So which slam with wood?

[pc1]

Originally Posted by JoshDragon

The wood racquet era took place many years before I was born. I fully admit that my exposure to wood raquets has been through, You Tube and reading books on former touring players.

I like the tennis pre-1985 but at the same time it seems kind of foreign to me. The strokes look different, the rallies are much slower, there's a lot of serving and volleying. I don't have the level of appreciation for wood that some do. Although, that's not to say that I don't appreciate, Borg's ability to rally from the baseline and come up with passing shots, using that small 65 sq inch head frame.

Think of it this way Josh. In professional baseball what type of bats do they use? They use wooden bats. Why? Because the aluminum bats that they use in college and many of the amateur ranks would not allow the pitcher any sort of chance at having a decent earned run average.

In tennis today (and incidentally as a hacker I love the rackets today) almost any decent player can hit a winner off somewhat deep shot into the court. There is less strategy and less emphasis and skills as volleying, drop shots, lobs than there was with the wood rackets. Also with the smaller head and lesser strings, players would have far more problems hitting the heavy topspin today.

Obviously there also would be far more mishits if player used the heavy loop swings of today which may force some of them to hit the ball much flatter.

It would be interesting to see the skills of these players. Would Nadal still be able to hit his heavy topspin? Would Federer still be able to drive the ball (relatively speaking) as well as with the current rackets? Who knows?

I think Sampras would do quite well with his serve and volley game but his game was based on the old Australians like Laver anyway.

I think it would be a fun change of pace from the sometimes boring baseline blasting of today from most players.

[Ripper014]

Originally Posted by pc1

Think of it this way Josh. In professional baseball what type of bats do they use? They use wooden bats. Why? Because the aluminum bats that they use in college and many of the amateur ranks would not allow the pitcher any sort of chance at having a decent earned run average.

In tennis today (and incidentally as a hacker I love the rackets today) almost any decent player can hit a winner off somewhat deep shot into the court. There is less strategy and less emphasis and skills as volleying, drop shots, lobs than there was with the wood rackets. Also with the smaller head and lesser strings, players would have far more problems hitting the heavy topspin today.

Obviously there also would be far more mishits if player used the heavy loop swings of today which may force some of them to hit the ball much flatter.

It would be interesting to see the skills of these players. Would Nadal still be able to hit his heavy topspin? Would Federer still be able to drive the ball (relatively speaking) as well as with the current rackets? Who knows?

I think Sampras would do quite well with his serve and volley game but his game was based on the old Australians like Laver anyway.

I think it would be a fun change of pace from the sometimes boring baseline blasting of today from most players.

I could not agree more... I do think Federer would be able to adjust since his game is as classic as anyone these days. Nadal would still hit topspin, it just would not be as effective as it is now.

I actually used a wood racket for the first hour of a mens night last weekend and faired well. I have a very classic game since I learned to play in the mid 70's, I did not nearly hit with as much topspin... but that was ok since I am comfortable hitting a flatter ball. What was surprising was that my volleying was effective and there was only a little speed lost off my serve.

It was a lot of fun... switching back to my Tour 90 took a little more effort.

[JoshDragon]

Originally Posted by pc1

Think of it this way Josh. In professional baseball what type of bats do they use? They use wooden bats. Why? Because the aluminum bats that they use in college and many of the amateur ranks would not allow the pitcher any sort of chance at having a decent earned run average.

In tennis today (and incidentally as a hacker I love the rackets today) almost any decent player can hit a winner off somewhat deep shot into the court. There is less strategy and less emphasis and skills as volleying, drop shots, lobs than there was with the wood rackets. Also with the smaller head and lesser strings, players would have far more problems hitting the heavy topspin today.

Obviously there also would be far more mishits if player used the heavy loop swings of today which may force some of them to hit the ball much flatter.

It would be interesting to see the skills of these players. Would Nadal still be able to hit his heavy topspin? Would Federer still be able to drive the ball (relatively speaking) as well as with the current rackets? Who knows?

I think Sampras would do quite well with his serve and volley game but his game was based on the old Australians like Laver anyway.

I think it would be a fun change of pace from the sometimes boring baseline blasting of today from most players.

I love the modern day racquets. Partly because I'm more familiar with them but I find it to be way more fun watching two players battle against each other, blasting aces and hitting winners. IMO, the entertainment quality of tennis has reached a new high because of the Nadal/Federer rivalry.

I don't think there should be a yearly wood racquet tournament or anything but I guess, one exhibition tournament with wood racquets, would be ok.

I'm not a big fan of it because I find wood racquet matches to be considerably less entertaining than regular matches, although they're still interesting to me.

[AndrewD]

Originally Posted by CyBorg

This would never happen. Using wood would be an injury risk.

Think about it. It's like asking a pitcher who throws overhand to switch to submarine. You'd kill his arm.

Nope, that's just complete and utter rubbish. If the players went to wood it would do more to save their arm than damage it.

Think about it. Instead of serving the first ball as hard as possible, because you know that your modern racquet and strings allow you to generate enough pace and spin on the second serve to keep your opponent on the defensive, they'll have to take some pace off it and go for a higher percentage and better placement. They'll know that, if they miss the first serve the second ball will be easier to attack.

The wood racquet will also require them to use natural gut. That's going to be far better for their arm and shoulder than the poly they use now.

In the 70's you had players like Nastase, Laver and Court chopping and changing between wood and metal. None of them ever had a problem with their arm or shoulder.

[CyBorg]

Originally Posted by AndrewD

Nope, that's just complete and utter rubbish. If the players went to wood it would do more to save their arm than damage it.

Think about it. Instead of serving the first ball as hard as possible, because you know that your modern racquet and strings allow you to generate enough pace and spin on the second serve to keep your opponent on the defensive, they'll have to take some pace off it and go for a higher percentage and better placement. They'll know that, if they miss the first serve the second ball will be easier to attack.

The wood racquet will also require them to use natural gut. That's going to be far better for their arm and shoulder than the poly they use now.

In the 70's you had players like Nastase, Laver and Court chopping and changing between wood and metal. None of them ever had a problem with their arm or shoulder.

Um, obviously I am referring to a sudden shift from one kind of technology to another. The OP is even talking about switching interchangeably.

Nastase/Laver/Court grew up with one kind of technology and honed their games with it. They hit the ball a particular way with certain grips, wind ups.

The OP is however referring to a hypothetical whereby at some point in time in a season the modern players put away their graphites and use woodies like the ones they had 30 years ago. Just to see how they'd do.

Realistically, this would be an injury risk. Guys would have to alter their mechanics considerably and this would inevitably result in different kinds of problems, particularly arm, elbow, shoulder.

Even making one single change can be a very bad idea if you're past a certain age. Watch the old matches and notice how differently they hit the ball and imagine Federer with that kind of technology - he would have to hit the ball in ways that his body is not accustomed. Hence the pitcher analogy.

[CyBorg]

Originally Posted by pc1

Think of it this way Josh. In professional baseball what type of bats do they use? They use wooden bats. Why? Because the aluminum bats that they use in college and many of the amateur ranks would not allow the pitcher any sort of chance at having a decent earned run average.

In tennis today (and incidentally as a hacker I love the rackets today) almost any decent player can hit a winner off somewhat deep shot into the court. There is less strategy and less emphasis and skills as volleying, drop shots, lobs than there was with the wood rackets. Also with the smaller head and lesser strings, players would have far more problems hitting the heavy topspin today.

Obviously there also would be far more mishits if player used the heavy loop swings of today which may force some of them to hit the ball much flatter.

It would be interesting to see the skills of these players. Would Nadal still be able to hit his heavy topspin? Would Federer still be able to drive the ball (relatively speaking) as well as with the current rackets? Who knows?

I think Sampras would do quite well with his serve and volley game but his game was based on the old Australians like Laver anyway.

I think it would be a fun change of pace from the sometimes boring baseline blasting of today from most players.

Don't bother reasoning with him. He's a mongoloid.

[classic tennis]

Originally Posted by joe sch

Would also be a great tribute to Jack Kramer. Down under in the aussie summer, Id sure like to be there !

Joe it would be great to see, Perhaps at Forest Hills? anyway it could happen if the guy's didn't demand $100K to front up.....I know where they can get the racquets

[Ripper014]

To those that pose that the use of wood rackets would be a problem... I don't see it I have lived through all the changes in tennis over the last 35 years...

I started with a Adidas Nastase (wood frame)> Head Pro (extruded aluminum)> Head Arthur Ashe Comp 2 (aluminum sandwiched between boron and fiberglass)>Wilson Prostaff 6.0 85 (braided graphite)>Dunlop Max 200g (injection molded graphite)>Dunlop Impact 95 (wide body graphite)x>Dunlop Maxply McEnroe>Wilson Tour 90 and many frames inbetween.

I played a decent level of tennis with classic strokes and an attacking all court game,have never sustained a serious injury and I have survived 4 decades of tennis with various equipment without ill effect.

As a matter of fact I actually used a wood frame on the weekend on a mens night and won all my matches with it... I had minimal lost of power... the one thing I felt was missing was heavy topspin.

The racket is just a tool... and there is nothing wrong with the tools of yesterday... the pros today could still hit well over 125mph on their serves. They could still hit the big forehands and backhands... they just may not be able to do it on demand.

The other thing they could do is limit the power of the new rackets... follow what golf has done. Allow the companies to create new rackets but limit them to the power of the old wood frames... or... those oversized balls to slow down the game (circa 1980's?).

Anyway... back to the point of the thread... any slam would be great except for the French.

[max]

Actually, I would like to see the weight of pros frames: the 13 oz. wood might well be doable for them.

The thrill of blast-it tennis is understandable: instant gratification. But the OP's right to note that earlier wood tennis required a lot more effort, mentally and tactically. What I miss are the amazing angles you could get with a wood.

[joe sch]

Originally Posted by pc1

Think of it this way Josh. In professional baseball what type of bats do they use? They use wooden bats. Why? Because the aluminum bats that they use in college and many of the amateur ranks would not allow the pitcher any sort of chance at having a decent earned run average.

In tennis today (and incidentally as a hacker I love the rackets today) almost any decent player can hit a winner off somewhat deep shot into the court. There is less strategy and less emphasis and skills as volleying, drop shots, lobs than there was with the wood rackets. Also with the smaller head and lesser strings, players would have far more problems hitting the heavy topspin today.

Obviously there also would be far more mishits if player used the heavy loop swings of today which may force some of them to hit the ball much flatter.

It would be interesting to see the skills of these players. Would Nadal still be able to hit his heavy topspin? Would Federer still be able to drive the ball (relatively speaking) as well as with the current rackets? Who knows?

I think Sampras would do quite well with his serve and volley game but his game was based on the old Australians like Laver anyway.

I think it would be a fun change of pace from the sometimes boring baseline blasting of today from most players.

pc1, I agree with your post. You maybe self abusive when you claim to be a hacker but your logic indicates to me you have lots of playing experience and speak from wisdom. I am an advanced player who grewup playing wood and then transition materials rackets and ofcouse can now take advantage of the modern OS rackets. Players can play the modern game, open and more western strokes with wood rackets, they would just have a few more unforced errors. I think Federer game would most efficiently adapt to the wood rackets as compared to most of the other modern players. Roddick and Nadal would really struggle with unforced errors and need to make more adjustments.

[borg number one]

Imagine Borg's power and spin with a modern frame folks, if he could generate the shots he did with his old frames. I submit that it would be quite scary to face him if he was playing with, for example, a modern Babolat when he was anywhere between 20-25.

Think about his serve, forehand, and backhand with that frame in his hands or say a modern Head/Wilson/Technifibre. He could CRANK his serves and his topspin forehand would PUMMEL other baseliners and volleyers alike. Also, how do you think his returns/passing shots would be? The guy was STRONG, so his power/pace/spin would be off the charts. Add on his retrieving skills (he was one of the fastest/quickest players EVER), and play on Clay and all other surfaces and he would be a force of nature most likely.

John McEnroe would also be VERY SCARY in his prime with the frames of today.