PDA

View Full Version : Pavel's racket??


rooski
08-28-2006, 06:13 PM
Does anyone know what racket Pavel is using? They aren't showing it very close up on TV. Maybe a Fischer M Pro 1?

Sleepstream
08-28-2006, 06:17 PM
Looks like a Fischer M Speed Pro Number One (98, probably). But that's just from what I saw of the paint at the beginning of the match.

Keifers
08-28-2006, 06:34 PM
I was trying to figure this out myself. I could be totally off-base, but wondering if it might not be an M Speed 105. The head looks bigger than a 98?

('Course, it might well be another racquet painted in the M Speed colors.)

He's playing really well with it!...

rooski
08-28-2006, 06:37 PM
He's playing really well with it!...Do doubt. The guy looks unstoppable. Maybe the best 1HBH in the game the way he is playing tonight. Incredible...I thought this guy was a dirt baller.

Keifers
08-28-2006, 07:31 PM
Do doubt. The guy looks unstoppable. Maybe the best 1HBH in the game the way he is playing tonight. Incredible...I thought this guy was a dirt baller.
I saw him play against Fed (I think it was) at Indian Wells. On TV. Same beautiful bh, but not as good as tonight!

Court_Jester
08-28-2006, 07:41 PM
Does anyone know what racket Pavel is using? They aren't showing it very close up on TV. Maybe a Fischer M Pro 1?
According to the ATP website, he uses a Fischer Magnetic Pro Number One, as you guessed.

Feņa14
08-28-2006, 07:54 PM
I think he uses something out the mold of a Fischer Pro Vac Classic 98. I doubt he uses the M Speed.

I know before he used Fischer he was with HEAD and used the Prestige Classic.

travlerajm
08-28-2006, 08:15 PM
His racquet looks awfully heavy judging by the way the ball comes off it. Anyone know his specs? I'd guess 13 oz.

tennisguy11
08-28-2006, 08:46 PM
travlerajm are you kidding me. His racquet looks really heavy because he hits hard? You are joking right?

travlerajm
08-28-2006, 08:49 PM
travlerajm are you kidding me. His racquet looks really heavy because he hits hard? You are joking right?

No joke. It's actually very easy to tell if you know what to look for. Don't look at the pace of the ball. Look at the amount that the racquet bounces back when he blocks a return. With a little experience, it's easy to estimate racquet weight to the nearest ounce by watching someone hit balls.

tennisguy11
08-28-2006, 08:53 PM
interesting, I tivoed it I will take a look

Keifers
08-28-2006, 09:03 PM
It looked pretty flexy to me -- seemed to absorb the pace of some of Agassi's hardest-smacked fhs. Anyone agree?

Davai
08-28-2006, 09:05 PM
The guy is amazing, unstoppable on the rise backhand. I honestly thought that Agassi was done. BTW great comeback from Agassi. I suppose nothing beats experience. travlerajm Can you tell the SW from the way he hits?

travlerajm
08-28-2006, 09:08 PM
interesting, I tivoed it I will take a look

Another cue is harder to quantitate, but you can judge racquet weight by looking at the swing speed. A heavier racquet will look more like it's being swung in slow motion on the groundstrokes, but the ball still leaves with lots of pace.

You don't notice it as much when both players have racquets that weigh almost the same (like this match). But if you watched a match where one player was using a stock racquet, it would be more obvious that one player was swinging much faster.

A tennis racquet during a groundstroke is kind of like a pendulum... it has a characteristic swingspeed. The best players usually take the racquet back high and then let gravity do the rest, letting the racquet swing at its characteristic speed. The heavier the racquet, the less the swing speed depends on player input, and the more it is a function of the racquet weight. This is one of the advantages of a heavier racquet.

hoosierbr
08-28-2006, 09:25 PM
There was a thread about Pavel's racquet a few weeks ago. Do a search and there you'll find some good info.

Edit: here's the link.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=22647&highlight=pavel%27s+racquet

TaintedWisdom
08-28-2006, 10:02 PM
The guys backhand is simply amazing!
BTW while this sounds a bit odd, I think he was really getting tired (in a bad way) He was even breathing through his mouth in many of the shots they gave him, while andre was barely sweating. As the game went on and on, pavel was moving and hustlin for the ball less.

BreakPoint
08-28-2006, 10:19 PM
travlerajm are you kidding me. His racquet looks really heavy because he hits hard? You are joking right?

Actually, it's not that hard to tell when someone is hitting with a heavy racquet just by the way and speed they swing the racquet and how the ball comes off of the racquet.

For example, just from watching players like Davenport, Blake, Philippoussis, etc., I can tell that they're probably using fairly heavy racquets.

Remember that M = mv (momentum = mass x velocity). So you can swing a heavier racquet slower than a lighter racquet and still generate the same amount of momentum transfer to the ball. Of course, if you're able to swing a heavier racquet as fast as a lighter racquet, you'll generate even greater momentum and really smack the ball. :D

Davai
08-28-2006, 10:22 PM
Actually, it's not that hard to tell when someone is hitting with a heavy racquet just by the way and speed they swing the racquet and how the ball comes off of the racquet.

For example, just from watching players like Davenport, Blake, Philippoussis, etc., I can tell that they're probably using fairly heavy racquets.

Remember that M = mv (momentum = mass x velocity). So you can swing a heavier racquet slower than a lighter racquet and still generate the same amount of momentum transfer to the ball. Of course, if you're able to swing a heavier racquet as fast as a lighter racquet, you'll generate even greater momentum and really smack the ball. :D

P =mv, not M, but P, is momentum.

BreakPoint
08-28-2006, 10:38 PM
P =mv, not M, but P, is momentum.

Yes, but "p" also stands for pressure in physics. (BTW, it should be a lower-case "p" for momentum also.)

To make it less confusing for the layperson, since I spelled out "Momentum = mass x velocity", I just used their initials as abbreviations, "M = mv" (actually I've seen it used this way elsewhere also). People are also so used to seeing "F = ma" as being "Force = mass x acceleration", that I think using "p" for momentum may have confused some people without a physics background.

thomas martinez
08-29-2006, 05:18 AM
Out of your list there, only Blake and Flip are using heavy frames. Lindsay, she's actually quite light. Sub 12 ounce strung. Pavel, wihtout string, is in the neighbourhood of 12 ounces. Swing speed and weight do not always corralte with one another. Swingweight on the other hand is a different story.

rooski
08-29-2006, 01:24 PM
The reason I wasn't sure he was using an Mag Speed Pro 1 is that the upper hoop of Pavel's racket looked relatively thin in the beam (maybe 21mm) while the actual MS Pro 1 is fairly wide at 25mm. Maybe it was just the TV image.

travlerajm
08-29-2006, 01:37 PM
Swing speed and weight do not always corralte with one another. Swingweight on the other hand is a different story.

Of course, static weight factors in to the actual swingweight when you translate to the actual axis of rotation using the parallel axis theorem.

hoosierbr
08-29-2006, 01:41 PM
Don't know for certain but I speculate he's using the old Pro #1 with the M-Speed pj.

thomas martinez
08-29-2006, 02:03 PM
Not always AJM. Sometimes things just defy physics. I could easily give you two identical frames in every way except for swingweight. One being radically different from the other. Yet the balance and static weight would be the same.

LN_Dad
08-29-2006, 06:31 PM
The way he was playing last night, he could have nailed backhand winners with an old T2000.

travlerajm
09-04-2006, 12:14 AM
Not always AJM. Sometimes things just defy physics. I could easily give you two identical frames in every way except for swingweight. One being radically different from the other. Yet the balance and static weight would be the same.

This is not relevant to what I was saying.

What I mean is that if two racquets have the same measured swingweight, the one with the heavier static weight would have the higher actual swingweight, because the axis of rotation of a forehand or a serve is well beyond the butt of the racquet. For example, Nadal's racquet and Sampras' racquet have swingweights that measure almost the same. But Sampras' racquet is much harder to swing fast because the actual swingweight of a stroke is much higher when the static weight is higher.

thomas martinez
09-04-2006, 06:05 AM
Not at all. Because measured swingweight and actualy swingweight are two in the same going by the way diagnostic machines take swingweight readings, either with or without strings. And no, Nadal and Sampras have swingweights nowhere NEAR eachother's. And Pete's are going to be harder to swing quick thanks to the heavier static weight, not the swingweight. It's amazing how far off what you have to say is. Even the bit about Roddick. He's not the type to change something like that. It's down to Connors helpinghim out and him changing technique more thenanything else.

phat
09-07-2006, 06:38 AM
Thanx Thomas Martinez....... I have read too many post on static weight, swingweight, HL, HH from travlerajm, too many things are being "theorized" without even knowing the full picture (i.e real specs of each player's racquet). No offense travlerajm. I know you are just trying to help.

Ash Doyle
09-07-2006, 10:44 AM
It's amazing how far off what you have to say is. Even the bit about Roddick. He's not the type to change something like that. It's down to Connors helpinghim out and him changing technique more thenanything else.

Thank you. For the ones that don't know it, Thomas is a stringer for the pros. He knows what he is talking about and should be listened to. I just don't want new players to be lead astray by some of the crazy stuff they read on this message board. About three years ago there was about 90% good info here, now there is about 10% good info here.

TheRed
09-07-2006, 02:20 PM
Thank god t. martinez. I haven't been reading posts lately but coming back and seeing travlerajm's posts really bring down the quality of this board. His predictions are absurd, baseless, based on poor information, and without merit of any kind. Makes me wonder if he even plays tennis.