PDA

View Full Version : 28 in. racquets and one handed backhands?


chair ump
12-28-2005, 01:21 PM
I hit a one handed backhand and am looking to try out a 28 in. racquet. Does anybody have any opinions/experience on the subject. I hit mostly slice and chip backhands, sometimes coming over it...and try to get to net most of the time.

SteveI
12-28-2005, 01:29 PM
I hit a one handed backhand and am looking to try out a 28 in. racquet. Does anybody have any opinions/experience on the subject. I hit mostly slice and chip backhands, sometimes coming over it...and try to get to net most of the time.

chair ump,

Using a 28" frame with a one handed backhand is something I have tried in the past, when the 28" rackets were "hot". My control on both sides really suffered. As far as using a 28" frame to play serve and volley or all-court tennis, I would not go that route. I guess it also depends on the level you are playing regarding net play with a 28" frame. Getting 28" inches into position to volley vs hard hitting 4.5 or up would be more difficult than using a 27" inch frame. I hope that helps. BTW what frames are you looking to demo?

Regards,
Steve

chair ump
12-28-2005, 01:55 PM
thanks for the reply. I am looking to hit with a wilson prostaff 6.1 classic stretch 28 in. racquet. I am a 4.0 all court player, and I have noticed that some players used extended length racquets in this forum and really like them. So, I'm curious to see what it does for my game. Being 6'3'' I was hoping that a 28 in. frame would give my net coverage some extra reach, since I am constructing my game to spend most of my time at net.

Speedy_tennis
12-28-2005, 06:26 PM
albert costa plays with pog LB

rooski
12-28-2005, 08:15 PM
28" frames pretty much blow at the net. Great for serves and groundies though. Also, shoulder pain has been associated with these long rackets.

Also, at 6'3" I wouldn't think you would need any more reach :)

SteveI
12-28-2005, 08:25 PM
albert costa plays with pog LB

Hi,

Have not seen Albert Costa playing Serve and Volley or All-Court Tennis much. Really a power clay court baseliner.

Regards,
Steve

chair ump
12-28-2005, 08:34 PM
Well, it seems that the 28 in. frame may be a burden at the net according to responses thus far. However, in my experience, most people attempt to pass at the net using angles instead of directly into the body (same thing on serves), so I'm thinking the extra inch might be useful in those cases...and with tricky overheads.

SteveI
12-28-2005, 08:46 PM
Well, it seems that the 28 in. frame may be a burden at the net according to responses thus far. However, in my experience, most people attempt to pass at the net using angles instead of directly into the body (same thing on serves), so I'm thinking the extra inch might be useful in those cases...and with tricky overheads.

Hi chair ump,

Hummmm..depends. I tend to hit low dipping balls on the pass. A clean pass is not really all I am trying for. I will take a missed volley or a shot that has to be volleyed up. In any event..if the player is hitting angles you still have to get the frame moving and in position and the extra inch could cause you to be be a faction slower. All I can say is give it a shot.. BTW what is the SW for the 6.1 stretch?

Regards,
Steve

SteveI
12-28-2005, 08:51 PM
thanks for the reply. I am looking to hit with a wilson prostaff 6.1 classic stretch 28 in. racquet. I am a 4.0 all court player, and I have noticed that some players used extended length racquets in this forum and really like them. So, I'm curious to see what it does for my game. Being 6'3'' I was hoping that a 28 in. frame would give my net coverage some extra reach, since I am constructing my game to spend most of my time at net.

SW for the MP is "336" BTW.. that # is a function to how much effort it takes to get a frame moving. 336 is not too bad... But could be lower.

Regards,
Steve

hummer23
12-28-2005, 08:57 PM
PS classic stretch is a stiff frame, and heacy. As mentioned above the swingweight isnt low either. Being 6' 3", you should have pleanty of reach at net, and therefore a control oriented and most importantly controlable frame may be the way to go. For example, one of the varios prestige mids may be a good choice, or a wilson ps 85, or 95 might be good also. there are great volley frames. I wouldnt look to a longer frame, especially such a stiff one, as that could lead to serious issues on the shoulder and elbow if you are trying to swing it faster than you are able to. Getting to hard hit shots at net could be a problem spot for this. I'd say maybe work on quickness, becasue you shouldd have the wingspan to be effective at net, and stick with a more standard leanth frame.

SteveI
12-28-2005, 09:05 PM
PS classic stretch is a stiff frame, and heacy. As mentioned above the swingweight isnt low either. Being 6' 3", you should have pleanty of reach at net, and therefore a control oriented and most importantly controlable frame may be the way to go. For example, one of the varios prestige mids may be a good choice, or a wilson ps 85, or 95 might be good also. there are great volley frames. I wouldnt look to a longer frame, especially such a stiff one, as that could lead to serious issues on the shoulder and elbow if you are trying to swing it faster than you are able to. Getting to hard hit shots at net could be a problem spot for this. I'd say maybe work on quickness, becasue you shouldd have the wingspan to be effective at net, and stick with a more standard leanth frame.

Hi,

NoBadMojo (5.5) is an all-court serve and volley guy and he uses a customized Volkl T10. He cuts down the bumperguard to reduce the sw.. and adds a leather grip to make the frame more head light. These mods make the frame much easier to move thur the air and create a fine volley stick. If you are playing 5.5 tennis in FL.. you need to be really for some well-placed rockets coming your way at the net.

Regards,
Steve

chair ump
12-28-2005, 09:35 PM
What you guys are saying makes sense...when my net game is at its best, I am moving well (and anticipating well), moving through the first volley and closing in tighter on the net. So maybe the extra inch won't be an advantage, but serve and volley tennis depends a great deal on the serve, and I've heard that the 28 in. racquets open up some major possibilities in that department.

NoBadMojo
12-28-2005, 09:48 PM
Thanks Steve, but unfortunately not too much percentage in serve.volley anymore.
ChairUmp I would avoid the 6.1Classic Stretch like the plague. That thing is an arm beater even in the standard length. Also most one handers have a tough time with extended racquets anyway and the extended length even in a softer frame often gives people arm troubles. Also, extended length frames are tougher to return serve with for many people especially when you get jammed. I know when I see an opponent using an extended frame, the first thing I do is give him jammers both on serves and when he is at net. Also most 4.0's are still struggling with consistency and extended frames are more inconsistent frames. If you dont need the extra length for more leverage and power, I would just go standard length or no more than 1/2" longer. Not what you want to hear I am sure, but I think you are on the wrong track here. Lots of great frames to choose from

Midlife crisis
12-28-2005, 11:47 PM
I hit a one handed backhand and am looking to try out a 28 in. racquet. Does anybody have any opinions/experience on the subject. I hit mostly slice and chip backhands, sometimes coming over it...and try to get to net most of the time.

I use a 28" long racket, static weight of 373 grams, about 7 points HL. My backhand is the much more consistent of my strokes, and I can hit from slice to extreme top, even more than probably on my forehand. I use an eastern grip for topspin shots up to my stomach level, and a more extreme eastern for above that. I slice with a continental.

I'm not sure why there are so many complaints about using a 28" racket. It's less than 4% longer than a 27" racket, and unless you're such an accurate striker of the ball that you can consistently hit within an inch on the long axis of the racket, I just don't get it. My personal belief is that people expect to have problems because they don't think to examine how slight of a difference the length really is, and therefore psyche themselves out before they even step on the court. There's really no other good explanation for the problems people report.

Sweden
12-29-2005, 02:09 AM
I think you should go for a 27,5 inch racket. They are great in every sense unless you have a really big forehand swing, that is the reason why I don't use it.

If you like Pro Staff 6.1, try the PS 6.5 in 27.5, it is about the same weight as the 6,1. The Pro Staff 6,5 tour (27,5) is the sweetest racket I have ever tried. The 27 inch 6,5 is not the same weight, it is lightweight and not a good racket in my opinion.

You might also try the Hyper Pro Staff 6.1, it is available in 27.5 as well.

kabob
12-29-2005, 03:08 AM
I play serve & volley occassionally with a Wilson 6.1 Stretch 95. Also employ a one-handed backhand. It's a blast :D

chair ump
12-29-2005, 05:37 AM
Hi Kabob,

Is that the 6.1 classic stretch 95 that you are talking about?

Ripper
12-29-2005, 06:01 AM
IMHO, using extended length raquets has very little to do with having a 1 or a 2 handed back hand. Remember, the extra inch (or half inch or quarter of a inch) is not there just to make the handle longer, but to make the complete raquet longer. The fact that they add the extra length to the handle is just so because it's the most convenient place to do so.

Ash Doyle
12-29-2005, 11:20 AM
IMHO, using extended length raquets has very little to do with having a 1 or a 2 handed back hand. Remember, the extra inch (or half inch or quarter of a inch) is not there just to make the handle longer, but to make the complete raquet longer. The fact that they add the extra length to the handle is just so because it's the most convenient place to do so.

You're missing the point here. That extra inch makes the racquet less Maneuverable, and also it moves the contact point away from you another inch. Both of those points, many believe, make it a little hard to control on the backhand side for a one-hander. However, I think it's a little overblown. While I think that extra inch is a great plus for two-handers, I don't think it's that bad of a detriment for a one-hander. It might seem that way at first switching from a standard length racquet, but after a little practice and getting used to it I don't feel it's that big of a deal.

Also, other than Mardy Fish can any name a non-claycourt specialist that uses one?

SteveI
12-29-2005, 11:31 AM
You're missing the point here. That extra inch makes the racquet less Maneuverable, and also it moves the contact point away from you another inch. Both of those points, many believe, make it a little hard to control on the backhand side for a one-hander. However, I think it's a little overblown. While I think that extra inch is a great plus for two-handers, I don't think it's that bad of a detriment for a one-hander. It might seem that way at first switching from a standard length racquet, but after a little practice and getting used to it I don't feel it's that big of a deal.

Also, other than Mardy Fish can any name a non-claycourt specialist that uses one?

What frame is Mardy using? I thought it was the 300G or MilFil 300G?

Steve

Ash Doyle
12-29-2005, 11:57 AM
What frame is Mardy using? I thought it was the 300G or MilFil 300G?Steve

That's the paintjob, but it's an extended 28" racquet. At one time, he used the Wilson 6.1 stretch 95 and has stuck with racquets with specs close to that one.

chair ump
12-29-2005, 12:55 PM
I heard that henman is using an extended length racquet now. I'm not sure if it's 27.5 or 28. Anybody know?

Vantage231511
12-29-2005, 04:09 PM
I use 28". Took some getting used to for volleys, but never noticed a difference with groundies, and improvement on strokes and serve.

What I still wind up doing is choking up on volleys if I don't think I'm getting the head in place fast enough that day. Nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact, several all time greats used to do it. The most notable being old, old timer Norman Brookes.

splink779
12-29-2005, 04:23 PM
Also, other than Mardy Fish can any name a non-claycourt specialist that uses one?


Ferrero
Nalbandian
Davydenko
Malisse
Grosjean
Rochus

Those are just off the top of my head. As you can see I don't regard Grosjean and Ferrero strictly clay courters.

splink779
12-29-2005, 04:24 PM
By the way, those here who say they use 28", what do you use?

chair ump
12-29-2005, 06:16 PM
The wilson prostaff classic 6.1 stretch 95 is 11 pts. headlight. If I wanted to add weight to make the balance more even, does anybody have any advice on where to place the lead without making the racquet less maneuverable at net than it already is. I was thinking a little at 3 and 9 o'clock.

SteveI
12-30-2005, 04:41 AM
The wilson prostaff classic 6.1 stretch 95 is 11 pts. headlight. If I wanted to add weight to make the balance more even, does anybody have any advice on where to place the lead without making the racquet less maneuverable at net than it already is. I was thinking a little at 3 and 9 o'clock.

Hi chair ump,

You can add lead tape at 3 & 9 which will make the head more stable and the frame less headlight. That will tend to make the frame less maneuverable and add more static weight. 11 points HL is quite HL and would make the frame more maneuverable than after the addition of lead tape at 3 & 9.

Regards,
Steve

chair ump
12-30-2005, 07:52 AM
Thanks Steve,

I'm looking forward to giving that a shot.