Is there any benefit of using mid size frame?

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by mishin900, Jun 10, 2008.

  1. mishin900

    mishin900 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Messages:
    218
    I've always been using mid plus sized frames, but I wonder why people use mid sized frame. Is there any benefit of using mid sized frame? I tried prestige mid's and k90 and didn't really have any problems hitting. So is it better to use smaller head sizes if you can handle it? I'm seeing many people saying that mid plus size fits better with modern tennis because of the power and topspin.
     
    #1
  2. bossass

    bossass Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    232
    It's all about your game style. Some people find mids better for them, some don't. If you liked the way they changed your game, then switch. If you couldn't generate the spin you really like to, then don't.

    I hit fairly flat and hit hard, so mids work out great for me.
     
    #2
  3. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,616
    If you find mid plus racquets easier to use like you have said then its probably better to stick with them.
     
    #3
  4. Abriano

    Abriano New User

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    39
    a more predictable stringbed
     
    #4
  5. 2nd_Serve

    2nd_Serve Professional

    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,225
    Well, I found more spin with mid sized frames. And more control. Pretty much only two benefits. Really lets your swing out and still keep the ball in. With LUxilon, you have the ultimate control racket.
     
    #5
  6. Djokovicfan4life

    Djokovicfan4life Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    5,484
    Location:
    Stillwater, OK
    Mid sized frames are also more maneuverable at net.
     
    #6
  7. superstition

    superstition Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,035
    A mid or smaller makes hitting flat shots and volleys more predictable in my experience. But, small heads make returning heavy topspin serves more difficult.
     
    #7
  8. pow

    pow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,439
    I like the control I'm getting, it is dependent on play style and grip style. I prefer the feel and I don't know if it resists twisting but my Redondo Mid is as solid as a rock.
     
    #8
  9. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,363
    for me, the benefits do not compensate for the drawbacks.
     
    #9
  10. xsuper

    xsuper New User

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    66
    yup, I second that.
     
    #10
  11. Ryoma Kun

    Ryoma Kun Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    552
    more predictable/consistent string bed, less string needed to string, more maneuverable (assuming weigh and balance equal, looks better
     
    #11
  12. mdjenders

    mdjenders Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,263
    the smaller head is more maneuverable and easier to swing through the air, imo
     
    #12
  13. herosol

    herosol Professional

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,184
    exactly.

    the mid-size is good off the ground no doubt, but trying to great deep shots is just very hard.

    my two favorite parts though:

    1)Serve: Solid Solid Solid. Fast. Pin-Point
    2)Volleys: Exactly like the serve

    And it is why those two attributes were favorable when the mids dominated the game ya know?
     
    #13
  14. ogruskie

    ogruskie Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,103
    Dunno what you guys are talking about, my strokes can be quite devastating with my KBT. And I'm an aggressive baseline hitter...
     
    #14
  15. Deuce

    Deuce Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,270
    Location:
    A not so parallel universe...
    Most of the posts here are very vague generalizations - and therefore not worth much.

    The bottom line is that you can't generalize.
    Selecting a racquet based on its headsize is a mistake.
    Hit with whatever racquets interest you, and choose the best one. That's the only way to do it.
     
    #15
  16. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,767
    But I hardly consider the K-Blade Tour a "Mid". It's 93 sq. in. I consider Mids to be 90 sq. in. or less.
     
    #16
  17. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    I dont think people really care...
     
    #17
  18. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,767
    Correction: YOU don't care. OTHER people do care.

    You can't say you get more power out of your 93 than a 90 and then say that the headsize is irrelevant.
     
    #18
  19. Pro Staff Pete

    Pro Staff Pete Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Rozenburg, The Netherlands
    Less string needed to string? That shouldn't be a factor when getting a new frame, unless you care about those 1 or 2 extra rackets you could do with a reel.

    Looks better? That's each to their own.
     
    #19
  20. Automatix

    Automatix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    2,923
    Location:
    Poland
    Yeah... I agree... 93 sq. inch racquets are really close to Midplus frames... not only that but Prince has the nerve to call their 95 sq. inch racquets Midsize frames...

    K90, RDS 001 90, Head Prestige Mids (89,9 was it?), Dunlop 100s those are true mids to just name a few.
     
    #20
  21. bertrevert

    bertrevert Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Location:
    Syd, Oz
    Yes the benefits might be adding some new dimensions to your game, ones you didn't have before, or that complement your style of play.

    Now the proviso here is that you want to make more gains in strokes than you might lose.

    Typically, a MID will be great for s&v. It will give you pin point accuracy. You will get more feel and it will develop the foundations of the game (footwork, speed, early perception etc) because simply its more demanding thaat you be in position and hit out.

    There may however be too many downsides which are too telling on your game and you'll have to go abck to mid+

    A more subtle and nuanced game awaits you. Trouble is... you still have to win. Anyone, continually losing, would ultimately contemplate changing their equipment...
     
    #21
  22. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I disagree. How else are people supposed to narrow down from the gazillion racquets out there without having some generalizations on what specs affect what aspect of hitting? I don't think it is "not worth much" to say that a smaller headsize is more likely to be control-oriented or maneuverable than say an OS.
     
    #22
  23. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    Oh yeah im sure your comment has changed peoples lives on here...:shock:

    Wilson label the frame a mid...they dont care what you say...
     
    #23
  24. sciwriter

    sciwriter New User

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    92
    Tennis Magazine has a little feature this issue on which strings to use for different categories of frames. The article says that a mid-size frame is up to 98 inches, and mid-plus starts at 100 inches. This surprised me -- it doesn't correspond to what I heard in the past.
     
    #24
  25. MrAWD

    MrAWD Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Reading, MA
    Typically, Mid size frames would offer better feel, more control, and lower power level then the bigger sticks. They are also a bit harder to play with and that is greatly dependent on the players playing style. They are less forgiving and they will highlight pretty clearly most of the bad parts of your game (foot work, timing, positioning, etc). Due to typically lower power levels those stick inherently have one has to swing them fast and long in order to use them successfully. If a player has slower and more compact swings it will be hard to generate enough pace with them even for the rallies! I guess, the fact that they produce exactly what you put in there (no more and no less) is a good and a bad thing depending on the player. So, if you can use it to your pleasure it is a great choice for a racquet!

    Fedja
     
    #25
  26. TenniseaWilliams

    TenniseaWilliams Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    Pangaea
    The smaller the headsize, the stiffer the stringbed, and generally more flexible the frame. This gives mids a unique feel. Larger head sizes can be more stable on off-center hits at the same mass, and the hitting surface extends closer to the balance point.

    The difference between 90 sq in and 100 is pretty minor in actual diameter, and aren't on-center hits all about the same rebound power? The basic feel and sound are very different though.
     
    #26
  27. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,767
    And Prince labels their 95 sq. in. frames as "Mids". They can't both be right, can they?

    What if another company starts labeling their 100 sq. in. frames as "Mids"? Do you think that would matter to people when they start talking about how a "Mid" plays?

    Bottom line is it doesn't matter how the manufacturers label them. What matters is how the public perceives them.
     
    #27
  28. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I have two racquets that are 97" that say they are Mid+ on the frame themselves.
     
    #28
  29. geesechops

    geesechops Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    591
    Location:
    NorCal
    I like my racquet, which happens to be a mid, but I didn't go looking for a mid in particular. For me the benefits of this racquet out weigh the costs and I have tried many other mid - mid+ racquets out there. I would probably return more serves into play with a bigger head size, but the rest of my game would go down sufficiently. The #1 thing I love about it is the great maneuverability (scalpel) with a high static weight.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
    #29
  30. In D Zone

    In D Zone Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,742
    To me it boils down to your personal preference and playing style. I do play 98, 97 and 95 head size racquets from time to time but it don't compare to the feel when I play mids.

    I am beginning to enjoy playing mids with denser pattern. The only challenge I see is finding the right tension and string that will match with your playing style. So far I have been happy with all the mids I own.
     
    #30
  31. MrAWD

    MrAWD Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Reading, MA
    And, what is so special about that?

    Fedja
     
    #31
  32. LafayetteHitter

    LafayetteHitter Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,954
    Location:
    Lafayette, Louisiana
    I find most mid sized frames with a great stringjob provide a certain sweetspot feel that I have yet to find in a midplus sized frame. That may be only my preference of a sweetspot feel and i'm sure there are other that find a larger head has a nicer feeling sweetspot. Most would admit that a precisely centered groundstroke on a Prestige Classic is quite a nice feeling.
     
    #32
  33. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    What are you talking about?

    Prince, Wilson, Volkl, Head etc all label 93 as mids...and have done for a long time. END.
     
    #33
  34. Murray_Maniac

    Murray_Maniac Banned

    Joined:
    May 23, 2008
    Messages:
    899
    Yea, I hate that Prince now labels 95 as a mid. Oh well, the Tour Diablo mid, WHICH IS A MID, is the greastest prince racquet, and everything else of theirs thats newer is not as good. After 10 or 20 years of only 98-105 tour racquets, mids will burst back onto the scene.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
    #34
  35. h7hugo

    h7hugo Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    Portugal
    and one question, which is the best mid (ag100, mg prestige, k90, rds001 or kBT, BB11,..)?? and why??
     
    #35
  36. bertrevert

    bertrevert Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Location:
    Syd, Oz
    quite a cool suggestion... the Fed effect will tqke 10 or so yearsas all of the juniors today mature and come through the ranks playing with what the best player today is winning with heh heh
     
    #36
  37. soyizgood

    soyizgood G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,323
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Wilson did that for the nTour 95 and Gamma did the same for the G325, btw. I should know since I owned both of these racquet.
     
    #37
  38. BullDogTennis

    BullDogTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Location:
    Big Orange Nation

    KBT-because its really the only one i've played with(hit with the k90, but dont consider myself to have really "played") its very manuevarable, and can gets lots of spin, and goood pinpoint flat serves--lacks a bit for me on getting kick with the 2nd tho.
     
    #38
  39. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,767
    So then Prince's 95 should be a Midplus, right?

    Wilson also labels their 95's as Midplus. So how can both Wilson and Prince be correct?

    Also, everyone knows that the Head Mids are only 89.5 sq. in., not 93 sq. in.

    That's why what the manufactures label their racquets should be ignored. Experienced players and people who know anything about racquets know what they are playing with.

    The size range for a Mid is already very large (71 sq. in. to 90 sq. in.) compared to the size range for a Midplus (91 sq. in. to 103 sq. in.). It would make no sense to further increase the size range for a Mid to 71 sq. in. to 95 sq. in., and thereby decreasing the size range for a Midplus to only 96 sq. in. to 103 sq. in. Frankly, I think anything over 100 sq. in. should definitely be called an Oversize.
     
    #39
  40. bertrevert

    bertrevert Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Location:
    Syd, Oz
    I think of a 95 as a mid+

    Anything under that is surely a mid.

    Anthing much over 102 to me is in Oversize territory...
     
    #40
  41. geesechops

    geesechops Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    591
    Location:
    NorCal
    If I had to choose from those I would have to go with the AG100 because I haven't played with it yet, thus no disappointments ;) Although I had quite a solid hit fairly recently with the new Babolat Limited even though it was a 95. The balance on that one felt spot on and I felt like I could work the ball like my PS85. The worst to me was the KBT, I couldn't hit with that thing at all. The grip on the Prestige kills it and it felt to light (never had success with lead). The RDS001 is pretty nice, very unique feel thats worth a try, I think I would like it more if I had a two-handed backhand. The K90 was an upgrade in spin (from my PS85) and I actually played a year with it until I tried the AK90's which I liked more (because of the maneuverability), especially against touch/spin players, but not to long ago I picked up my old PS85 and it was love all over again. With my increased skill level I felt even more comfortable with what I think is the greatest mid, if not racquet of all time. I now own 7 of them. :mrgreen:
     
    #41
  42. Deuce

    Deuce Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,270
    Location:
    A not so parallel universe...
    Who's on first?!

    This entire thread is useless - it's full of people saying "Typically" and "Generally"... But the racquet to player match is anything but typical or general.

    Well, for one, narrowing racquets down based on weight would be more useful than by head size.
    Because weight and balance are far more determining factors than is head size - especially between mids and MidPluses.
    Flex is also important. Not the flex numbers that the RDC machines give you - they're essentially useless - but the real overall flex of the frames.

    If you're used to a particular weight and balance and flex in a MidPlus, you'll be able to hit perfectly fine with a Mid that has the same weight and balance and flex. Or if you are used to a particular weight and balance and flex in a Mid, you'll have no problem switching to a MidPlus with the same weight, balance, and flex.
    Consequently, if you are used to a certain weight, balance, and flex in a perticular MidPlus racquet, and you significantly alter the weight and balance on that very same frame, you'll have difficulty playing with it.
    That's because weight and balance are the most significant and influenceable elements of a frame - not head size. (Strings and tension are also very significant, but we're discussing frames here.)

    "More likely" for whom? Maybe for you, and not for me. Or the other way around.
    That's why generalizing is wrong and is of no help at all in talking about frames - especially when we don't know the player involved.
    Some people will get more control with the Mid, and others will be able to control the OverSize better.
    Which brings us right back to the beginning.
    How a person will play with any given racquet has more to do with the way their playing/swing style reacts to the weight and balance (and a little flex) than head size.
     
    #42
  43. RoddickistheMan

    RoddickistheMan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,068
    yes more [k]ontrol!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
    #43
  44. MrAWD

    MrAWD Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Reading, MA
    WOW!! You played with one single Mid racquet and you know for the fact that is the best one out there!! How deep!!

    Fedja
     
    #44
  45. MrAWD

    MrAWD Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Reading, MA
    I think you are missing important thing here and that is the feel that you get from the racquet! I was playing with Redondo MP for a while (which has pretty much identical numbers from your list to the Redondo Mid) and due to the lack of the feel, that I get from the Mid, I sold my MP and I am all Mid from that day!

    Now, it is fact that Mid size frames "typically" have better feel then the larger racquets, so one could use that one as one of the selectors when choosing the playing stick! But, I agree with you that all of the things should be taken into account when choosing a new frame!

    Fedja
     
    #45
  46. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    Feel is the most important thing to look for in a frame?

    Tell that to all the pro's using babolats that would kick your arse (and your feel) into touch.
     
    #46
  47. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,767
    And how many of us here depend on winning tennis matches to put food on the table?

    Yes, to many of us non-ATP pros, feel is the most important thing in a tennis racquet.
     
    #47
  48. Harry24

    Harry24 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    382
    if you are finding that the mid-seize racquets are just not giving u enough spin or power. I would suggest trying out the KSix-One 95 16x18(open string pattern),this racquets is great for serves and volleys like a mid size but I get plenty of depth and power from the open string patyern.
     
    #48
  49. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    Id rather win tennis matches than admire the feel of my racket while getting smacked off the court.
     
    #49
  50. treblings

    treblings Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,411
    Everybody here is constantly talking about the pros using paintjobs, so that they can still play with their old rackets, not the newest version.
    Why do you think they would do that?
    Obviously, the way a racket feels is important to them.
     
    #50

Share This Page