Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by BreakPoint, Jan 30, 2011.
because they don't know better
So when Federer loses, he needs a bigger racquet. When Federer wins, he doesn't need a bigger racquet.
When Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray loses, they don't need a bigger racquet. When Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray win, they don't need a bigger racquet.
Thus, when Federer loses, the problem MUST be his racquet. When Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray loses, it MUST be some other reason that has nothing to do with their racquets. However, when Federer loses, there's no way there's any other reason besides his racquet. Federer can't possibly have the same reason for losing that Nadal, Djokovic or Murray have.
If you believe the above sounds logical, then I feel very sad for you.
And "outdated" is a matter of opinion. What does it matter if it's "outdated" is you can win with it? If you asked Berdych if he would be willing to use an "outdated" racquet if it would guarantee that he would win 17 Slams with it, do you think he would accept your offer? Of course he would!
When Sampras destroyed Agassi in the 1999 Wimbledon final and 2002 US Open final, Sampras was already using an "outdated" racquet. Do you think it mattered to Agassi that Sampras was using an "outdated" racquet? And after watching Federer play this week with his new bigger racquet, I'm sure Sampras is so happy that he never switched to a bigger racquet while he was on tour.
...and nobody told Andre to switch to 138 back then, right?
Racket is nothing to do with his loss in Federer's opinion.
Federer lost in Hamburg in the semi to a qualifier - . Federico Del Bonis 6-7 (7-9), 6-7 (4-7) final!
Oh well either way 90 or 98 - it still the same results for now!
I wonder if he didn't enter these two tournaments knowing they will be relatively painful for him in terms of making the biggest leap in racquet type in his career? Every match he wins is a points bonus anyway to even in Hamburg he is up on points.
This and the next tournament could the exact sort of opportunities he's rarely ever had before where the results literally cannot affect his ranking negatively, nor do they interfere with an important part of the season for him. Even in the matches he won it wasn't vintage Federer even by his pretty average 2013 pre-Wimbledon standards. I imagine he'll really tighten this ship up for the next tournament and come the hard court swing where he typically goes more control oriented with his string set-up the hardest part of the process will be over.
Maybe it's all just an opportunistic happening but, then again, maybe he has this planned better than some are giving him credit for when they just look at his level of play on these pretty crap clay courts using weird balls. Wilson were in on it months ago - we know that by the fact P1 was customising him a set of frames a few weeks ago. This was no "try 5 frames and pick one in a few days then play with it in a tournament 5 days later" scenario. A lot of preparation went into this imo.
How's that working out for him this year? :lol:
Good time to bring it back.
And why didn't you bring this thread back after Federer beat Mannarino in the 3rd round and advise Mannarino to switch to a smaller racquet? :???:
Because Manarinno is that bad, so she should have beaten him with frying pan anyway
I'm guessing Roger will revist the 98 now that the 2013 season is essentially over (for him anyway).
Or maybe a Weed.
I remember Federer saying that he will resume his racket testing after US Open.
If a bigger racquet helped players extend their pro careers when they got older, both McEnroe and Sampras would still be on the ATP Tour.
Extend, maybe not. Help, possibly.
When Sampras says he wishes he'd tried a larger frame during his last few years, I think that carries more weight anything anyone on here could have to say.
After seeing Federer's fiasco with the larger racquet, Sampras now says he's glad he stuck with his PS 85 during his career.
The grass is always greener. I wish I had bought a lottery ticket the last time the jackpot was over 500 million. Because if I did, of course I would have won. :shock:
Ok, what about Fed's Fiasco 2nd round exit against Stakhovsky and against Robredo? But wait, it's with the small racquet, ah?? So Fed is a fiasco nowadays with anything, but his chances would be better with a bigger racquet (IMO), He will go back to it and will play better with it, small racquets are part of the past, quit pretending you are know a lot, Fed has the worst handed backhand in the top 200 (well Lopez and Karlovic are right there with him), meanwhile all others one handed play with bigger racquets, I don't know if it's a coincidence or not but they all have better BH, at least they can rip it down the line anytime they want, unlike Fed.
Age is not an excuse either HAAS, ROBREDO... are just as old as He is.
That's what happens when you get old. Federer is 32. How about 7-time Wimbledon champion Sampras' 2nd round exit to Bastl at Wimbledon when Sampras was 30?
And how about Nadal's 1st round exit to Darcis at Wimbledon this year? Does Nadal need to switch to a bigger racquet, too?
You're right about Federer's backhand. His one-handed backhand was better when he used the PS 6.0 85. He should switch to a smaller racquet.
Oh, and how many Slams have either Haas or Robredo won in their 30's?
I can only imagine the number of slams Marat Safin would have won if he moved from that tiny Mid to the Midplus :twisted:
Old man Robredo played a solid game, Federer just could not capitalize on anything that match, a shank on a 90 isn't gonna be a winner on a 95/98. His game that requires so much timing, footwork, speed and agility that the dropoff was going to be precipitous. He doesn't have a game that shortens points or a big serve to lean on.
let's just put safin, robredo and fed on the shelf for a minute. I've gotta know what size racquet uncle rico uses to hit a tennis ball over them mountains? btw, would you have won state if you were using a 98 in stick instead of a 90? :twisted:
that's cause these not so smart people thinks somehow bigger racket with bigger head will make them play better. This is always the case. Federer is perfect example. he acutally loses control on his forehand when he goes to bigger frame. and he gains nothing on his serves
With a 98 I would've taken state. Things would be different
Is this still on discussion????... Get a life...
It's not the head size, it's the weight and/or swingweight. Fed's late on everything these days. All his shots, especially forehands that go deep indicate that he isn't quite getting the stick through the hitting zone. He just needs to drop 3 - 5 grams off the head.
Change of stick at this stage of his career is a real distraction to his beautiful tennis.
This may actually be a good suggestion.
Exactly! I think one of the reasons he lost to Robredo is that he lost a bit of confidence in his shots with his old racquet after fooling around with so many different prototypes for almost two months. That was enough to plant a seed of doubt in the back of his mind. At his level, that's enough to to mess him up just enough to lose a few critical points and the match.
I re-watched Fed's match against Nadal in Cincy. His problem is clearly not racket head size. He's still got the game to be at the top, but clearly against Robredo he was not hitting with much confidence. I continue to believe that it's primarily a mental issue with him at the moment and not anything physical, whether regarding his own body or his racket.
Is it possible to keep the same 90 box beam mold for roger while changing the throat to a more Aerodynamic aeropro design?
Basically amalgamation of pro staff and aero technology?
i basically am in agreement that his racquet works for him, he just needs to be able to whip it easier every so often and not feel like the inertia is too large..especially on the arc balls
For sure. His racquet is fine and notwithstanding a back tweak here and there (he's had them at least as far back as 2003), he's physically capable of playing as well as ever. It seems very evident his head is his biggest and possibly only real issue.
He doesn't need a bigger racquet. He needs a new racket.
He doesn't need a new racquet. He needs a new back, new legs, and new confidence.
I was pondering my previous response and believe if wilson can somehow get around the patent that is owned by Babolat on the aero design this could be successful.
He doesn't need a new racquet. The old stick got him 16 break points at US Open this yr, his head took only 2.
where's my "like" button???
I think RF needs more mass on his old racquet. He doesn't need bigger head size. He needs bigger mass. More weight on both tip and handle. As timing is a crucial part on his game, the added mass will help him with the timing.
what an idiotic post this is
Why? A bigger stringbed is not the only way to get more power, if that's what Federer wants. More weight or a stiffer frame will also give you more power, as will more powerful strings and/or lower tension and/or a more open string pattern. So a bigger racquet is not the only way to go. In fact, a bigger racquet just gets in the way of your swing more and is harder to manipulate the angle of the head.
Federer more than likely has heard of this weight and balance stuff. He may possibly have worked out what balance works best for him.
I love how forum people give their advice to players rated some of the greatest that have ever played the game.
The fact is people say about a larger racket as Fed "frames" more balls than the other top names.
You're correct, a bigger racquet does get in the way, and is clearly a handicap...which is precisely why 98% OF THE CURRENT PRO'S USE IT..apparently they just love to put themselves at such a disadvantage!!!!
WILL YOU PEOPLE WAKE UP AND JUST LOOK AT THE FACTS!!!! There is a reason 95-100 sq inch is the new standard...IT WORKS BEST!!!!!!!
The Mid is dead...on the PRO TOUR...relax..no one is taking them away from you...I still use my 89.5" Graphite Pro plenty of times...but if I as on the Pro Tour...no way.
He doesn´t need a bigger racket.
Just bigger balls.
Yup, you're right. If these pros used smaller racquets, it would be less in their way and they'd have the racquet head speed that Federer had with his 90. And perhaps they'd also have 17 Slams.
Oh, and everybody using something does not prove that it works best. Everybody used VHS even though Betamax worked better. Everybody back in the 1960's used 65 sq. in. racquets, does that mean it worked best? Everybody wore long pants to play tennis back in the 1930's, does that mean it worked best?
WOW...been awhile, forgot how delusional you are, yup....you're right...99% of the players are using inferior equipment by choice...for no reason...with no evidence to back it up, yup, they are just idiots, and even with all their exposure to ANY EQUIPMENT THEY WANT, THEY STILL CHOOSE THE INFERIOR SPEC!!!! #HEADINTHESANDIMPOSSIBLYSTUBBORNMORON!!!!!!
Oh, there is a reason. 99% of players aren't good enough to use smaller racquets, that's why they NEED the bigger racquets. Federer is NOT one of these untalented people.
why can we just not accept that it does not matter what racket he uses.
Because there are so many people on this board who aren't good enough to use anything other than a big racquet in order to hit the ball so they think that's also what the best player who ever lived also needs. :???:
i would bet a lot of money that he retires or switches back to the old, smaller racket (until the end of this year). if betnwin would offer this bet, i would bet A LOT on it.
this bet would also resolve the problem here...if u think this fkng bigger racket helps him, bet on it! good for me, im getting better odds
OMG, you could have saved Feds, so much time by donating a roll of lead tape to customize his racquets. Ashame he, and his team never thoughted of that.... too late now that he has invested so much time in switching and testing. How much slams has this costed him? Maybe a thread should be started on how many slams he missed out on?
because it does matter
It seems to matter more to people on this board than it does to Federer.
Separate names with a comma.