Those of you who think Federer's 90 sq. in. racquet is way too small should.....

Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by BreakPoint, Aug 15, 2013.

  1. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    ....try playing with a 65 sq. in. wood racquet wearing the fashionable short shorts like Vitas Gerulaitis did in the 1980's:


    [​IMG]


    After two weeks, going back to a 90 sq. in. racquet and wearing Federer's long shorts, both will seem absurdly gargantuan to you and you'll think both are way too big to be playable! :grin:
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2014
    #1
  2. NickJ

    NickJ Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Location:
    UK
    I've got bigger spoons in my kitchen drawer!
     
    #2
  3. Vcore89

    Vcore89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    The synapse
    ...and 65s wood racquets are much better playing than the Wilson T series.

    I'll have to pass with the short shorts!:) Haha, reminds me of Magic and Bird jockeying for position on a rebound in their tight short shorts!
     
    #3
  4. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    And if guys like Borg and Vilas could put massive topspin on the ball using such tiny racquets strung with natural gut, why do today's pros like Nadal need such a massive 100 sq. in. racquet strung with poly strings in order to produce spin? I mean, the ball is the same size now as it was back then, right?

    So is it just that today's players have poorer eyesight, have worse eye-hand coordination, or it's now just a weak era? :shock: :(
     
    #4
  5. 10is

    10is Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,451
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2013
    #5
  6. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    #6
  7. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,385
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    Are you really asking? Or just attempting to further your usual agendas?
     
    #7
  8. TennisAddiction

    TennisAddiction Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    218
    I always thought Gerulaitis was what you got when your Vitas was inflammed. :lol:
     
    #8
  9. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    I'm really asking.

    Do today's players just have much worse eye-hand coordination that they need to use massive racquets in order to hit the same size ball?
     
    #9
  10. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    A mild case is just called "Vitas", but a really severe case is called "Vitas Gerulaitis". LOL :lol:
     
    #10
  11. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,362
    it's kinda different: back then most of the players were using small head size racquets. today, only federer and a few other players are using 90 and everybody else is using larger head size.
    If you think it's an advantage using smaller head size racquet then more power to you.
     
    #11
  12. ozbikebuddy

    ozbikebuddy New User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Messages:
    27
    Different strokes

    Different strokes, pure and simple.

    Bigger frame= easier to play topspin and western astyle grips

    Woodern frame size= flatter shots just due to the smaller hitting area and reduce margins on the swings.

    pure and simple stroke machanics
     
    #12
  13. gavna

    gavna Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Messages:
    3,694
    Yes of course they are - the size of the balls have been pretty std for over 100 yrs.
     
    #13
  14. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    That certainly didn't stop Bjorn Borg from generating massive topspin using his western-style grips and reverse forehands with a 65 sq. in. wood racquet. :shock:
     
    #14
  15. Borg didn't have a western like today's. They called it western but it was more like extreme eastern. He didn't put nearly as much topspin on the ball as current guys do, and the guys today club the ball compared to guys a few decades back.

    Come on man, I know you know this.
     
    #15
  16. ozbikebuddy

    ozbikebuddy New User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Messages:
    27
    Didn't say couldn't be done

    Didn't say couldn't be done, just easier with the larger hitting area.

    I can hit topspin with a wood too but swinging as fast as i do and with such a small face on the frame, it just that you do get a lot more miss hits.

    its like Prices Power level rating a combo of headsize length weight stiffness, woodern an smaller frames jsut tend to suit certain styles of game better, there will always be exceptions.
     
    #16
  17. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    Borg hit reverse forehands just like Nadal does today, except that Borg was able to do it with a heavy 65 sq. in. wood racquet, whereas Nadal needs a lightweight 100 sq. in. racquet to do it.

    Borg vs. Nadal:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2h6-i6Q5is

    This tells me that Borg must have better eye-hand coordination than Nadal does. :shock:
     
    #17
  18. 10is

    10is Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,451
    http://www.supersport.com/tennis/bl...es_three_types_of_balls_to_counter_power_game

    Read the linked article. Same size/weight but different materials for the USOpen (i.e. faster court) balls -- harder rubber. Elsewhere though, for instance at Wimbledon, the balls are slightly larger than they used to be.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2013
    #18
  19. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    Yes, I am aware that back in 2001, the ITF approved 3 different types of balls, but I believe the ACTUAL balls still used today in most pro tournaments is still the same size as it was 30 years ago.

    BTW, nowhere in that article does it say that the US Open has changed to a ball with harder rubber (why would they want to make the US Open even faster?) nor does it say that Wimbledon changed to a larger ball.
     
    #19
  20. 10is

    10is Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,451
    TYPE-1 with the harder rubber are used for clay - I mis-stated the ball type in the previous post. TYPE-2 balls are the standard balls for hard courts and yes they remain unchanged. TYPE-3 balls (with a larger diameter) are what are used on grass.

    Also, this article is from 2000 when they were still researching the use of a larger ball at Wimbledon which was consequently implemented after 2001:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=119933&page=1&singlePage=true

     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2013
    #20
  21. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    Except that no players, commentators, nor authorities have ever mentioned that this experimental larger ball was ever ACTUALLY implemented in match play at Wimbledon.
     
    #21
  22. 10is

    10is Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,451
    Look it BP -- Quite a a few have -- Mark Woodforde even has a collection of balls from each of his Wimbledon seasons and according to him they have gotten gradually larger. It's a nuanced increase but an increase nonetheless.
     
    #22
  23. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,399
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Actually got to hit a few today with a Dunlop pre MaxPly wood racket.
    I use a strong SW forehand, 1hbh backhand.
    I hit maybe 16 groundies total, before the guy who brought the racket wanted it back. NO mishits, at least 8 were off volleys from inside the service box, and my groundies were all topspin drives.
    HE wanted his racket back, as he was going to play a doubles set with it against us.
    They got to a 4-0 lead, then we came back and won 6-4. The wood racket was great in the first 4 games, then mishit all over the map after.
    His serves were THE SAME, as with any other racket.
    His strong forehands, and he's 6' tall and 200 lbs., were as strong as last week, when we played against him. Only an increased # of mishit's when he got tired was the difference.
     
    #23
  24. Chace

    Chace Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    578
    You don't see Borg using a wood racket today.
     
    #24
  25. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,461
    That's because they don't make wood racquets anymore and all of his old ones are either warped or cracked. :wink: So he uses the next best thing which is a 90 sq. in. Mid. :)
     
    #25
  26. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,362
    #26
  27. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,399
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Dumb to use Borg as an example.
    Borg had taken years off of tennis, and was rusty and not match tough.
    Maybe some of you theorists should TRY a wood racket, before entering your opinion on the matter.
    I own one HeadMicroGelOS, so I do have a big racket.
    Used to play with 115 PrinceTT's and extended Changs.
    Of course, played all my good tennis with Smiths, Kramer's, ProStaffs, and Head Pros, and YonexOPSGreens.
     
    #27

Share This Page