Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by Rozroz, Jun 9, 2013.
i wish THIS was on video
I think a lot of these questions arise from the fact that a lot people haven't seen top level pros play live, only on TV. Only live, especially if you're courtside the same way you see the rec players and juniors at your club, do you see how incredibly amazingly, stupefyingly good top level pros are. I can't stress that enough.
There is video of Todd finishing off Chang with a JK Pro Staff, but it was just the last three points of the match:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtD_w7Lx9HI
John LLoyd and Malavai Washington were hitting on the court next to me back when they were on the LA Strings (early 90's), and I was simply astounded at was going on a few feet away. Almost all of the balls were just a few inches over the net and hit harder than anything I'd ever seen in my life. And these guys were semi-retired! I used to play 5.0 players back then and these guys were playing a whole different game. It wouldn't even be close.
this is so weird, actually makes me wanna play a woody
Could someone explain to me please how any of these type of threads have anything to do with tennis tips and/or instruction?
^^They don't. But there is no specific forum for trolling so this was the closet one.
Interesting post, but I would like to second comments above about differences in performance level from another sport perspective.
I am 4.0 in tennis but I am definitely at least 5.0 (maybe 5.5) in skiing if we applied similar scale of performance.
I know someone who was top 50 in world cup skiing (so not even real top pro by definition of the OP; he was probably 4-5 second of the pace) and watch world champion skiing gates on the black run I know really well.
Believe me guys, the difference is such, that I is just depressing :-(
I would be surprised if in sport like tennis level differences were any different i.e. 5.0 is nobody in comparison to top pro.
Sweet dreams guys, wooden rackets or not
However, some comments about pace of hitting with wooden rackets in 70s and now are relevant to this discussion.
While Borg technique looks quite modern (sorry, lowly 4.0 speaking) unlike his opponent, the pace seams slow.
I wonder if there is any way we could measure it somehow from old videos?
Djokovic does not look much more athletic than Borg, so what pace could he generate with wooden stick CONSISTENTLY?
But like others said, consistency in placement would win the day IMO.
wait, wait, wait.
lets get this straight.
some of you guys think a 5.0 would have a chance vs a pro if the pro was using a wood racket.
hmm already kind of an unique theory.
but sure lets think about it.
what pro would the 5.0 want to play? granollers, maybe someone really young like tomic or sock.
no they would want to face
Don't mess with a pro and his woodie.
Me too, I bought four after viewing that video.
^^ I sometimes play with a wood racket. Bought one years ago. It's awsome.
i have my grandpa racket on the wall.. i wonder if it's still usable..
how do i know?
oh, i don't think any stringer here could string it anyway, so...
This is the oldest one I got, Spaulding Nationalist B. Made in USA
so how do you string one of those these days? any stringer can string it?
A modern 6-point stringer should be able to string it no problem but I'm not touching it. That things got original strings in it and funny enough just saw one exactly like it on fleabay for $70, not bad. Its an early 1920's model.
Wouldn't it depend if the wood racket user was USED to using wood rackets, and willing to sacrificed a few impediments for the sake of history vs modern tech?
I used a wood racket on a few shots around 5 weeks ago. Dunlop PRE MaxPly with 30 year old gut.
It worked great. Groundies were solid, passing shots also, didn't try serves or volleys, but I used wood rackets for 3 years back in the say. Kept my same strong SW forehand grip. NO advantage, the disadvantage being I needed to watch the ball a bit more than with 98" rackets. Power was very close, feel better, better for blocking, a little slower for big swings.
I'd contend, if I would lose 6-4 with my own 98 sq in racket, I'd lose maybe 6-3 with a wood racket.
Two weeks ago I tried an old Dunlop PRE MaxPly with old string also and was still able to hit decently. Serves were a bit slower and but I could still kick the ball up there with it.
I know I don't play a high level tennis, but when I switch to messing around with my woody I don't have to adjust my swing. Just the timing, the switch to the woody is easier for me than a switch to a 9 oz oversize. S I'd say the pro crushes without sweating.
There are plenty of 5.0s who, while using a wooden racket, could beat other (not as good) 5.0s who were using a modern graphite racket.
really? that's pretty interesting. someone must video a match like that!!
When I play with a wood racket I also don't notice much difference. A bit less power, but my wood racket is strung at 21 kg with Wilson Sensation and my normal Pro Staff 85 stick with gut so I would say it's the string, not the frame that explains most of the difference. I guess, the good ol' Pro Staff is closer to wood than many newer frames in the first place.
Touch and feel is better with the wood, no doubt, even though this is supposed to be the very stregnths of the Pro Staff. Funny.
I've always had trouble playing with a woodie, people tend to stare a lot and......oh you mean the racket!
the difference has been exaggerated a ton by the media. sure the new rackets are a lot better.
but with the wood rackets you can still produce some really good shots. the topspin issue that folks like john mcenroe like to talk for ages about. is very overrated. i can hit a good top spin forehand with a wood racket.
the difference between a wood and my current wilson 95 k61 is power in the racket. i can produce a lot of power with my swing, to hit really hard with wood. but what i couldn't do nearly as well with a wood is my kind of pushy shots would be about 80 percent worse.
actually if u play a lot players in there mid 50s to early 60s who played a lot with wood rackets i bet they wouldnt hit as much short nothing balls with slow swings as some of us younger players because with woods the racket itself has no power so most of those swings are going to go into the net.
obviously pros have the timing and swings that they basically would be able to beat 5.0s with a wooden spoon.
It changed the game towards baseline bashing marathons. It makes the game easier for everyone, yes, but what it really shifts is the metagame. If everyone agreed to play heavy topspin baseling games with wood rackets, nothing would change but the speed of the ball and the levels of spin being lower (it'd still be fast, just slower). Also, less people would be able to make last second flick winners. Gameplay would overall stay the same except rallies last a bit longer (while balls are easier to get, you also have to be in better position to hit them).
Now, if 99% of the players were forced to play the current style of tennis, and the last 1% were allowed to play all court tennis, that 1% would have a far better winning percentage (since last second passing shots are harder).
Pro with wooden racket wins. I've seen this exact scenario with a much smaller skill gap.
The pro would win 6-0, 6-0.
This thread describes how Todd Martin crushed a former D1 player with a wooden racket. So if true, a 5.0 has no chance.
I played with an old wood racket today against a bunch of 3.5 and 4.0s with their regular rackets. It's really not that big of a difference and you adjust almost right away. Everybody that plays should try it just for fun. Serves are the least affected by the change. Slice worked even better for me with the woody.
Separate names with a comma.