNGO
06-27-2005, 05:32 PM
Well. there's really no need to get tense BP and NBMJ, specially because you are basically agreeing about the point, every tennis fan knows pros most of the times do not play with what we see, I have had on my hands a couple of racquets of pros customized by manufacturer.

I think is simple, you can be a person who is not interested in changes because of the success you get with your weapon as is, in such case manufacturers will never make you change, specially if you are somebody at the tour, and if you accept the changes, then you are the other type of person.

Anyway, marketing goes on, and racquet sales are not holding, they need new models so we run to TW or other shops and buy new staff thinking that is the secret to improv, that sometimes does, but most of the times enchantment will dissapear shortly, agree??

textbook strokes
06-28-2005, 08:34 AM
I think the key issue here is that pros really "work" with their racquets, while we just have fun (or misery) with ours. A pro will rarely agree to take the risk of change, unless he/she is forced by the sponsor. Keep in mind the time a player needs to adjust his game to a racquet, and the disaster it cuold cause in his/her ranking.
If they have to, they'll try to use a paintjob, and if not possible for phisical differences, they'll just customize the new stick to feel like the old one.

BreakPoint
06-28-2005, 09:47 AM
1. Federer-Totally custom racquet
2. Agassi- could be an old twin tube, or even the donnay pro
3. Safin- Prestige classic 600
4. Hewitt-Super Rd tour
5. The Bryan Brothers- prostaff classic 6.1
i was in disbelief when i found out too, bud

Actually, for me, I'd be in disbelief if someone told me that pros DID, in fact, switch to a new racquet every year. I mean even us recreational players like to stick to a racquet that we like and hate being on the demo treadmill and go around searching for old racquets that are no longer sold, so why should pros that depend on their racquets for a living be any different?

Some others:

Grojean: Twin-tube Radical Tour
Kuerten: Pro Tour 280 or 630
Philippoussis: Prestige Classic
Gaudio: HyperProStaff 6.1
Canas: HyperProStaff 6.1
In fact, you can pretty much be sure that none of the pros are actually using a LM Prestige nor any nCode racquet (except perhaps the Williams sisters).
Fish: ProStaff 6.1 Classic
Henman: ProStaff 6.1 Classic
Sharapova: Prince Hornet
Srichaphan: Yonex RD-40
Haas, Blake, Robredo, Mauresmo, etc.: none use a Dunlop M-fil racquet. They're all either very old Dunlop models, Tyger racquets, or from a custom mold.

Indiantwist
06-28-2005, 11:19 AM
Pro's customize their racquets from tournament /tournament (some times it also depends on opponent). Not all of them use Pain Jobs and Not all of them call up TW and buy their racquet before the game.

I am a believer that most of the pro's use the racquets they endorse (with their preferred customizations).

However i am not playing Bablot because Roddick/Nadal/Clijsters is using it.
Despite the fact that I play in a "League completely different" which none of those players can even dream of playing :)) ,I picked babolat because it felt comfortable for me. It also helped that they are endorsing it which adds that those sticks afterall have something in them.

TennisD
06-28-2005, 02:00 PM
Hahahah, these threads make me laugh so much...

TennsDog
06-28-2005, 04:10 PM
Henman uses a ProStaff? I understand using a paintjob to update models, but why would he have a paintjob of a different company? That doesn't make sense...

Ztalin
06-28-2005, 06:03 PM
as for you Ztalin, your comment was not appropriate or accurate. maybe you are actually Breakpoint in disguise.

You were arguing over nothing, really. Saying "zzzz" or "boring" has no use in a post. And if you think I'm Breakpoint... that's sad. Accept that more than one person disagrees with you and move on.

textbook strokes
06-30-2005, 08:31 AM
Henman uses a ProStaff? I understand using a paintjob to update models, but why would he have a paintjob of a different company? That doesn't make sense...

Probably he never liked any of the slazenger in the first place. The wilson is a well proved stick among pros, and I also remenber that the slaz pro braided (black&withe) was made having a wilson as a matrix, according to the TW old review, so it should'nt be difficult to make a paint job. ;)

TennsDog
06-30-2005, 10:30 AM
I understand using Wilson, but if he does, then why does he paint it to look like Slazenger? Why advertise for something completely different that isn't even involved?

TennisD
06-30-2005, 12:12 PM
I understand using Wilson, but if he does, then why does he paint it to look like Slazenger? Why advertise for something completely different that isn't even involved?
You aren't much of an economist, we can see that.

The reason Tim does this, is because the number Slazenger puts on the table obviously has more zeros behind it than the one Wilson wrote...

TennsDog
07-01-2005, 06:27 AM
I suppose he needs to get money from somewhere since he isn't busy winning any Wimbledons...

BreakPoint
07-01-2005, 10:16 AM
I suppose he needs to get money from somewhere since he isn't busy winning any Wimbledons...

Just remember that pro tennis is all about money, and not tennis. This is how they make their living and put food on the table and feed their families. They aren't dumb. They'll try and milk as much out of it for as long as they can since their careers are so short and opportunities so few.

Do you think that Sharapova's dad pushed Maria to play tennis so hard so that she could enjoy playing a nice recreational sport? They came to the U.S. with no money in their pockets and left her mother behind in Russia. The idea was to get rich as soon as possible through tennis. Now Maria makes $25 million a year (mostly in endorsements)! Mission accomplished!! Pretty much the same goes for the Williams sisters.

doriancito
07-01-2005, 10:19 AM
hey look at this item on **** 7165821678 type that number at the **** search box and you will se the LM ridges can be painted. i used to believe they were real but not anymore and im disapointed with head but now i use the flexpoint which is pretty cool and has the liquid metal ridges but in the original racquet color which is harder to notice

TennsDog
07-01-2005, 10:26 AM
See, the ridges on that racket are obviously painted, since they are actually a different color and don't have any kind of shadow.

textbook strokes
07-03-2005, 07:53 AM
Since probably many (better some) players use paint jobs; Are the juniors players the firsts ones who really use a new "player stick" when it is recently released?. Because we can deny there are new racquets periodically, and older frames get out of line.
I do know I'm speaking generally. I'm thinking about; Would you say a junior player rarely uses a painted stick?.

BreakPoint
07-03-2005, 01:26 PM
Some ranked juniors and college players do indeed use paintjobs.

textbook strokes
07-04-2005, 08:48 AM
Then how is the process of introduction of a new racquet/technology?. Is not serious to believe there are only old frames painted like new ones in tour.
Take the Ncode 6.1 95 for instance; there are like 30 players among the top 100 using it. Many juniors too. Are all of them painted hyper prostaffs ?.
And since the ncode is like a year 1/2 old; How many years will take to say goodbye to the painted old frames?.