Federer must make the switch or he will descend even more

Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by The Baseline, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. 0d1n

    0d1n Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,731
    Location:
    Cluj-Napoca, Romania
    Agassi did hit the ball very hard when he wanted to, but he didn't quite have the destructive power of Federer's forehand on any wing.
    Also...this is one case where I actually agree with parts of what Breakpoint is saying ... (the world is going to end now...I know it) and that is the part about the visible difference in racquet-head speed between Fed and Agassi. Even though the difference in power is not that great I, like BP, think that the additional RHS is mostly rewarded by more spin on the average Fed shot when compared to AA.
    I've very rarely seen AA mishit, and can't really remember a totally framed shot...but I'm sure there were some...it is unavoidable when on defense.
    I distinctly remember Sampras framing balls with the backhand though even on some pretty "normal" rally shots...probably not as many as Fed, but then again he spent a LOT less time on the baseline when compared to Fed as well.
     
  2. SwankPeRFection

    SwankPeRFection Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,509
    scotus, shanks happen when you accelerate too fast on your strokes. If the timing is off by just a bit, when you put that extra omph into a shot, it'll happen. Doesn't matter what size a racquet is. Pros don't hit as slow as the general public does and even the general public shank balls when they swing too fast in relation to when the ball actually makes contact with the racquet on it's trajectory path. It's a timing thing and nothing more. Anyone can make this mistake and it generally happens when they rush a shot or when they put more spin into one and just mistime it. If you think a 95 is that much bigger than a 90, then I want to laugh at you. I'm sorry, but I used to play with a 107 Donnay and even that isn't tremendously bigger than a Wilson 90 if you stack one on top of the other. Sure, there's a difference, but if the ball is going to stroke the frame on the 90, it'll do the same on the 107, but at a slighly less angle. Either way, once it strikes that frame, it's either a complete shank or the flat beam causes more spin to be imparted on the mishit and makes for a surprisingly good shot. After all, how many times have we witnessed Fed use the boxbeam to impart even more spin on a shot to keep it in. Somehow that magic used to happen a whole lot more in the past... seems as he's gotten older, now those missed shots are all of a sudden called shanks. :roll:
     
  3. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Yes, Agassi can hit the ball hard but hitting hard is not the same thing as having fast racquet head speed. Federer has very fast racquet head speed to generate more spin on the ball, so even though it appears he's hitting the ball flat (in trajectory), his balls actually have a tremendous amount of spin on them. Agassi, OTOH, swings slower and flatter with a heavy racquet to generate a lot of raw pace on the ball. Thus, Federer is going to shank more because the angle of contact at which he hits the ball with his faster racquet head speed is greater than Agassi's. If you watch ultra slo-mo videos of Federer's forehand, you'll see that he actually rolls over the ball with his wrist during contact:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_6hC2qKnKw&feature=related
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkDIFP4SK9Q&feature=related

    Whereas, Agassi doesn't but hits through the ball flatter with a firm wrist:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MNXV4jwUN0
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXWks8yvRJQ&feature=relmfu
     
  4. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Love how their is always this conflict about how a 107(or whatever size bigger)
    Wont help because its not big enough?, but its so much bigger it causes problems to swing. You guys are freakin geniuses LOL!!! The reason for the extreme rhs is because its an inferior racquet for that level of competition. A larger head generates more power and spin with less NEEDED rhs, thats why his rhs is too high,and string tensions too low. The real solution is to step up to a bigger stick. Pete strung his up, in an effort to gain control, and that was the 85, that was also a different time and style of tennis being played, on many different surfaces.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2012
  5. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    The needed rhs is exactly the problem, you guys have defined it right there. Why is his rhs so high yet has the least jump of the top 4 save maybe for Murray. I notice when he gets good jump it doesnt carry through the court. Why is the tension so low? Why is he trying to hit Nadal forehands now (and failing)? Trying to compensate for some deficiency?
     
  6. SwankPeRFection

    SwankPeRFection Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,509
    mellow, you're misinterpreting what I'm talking about. There is rhs for normal shots and then there's rhs for those rippers that you hit and want to be winners. Pretty much all of the top pros play with lower tensions. Also, most pros customize their frames to generate better rhs/power/control/stability. Trying to argue for these points in relation to retail racquets that you and I play with is pretty pointless. Not only can we not hit has well as the pros can, but we also don't play with the same customizations. So, stating that a wider beam Bab can help you improve your shots as opposed to a box beam racquet is not a valid statement for everyone... let alone a pro.
     
  7. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    WTF? Where di you read that?
    I never said a wider beam Bab, I never would suggest that from what he has played (though I would like to see it) nor for his style. I have always said a 95/98 bb of the same general mold and layup. My feeling is that a much bigger does become cumbersome. Something that cannot be tuned out. I tried this with a NXG 107 and no matter the weight and balance it was not going to happen. I would also say that a little more measured stiffness in the frame because the bigger hoop will play less stiff... The simple fact is he would not have to change anything about what he does, that will all stay basically the same, though he would not have to press because of the smallish frame. It is of note too that someone on here suggested that we are not able to make these decisions for Fed because we do not have any idea about the level.... But when you see the superstition/habits these players exhibit, what makes anyone think they are of the right mind to do it on their own? Gasquet playing the same ball for the majority of the tourney? Extreme ball bouncing, water bottles, bouncing balls between the legs, touching the back wall/lines, not touching lines, getting up first/last etc... Just because you are comfortable/used to something does not mean it is the best option. I feel that when you become complacent and fail to change with the game the end is near, in light of that Bravo for Winning Wimby, and good fortune at the USO.
     
  8. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Hmmm....Nadal swings with as high or even higher racquet head speed and he uses a 100 sq. in. racquet, which is even bigger than the 95 you are recommending.

    BTW, a racquet cannot generate spin unless you swing it fast at an angle REGARDLESS of the size of the racquet. Just plain physics. So, no, a larger racquet WILL NOT generate more spin with less racquet head speed than a smaller racquet - all else being equal.
     
  9. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,806
    He should switch to the 95 version
     
  10. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Not true at all. Federer's opponents have said that his balls jump more than other player's except Nadal's.

    And what's wrong with low tensions? It gives you more power, more feel, more touch, and is better for your arm. Federer is able to invent amazing shots because he's helped by the low tensions. McEnroe used to also hit amazing shots and angles using low tensions.
     
  11. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    I say going back to the 85 would be even better for him. :)
     
  12. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Yes it will, longer string bed and more open though same 16/19 pattern would all equate into a more lively playing stringbed.
     
  13. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    That is bull s___, and his 2nd serve is on average the least jumpy. Even when they jump they do not move through the court like the other 3, they are half court sitters, especially if from a more defensive posture. This is mainly the BH side I am and have been referring to, the forehand is fine, though it does now seem to be missing some finishing power at 31.
     
  14. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,806
    Too risky. It does not lend itself easily to topspin.
     
  15. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    "All else being equal" means the same string spacing in the stringbed.

    Longer strings will give you more power but not more spin. A bigger racquet may help amateurs without the timing nor eye-hand coordination of Federer to swing more aggressively at the ball with less fear of framing the ball and thereby generate more spin. But that's not a result of the bigger racquet itself, it's the result of the more aggressive swing. Federer doesn't have this problem. His timing and eye-hand coordination are so good that he can swing just as aggressively at the ball even with his smaller racquet.
     
  16. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Are you kidding? Federer has one of the best kick serves on tour. That thing kicks like a mule and pull righty 2HBH players way off the court in the ad side.

    His backhands don't have as much spin as say Gasquets because Federer uses an Eastern backhand grip and he is basically half-volleying the ball from the baseline. Gasquet stands way back with a semi-western grip and whips way up on the ball as it's falling. Completely different techniques. He is basically a clay court player. 17 Slams to not even a single Slam final tells you which is the better technique.
     
  17. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
     
  18. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Sometimes when he is playing really well, but average no I do not think so. Except for Murray and that is partly because of his frame and string pattern. Through the last 2 years it has been his 2nd serve problems that have kept him from winning more than anything.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2012
  19. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    What's so great about topspin? Nadal hasn't been able to defend a single title off of clay with all of that topspin.

    Besides, I can generate more topspin with an 85 than with a 90.
     
  20. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Yes, I'm serious. Do you understand WHY longer strings give you more power? Now why would it give you more spin? The width (gauge) of the string may give you more spin but not the length.

    Who would be helped more by a class on swimming 101? A beginner or Michael Phelps? Federer can't "do more" with something he doesn't need.
     
  21. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    More BS. Where is the chest waders emoticon?
     
  22. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Basic physics, if it can impart more energy it can impart more spin.
     
  23. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    I thought so. You don't understand why.
     
  24. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    The PS 6.0 85 is one of the most spin friendly racquets I have ever used. Topspin, slice, kick, you name it. The thing is a beast on spin. I see my balls kick off of the court more with the 85 than with the 90.
     
  25. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Go watch slomos, and explain how a string can impart more energy into a ball but not more spin. If that energy can be translated into a flat shot, when at an angle how does it not get translated into spin in full or in part?
     
  26. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    You clearly not palying any other frames. The Speed Pro and RDS001 both impart way more spin and controllable power, the Volkl DNX 10 is way better in spin, is softer frame and more powerful when equally weighted/balanced. Fischer Pro No.1, ACT 98 and Revolution Pro 98 all impart more spin and controllable power. IS better than Prestige of any generation and RD7 logs (could never balnce them right either). Marginally better than HPS 5.0 on spin (16x20) pattern. Better than PT280 (Austria or Chinese) Not as good as Genesis 660, or Prince vortex... those 2 were with synthetics too, not full polys like the rest. All 85/90 play has been with Alu Power/Original or RPM, or some hybrid from that group.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2012
  27. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Tell Bjorn Borg that it's nearly impossible to impart tons of topspin with a 65 sq. in. racquet. He will laugh at you.

    Longer strings give you more spin due to the trampoline effect. The trampoline effect doesn't give you more spin. Brushing up on the ball does. You can brush up on the ball with any size racquet.
     
  28. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    I've played with all of those racquets you've listed above. No, none of them gave me more spin than the PS 6.0 85.
     
  29. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    So the men from the 70's that hit balls equal to what Sanchez Vicario hit has what to do with this topic? You could literally insert Vicario into those matches with her racquets and she would be very competitive with them.


    Say again... seems your bs has come full circle and you forgot what bs you already said or were talking about. Your last post merely proves that you have no clue about tennis or racquets in general. This has been beat to death and Fed will continue to get beat in physical slams by these guys, probably a bigger more forgiving frame would help against those few players that can out hit him push him around, it likely would not hurt his game any against lesser oposition...
     
  30. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768

    Ha ha ha....this proves that the statement you made below is actually referring to yourself:
    Yes, because tennis is all only about the racquet. :roll: LOL
     
  31. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Yes, thats why Nadal plays the 100 and not the 85/90 :idea: and why Fed has such a match up problem against the Nadal:idea::roll:
     
  32. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    Thats OK, this statement here proves you are a bs'r and a liar. As you like to say Physics, all else being equal what you say is an impossibility... My work here is done.
     
  33. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Yes, you're right. Federer's match up problem is COMPLETELY due to the size of Nadal's racquet. Never mind that Roddick (as well as countless other pros) use the same size racquet as Nadal and Federer dominates all of them. :oops:
     
  34. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Hey, just because you're not good enough to handle the PS 6.0 85 and produce spin with it is not my problem.
     
  35. 0d1n

    0d1n Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,731
    Location:
    Cluj-Napoca, Romania

    You have quite clearly never seen these players play live.
    Federer's rally ball jumps like crazy.
    Also your comparison of Fed's and Murray's second serves is quite frankly ridiculous. Fed has one of the better 2nd serves on tour and Murray has a comparatively poor one (his only real technical weakness is his second serve).
    Also, Nadal's is not even comparable, so how come Federer's 2nd serve is "the least jumpy" of the top 4 (in your view) when frankly...only Djokovic is even comparable to Fed when talking about serve in general and 2nd serve in particular. Yes, Djokovic's serve does have quite a bit of work on it, and it's deceptively good. Fed is AT LEAST as good on the second serve, and clearly better on the first though...so...even that comparison favors Fed.
     
  36. tennis_balla

    tennis_balla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,667
    Location:
    Here and There
    I've hit with the black/red BLX 90 and it produced a lot of spin. At the time I was using the Yonex RDiS 100 Mid and Fed's racket had more spin. I had it strung with full poly, like all my rackets do. I didn't like the feel of the racket though. Anyways, the tension Fed strings it at combined with gut main/BB ALU cross and his racket head speed.....

    Watch some videos of Fed hitting second serves or one of the many practiced session videos of Roger on YouTube. His balls have plenty of bite.
     
  37. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Meanwhile, Sampras was measured to have the most RPM's on his serves and he used a tiny 85 sq. in. racquet and he didn't even need poly strings to produce all that spin.
     
  38. TheOneHander

    TheOneHander Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,152
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2012
  39. Devilito

    Devilito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,266
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAH
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM1P2ej4YtY

    and his backhand has more spin on it than any of the 2hbhs in the top 10. His forehand has the most spin on it next to Nadal. He can flatten it out when he's going for winners but his rally balls are extremely spinny. His second serve has insane spin on it. I’m not sure we’re even watching the same sport here.
     
  40. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,589
    You guys can talk about spin production, but those balls are seldom coupled with the pace, that is what we are talking here. Somehow it gets twisted into 1 thing, just spin??? I know he can get lots of kick, as can many players. Its the kick coupled with the pace that he often lacks and produces the duck in the middle of the court. Whatever, you guys that are afraid of the technology can hold on to your fleeting moments in time. I know if you take Feds skills out of the formula what do you have?, and as the players have gotten better and his ability to maintain a certain level for the course of a match recedes what is he going to do? Anyone can go to some highlights film and pick good shots, those are not the norm though against the the other top 4-6 players he has had trouble with, because they bombard him with heavy deep balls until the error. His forehand does not have near the same penetration as Nadal, nor when Djoko pound his forehand to Nadal BH. I have seen him try the buggy whip or what ever and it def does not do the same thing as Nadal... Concerning the forehand spin in general often times they are spinny, but land half court like Meligini did. Just look at the Bolgomolov match how many rally balls land in the box or just back from it?
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2012
  41. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    Yeah, that's why Federer kicked Bogomolov's butt. The match wasn't even close.

    Dude, Federer has one of the best serves of all time. That's how he's been able to win so many Slams and everything else. If he had such a weak serve with relatively little pace and spin, how the heck does he ace so many people and how does he beat so many other players? The other players' serves must be even worse, huh?

    Meanwhile, you should start a thread that Murray needs to switch to a bigger racquet because he just got his butt kicked by Chardy in straight sets. :shock:
     
  42. 0d1n

    0d1n Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,731
    Location:
    Cluj-Napoca, Romania
    Exactly.

    Look man. You are clearly "not very knowledgeable" (understatement of the year) when it comes to tennis, especially interpreting what you think you see out there on the court.
    Just give up...will you ??
    There are many things that are debatable and inspire controversy in this game, who the greater player is...etc etc...but saying that Federer's forehand lacks penetration when compared to ANYONE is just plain dumb.
    His forehand being the best single ground stroke in the game and all...you know ??
    This is one statement that actually gets some consensus on this board and also among people who actually know what they are talking about (ex pro players...etc)...so you coming up with the rubbish you are posting is something truly "remarkable" (in the most negative sense possible).
     
  43. Lefty78

    Lefty78 Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    Florida
    LOL, Federer's forehand has better penetration than Nadal's. Less spin but better penetration.
     
  44. 0d1n

    0d1n Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,731
    Location:
    Cluj-Napoca, Romania
    Yup...Fed's forehand sure lacked penetration in today's final against Djokovic. He was hitting powderpuff forehands all the time wasn't he ??? :confused: :twisted:
     
  45. DownTheLineWith90

    DownTheLineWith90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    308
    Location:
    Baseline
    laugh out loud.
     
  46. ChicagoJack

    ChicagoJack Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,274
    Roddick must switch to a 90 sq inch Head or he will descend even more !!! This thread is funnier than farts in church, and it hangs around a whole lot longer.
     
  47. Timbo's hopeless slice

    Timbo's hopeless slice Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,097
    Best. Thread. Ever.

    ye gods, some people..
     
  48. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    Now it is safe to say, Federer got blown out of the water by a determined, confident Berdych..and the mishits and weak returns will cause and lead Federer to make the switch to a larger raquet for 2013, if he is to remain in the top 10 in 2013 as the yougn boys are turning the page with little to no effort.
     
  49. NikeWilson

    NikeWilson Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    683
    WE all just need to get used to Fed losing.
    INcluding Fed himself.
     
  50. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,768
    So if Roddick also made the switch to a bigger racquet he would have stayed in the Top 10 and wouldn't have had to retire?
     

Share This Page