Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by RoddickistheMan, Jun 26, 2013.
By all accounts. Nick Bollitieri at his best was a 3.5.
But that's not because of any differences in the way Head measures their frames. It's because they like nice round numbers for marketing when converting to metric measurements. So it's due to marketing in metric that Head's "93" is actually 89.5 and it's "98" is actually 95. They like to use the nice round metric numbers of 600, 630, 660, etc.
How do you know? He could lose in the 1st round of every tournament he enters. So there is a worst case scenario.
+1...... I love Fed, but I think new generation tennis need a bigger frame for topspin ( ball pocket when hitting topspin)
The next time Phil Jackson tells Jordan/Kobe to change racquets, let me know. Strategy and equipment are two completely different things. If you played tennis just like Nadal, would you take Federer's advice that you should switch to a K90 because he himself plays great with it?
I'm wonder, so you think 90 head size is the best for fed? With long and fast swing and stroke, topspin? For me, I think he can add just a couple inches on his racquet face. Just me though!
I think you guys need to go out there, hit a few balls with a 90, change back to your Weeds, and then jump into the discussion.
Nothing like the feel of smaller rackets. Precision, rewards, smoothness, feel.
Exactly! The satisfaction of hitting the ball with the PS 6.0 85 can only be exceeded by hitting the ball with a 65 sq. in. wood racquet.
I think Federer's problem is that he's getting old so his movement, reflexes, and motivation are not what they used to be. It has nothing to do with his racquet.
If switching racquets was the answer to winning, every pro would switch to a new racquet every time they lost a match since their livelihoods depend on winning. But they don't, do they? In fact, it's the opposite. They stick to pretty much the same racquet throughout their entire careers. They know better. Only amateurs think switching racquets is the answer to their problems because they don't want to put in the hard work to improve their games/body.
let's not forget his injuries. just because he's never retired a match in 1100 matches doesn't mean he isn't injured. i heard he has back issues at the very least -- who knows what else he has. it's very possible that his physique isn't 100% of where he was 5 years ago -- regardless of his stamina, footwork or speed. if he's being hindered by unpublished injuries, that's not cool.
It wouldn't be a bad idea...
...Annacone is a great coach, but there's nothing wrong with getting a second opinion via having Gilbert in for some consulting work. Let's not get too carried away with the head size debate, there's more to racket change than that. You can go lighter, go from 18/20 to 16/19, try some different strings, and so forth. I DO understand, however, why someone like Federer (or Sampras) would have a lot of doubts about switching technology late in his career. The New Stuff may be better, but it's an adjustment, and there ain't a lot of time for that in the pro schedule. I just switched from Head (Instinct S) after many, many years of playing with Head's latest, to Volkl Organix 7 310G. I know the switch was a good thing, but it's going to take me a while to make the adjustment, and I'm going to have to play with string type, tension, etc.
There is one other aspect to the racket technology game that I'll mention: grip size. When I was growing up, the idea was "use the biggest grip that you can get your hands around." My last coach convinced me that going smaller lets the racket handle sit more comfortably in your hand and lets you manipulate the grip much easier. So I dropped down from 4 5/8 to 4 /38, and I've been happy ever since. I've heard that Nadal and Fed use either a 4 1/8 or a 4...and, according to one of my hitting partners, who used to coach for Peter Burwash, this is why the two of them struggle with their volleys, at times.
So...I dunno. I suspect Roger is going to stick with what he has for gear...and we'll see how he does at the 2013 US Open. If he wins, I'm betting he'll stay with what he's got for the remainder of his career. If he loses...well, who knows?
Give Gilbert and anyone else 3 racquets (same color, same frame, no markings and sizes of 90/93/95) and I bet you none of them will be able to look at them and tell you which is which. The only way they could tell is if they set them on top of each other and see the mm differences if face size.
I.e. Gilbert don't know shi* because he can't play even with a 100+ frame.
Just came back from a lesson. For the first 20 mins was hitting with my PS 85 StV. Amazing feel, precision, lots of power and spin.
But for doubles it just doesn't work that well.
But what a stick....
No moron, they hire coaches for ADVICE...on anything that may help including equipment!!!!
Trust me mental midget, if the tennis world allowed enough time to actually adjust to new equipment (which it DOES NOT) then every pro would be open to a change...the reason for sticking with a piece of equipment as important as the racquet is simply because it is a HUGE RISK to try something new.
Give these guys a 3-4 month "off season" like other sports and you'd see a lot of racquet experimentation. 2-3 weeks off around Christmas time is not enough to risk a big time racquet switch.
My advice to Fed...if you want another Wimbly...cry injury like Rafa...take off 6-7 months and try out new sticks, come back before Wimbly, destroy everyone, and then get knocked out first week of US Open!
I think federer is still the king until someone dethroned him with more grand slams but, if he wants to compete with the other top guys he needs to move up to a 93 or 95 head size and then take a leaf out of Agassi's book and work hard on his physical and slightly bulk up like andy did or it won't be too long till he's getting blown off the court with that graceful style of his which will always look amazing but he's older now and has years on the other top guys who are more eager than him and all have something to prove.
If he did these things I think he could have another 5 years at the top again but, his days of dominating are definitely over as we witness the changing of the guards in this era.
Rafa should switch to a PD for a little more shot penetration.
I don't think ~5 square inches is going to suddenly return Federer to prime form.
That's an overstatement, but still...how long have people been saying this? And, until this year, Federer has remained as one of the 3 best players on the tour.
Time marches on. An increase in racquet head size won't change that. It won't give him back the step that he's lost.
The thing is move up is racquet a couple square inches won't help his footwork and movement. BUT it deffinetly help him make less miss hits, return better and a have little more power. especially, when your footwork getting slower, a little bigger head size will help.
i think federer uses outdated equipment, almost nobody uses that small headsize anymore, and maybe if he switched to a racquet a few inches bigger with all poly, he could have a little more spin, power, schtick on the ball and also might help on the easy shots hes been repeatedly missing on big points....or not.....it wont make him no1 again but it could help him with the competition
So Federer asks Annacone what he feels when he hits the ball? ROTFLMAO!!
So Federer should take the equipment advice of someone who used a POG Oversize during his career and served and volleyed and chipped and charged on EVERY single point, what racquet he should be using? ROTFLMAO!!!!
So true, Let him use what he wants to use.
Well..originally I thought mental midget was a little harsh...sorry, spot on. Starting to wonder if you are 10 years old?
Do you think, the best players in the world, who are calculated and meticulous about most of their decisions, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on trainers, chefs, and of course COACHING (LOOK UP WHAT IT ENTAILS), only to be a closed minded child like yourself and not bother to ask or use the advice of these men they HAVE PAID HANDSOMELY...because they feel they have no valid opinion since they are less accomplished than them to begin with?
You're basically a fool if you do.
NEWS FLASH...if you know the sport, truly KNOW THE SPORT...you can make some pretty valuable observations...INCLUDING recognizing how a certain style may benefit from a tweaking of equipment....BUT..here is the part you can't wrap your simple mind around...THE ADVICE THEY'RE GIVING MAY ACTUALLY BE THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY ACTUALLY FIND SUCCESS WITH!!!!
In fact you know why most champions make TERRIBLE COACHES...they ASSUME, like a moron, that what works for them works for everyone else. It's called teaching fool...and the Gilberts, Annacones, Cahills, etc of the world have proven their worth...BY GETTING PAID AND HAVING SLAM CHAMPS UNDER THEIR BELTS.
Grow up..think things out.
Yes, because Federer won so many more Slams AFTER he hired Annacone than before he hired him.
And how do you know if Roddick wouldn't have won more Slams if he had a different coach instead of Gilbert, who drove him nuts?
I think Nadal's won a lot of slams with his non-grandslam winning coach. And who says Roddick would have ever won a slam without Gilbert. Roddick's career ended off him not cracking forehands anymore. With Gilbert, he was cracking forehands. No need to troll. Just facts.
It's true that we hacks may need a bigger blade as we get slower, but I'm not sure it will do much for a professional player who has spent two decades with the one racquet.
In short, nothing can compensate for Fed's slower movement.
Did cracking forehands help Roddick beat Federer in any Slam finals? Did Roddick change racquets because of Gilbert? Did Murray win any Slams while he was with Gilbert? Maybe Roddick would have won Wimbledon if he had a different coach?
Do you ask your coach to demo racquets for you and have him pick one for you to use or it is better for you to demo the racquets yourself and choose one for yourself?
BG also said Federer should change his string and play more tournaments. There is a lot of pro players in golf and tennis drop off in their sport when they have a young family. The only problem with tennis is you have a small window of playing time and it usually is done before or at 30 years of age. You turn pro before 18 years old and in golf you turn pro at 22-24 and can play till you are 50 plus.
Serena switched strings and is now invincible. It wouldnt hurt fed to try
Federer already did that. He used to play full gut, like Serena did. Gut/4G vs Gut/ALU Rough. Given that the two advantages 4G has is durability and slighly higher tension maintenance. Since they don't care about the latter, and that Federer plays in a tiny headsize so he doesn't eat as much strings, he has no business with 4G. While Serena uses a bigger headsize and doesn't hit with as much spin. She also doesn't switch racquets as much during a match.
Gilbert is harping on this again this morning.
Yeah again about changing strings and going full and not hybrid..
Lendl switched racquets actually from the little Adidas to the much bigger Kneissel....he actually now plays with a bosworth .
Sampras switched to babolat didn't he?
And Connors switched to a bigger racquet in his later years as well.
Agassi switched to Poly as well and made one of the greatest comebacks in history
You guys don't get breakpoint......he is a good guy.
Break wants everyone to go back to wood and gut......I agree with him.
I wish everyone would go back to wood and gut as well....it was more exciting and players like the Williams would not have such an advantage merely because of power.
But break....those days are gone forever :-(.
New technology is here and you can't stop it sadly.
So there's an old saying that you should subscribe to:
"If you can't beat them ......join them "
Facts!!!! Obviously you haven't dealt with this fool...he no likey facts!!!!
:twisted:Waste of time.
Lendl started out with Kneissl White Star Pro and switched to the Addidas GTX which was clone of his Kneissl. In fact Kneissl made them and then Adidas made them under license. When Lendl switched to Mizuno he then tried to play with a larger racquet but would keep going back to his original Kneissl/Adidas frame.
He had no choice. He was playing kevlar because that's the only thing that wouldn't break on his OS racquets. And this, despite the custom made tighter patterns he used to use! Even if it was screwing his limbs.
Cracking forehands is the only way Roddick stayed in those matches... 16-14. Cracking forehands and big serves about worked. You hire coaches to give YOU "advice." Probably Gilbert was fine with Roddick's racquet. A big powerful racquet combined with a big serve. hmm... no need to ask that question. Murray may have needed a slam winner to help him get there...Nadal didn't. What can you say to that. Gilbert didn't win a slam. Explain Agassi? No you don't have your coach demo racquets, but if you respect him, since that's why you hired him as a coach, when he says something's not working for you, you take it into consideration.
You are right. I shall take my attention elsewhere.
No, Lendl didn't. He used a Kneissl before the Adidas and they were essentially the same racquet since Kneissl made it for Adidas. Lendl no longer plays on the ATP Tour so what he uses now is irrelevant, not that his old Adidas/Kneissl is available anymore anyway.
Sampras no longer plays on the ATP Tour so what he uses is irrelevant. He's not trying to win Slams anymore.
Connors was finally forced to switch because he could no longer get anymore of his T-2000s because Wilson had stopped making them ages ago. At one point, Connors was so desperate to get more that he appealed to the public to sell him any old T-2000s that they were no longer using.
Agassi also switched to a smaller racquet late in his career which helped him to extend his career. He went from a 107 oversize, which he had used for most of his career, down to a 102 midplus.
Lendl did switch from the Adidas to a Mizuno frame which was bigger than his Adidas. He did this for a couple/three years when he played Wimbledon to give him a better shot at volleying. During the rest of the season, he played with a standard sized copy of the Mizuno frame.
He only played the 2003 US Open with the Prestige Classic 660. Then went back to his Radical Tour 690 (Oversize)
Agassi also played with the retail Instinct at one point.
Yup, but always returned to his Radical Tour 690 (260 Oversize).
Did you read his book?
Because it talks about it extensively . It changed his game and facilitated his comeback big time .
There you go. Switching racquets late in a top pro's career usually doesn't work.
I perfectly know he loved the strings. But what I said is that previously, he was forced to play with kevlar because there was nothing else he wasn't breaking and co-poly were not nearly as good. Luxilon, the standard for premium monofilament, started releasing that new co-poly which became the standard for mono in the early '00s IIRC. The good co-poly strings are pretty young, he hadn't access to it beforehand. Of course he would try these strings rather than kevlar, and of course it hits better than the barbed wire he used to hit with. Of course it helped his game to ditch his harsh strings for co-poly. He went from "average" to "good" strings. As I said, Federer already switched his strings from full-gut to Champion's Choice. He went from "good" to "good, but different". He's already using Luxilon. What should he do? Full Luxilon to hit loopy forehands all day long like Roddick?
Separate names with a comma.