Wilson will shut down Vortex

[Sander001]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

It obviously does work or else Wilson wouldn't be coming out with these racquets. But it shouldn't be allowed to work because players shouldn't be allowed to use it. If players want to generate more spin, they should go work on their technique, not just buy a new racquet.

Aha so some players can get more spin with these new racquets and some like yourself, can get more spin with more closed pattern strings like the 18x20 you mentioned.
Am I missing something or are you just blatantly self serving and self interested?

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Sander001

Aha so some players can get more spin with these new racquets and some like yourself, can get more spin with more closed pattern strings like the 18x20 you mentioned.
Am I missing something or are you just blatantly self serving and self interested?

I don't know if it's more spin or what but I really love an open string pattern.

I guess my racquet progression went from the Kblade 18x20 and just going more and more open and loving it more and more.

I switched over to the Donnay pro one 16x19 and LOVED it. It was basically the same racquet as the Kblade just a more open string pattern.

Then the Vortex Tour 100 came out with a 14x15 pattern and I went nuts. It's basically the same stick as the Kblade and the Pro one but an even more open string pattern .

Now Wilson has really come out with something so intriguing.....less crosses than Mains ? WOW!!!!

Luckily I know the weight balance and size stick I love the most....but the more open a string pattern the better I seem to play.

I'm wondering if anyone knows the specs of the Wilson 99s? I saw the rumored specs and it seemed a bit on the light side . Will it be the same specs as the regular 99 steam just with a more open string pattern? Is there anyway to get the stick before January?

Also I've seen people talk about prince having a stick with a really open pattern....which stick is it?

I have never been so anxious to buy a stick.....this is more exciting than the IPhone 5 ...lol.

[SFrazeur]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Also I've seen people talk about prince having a stick with a really open pattern....which stick is it?

The current prince racquet with the most open pattern is the Warrior DB Team at 14x18: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Prin...NCE-XOWDB.html

-SF

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by SFrazeur

The current prince racquet with the most open pattern is the Warrior DB Team at 14x18: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Prin...NCE-XOWDB.html

-SF

Thanks for that ! Very intriguing.....but I'm not even going to try it as after years of fiddling I have my specs pretty much down. These racquet specs are all wrong.

I am looking for a head light stick at about 11.0-11.6 strung with an open string pattern, and qite stiff.....67 at the least.....I don't want to deal with customization.

I will go off my range a little but not this much. At 10.4 ounces and 4 Pts head head heavyand 62 stiffness the prince is just all wrong for me.

But again thanks ! I'm sure there have been discussions on the stick so I am not going to ask anyone's thoughts on it.....unless you want to give it?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Sander001

Aha so some players can get more spin with these new racquets and some like yourself, can get more spin with more closed pattern strings like the 18x20 you mentioned.
Am I missing something or are you just blatantly self serving and self interested?

All players should have to generate their own spin using a 65 sq. in. racquet with an 18x20 pattern because that was the standard for over 100 years. Bjorn Borg could do it. If you can't do it then your technique is the problem.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

All players should have to generate their own spin using a 65 sq. in. racquet with an 18x20 pattern because that was the standard for over 100 years. Bjorn Borg could do it. If you can't do it then your technique is the problem.

True......


So I need to cheat...lol....

The open string pattern really helps me.

[The Dark Knight]

Apparently Mark Woodforde possibly the greatest doubles player of all time played with a really open string pattern.....maybe the most open in history....I think 12x13?

The Vortex is more closed at a mere 14x15 so it's actually more old school than the old school.

Here's a pic of the high ten and the more modern Vortex es 100

[The Dark Knight]

On another note even the string is old school.....

Woodforde used a 15 gauge polyester....the Vortex which is modeled after the woodforde racquet recommends a similar 15 gauge polyester or a multifilament 15 gauge which is more old school than woodfordes poly .

[Bartelby]

In an article entitled the 'inch that changed tennis' it was shown rather satisfactorily that the modern topspin game requires a racquet far wider than the traditional wood one.

Beyond that it is a question of technique, although string pattern will change launch angle and strings will change slipperiness.

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

All players should have to generate their own spin using a 65 sq. in. racquet with an 18x20 pattern because that was the standard for over 100 years. Bjorn Borg could do it. If you can't do it then your technique is the problem.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

In an article entitled the 'inch that changed tennis' it was shown rather satisfactorily that the modern topspin game requires a racquet far wider than the traditional wood one.

Beyond that it is a question of technique, although string pattern will change launch angle and strings will change slipperiness.

Great article if its the one in thinking of . Polyester strings by the way have been around since at least the 70's . I think Polystar was the first and before that they simply refered to it as Nylon....pretty much the same thing.

But the inch that changed tennis happened in the 70's .....it was inch added to the tennis racquet and it states that its not the equipment that has changed but the players. Their techniqie amd physique. Here ya go:

Tennis: String Theory

Professional tennis players call it "the Luxilon shot," and, apparently, you can hear it coming. The ball crosses the net hissing and spitting like some enraged tropical insect. Its most lethal element is its topspin, which can dip the ball crosscourt in short angles so extreme that "the game has gone from linear to parabolic," as ex-pro turned coach Scott McCain recently put it. "It's like ping-pong out there."

The Luxilon shot can be traced back to 1997, when Gustavo Kuerten, a gangly, low-ranked Brazilian player, decided to string his racket with a co-polymer monofilament designed by Luxilon Industries, a small Belgian company specializing in medical sutures and bra straps (it still makes both). Kuerten confounded opponents with his aggressive, dipping shots, winning three French Open Championships and reaching number one. He credited Luxilon for a crucial role in his unlikely ascent. (See pictures of Wimbledon.)

Today, natural gut strings — the strands of sterilized cow entrails once used by most professionals — have all but disappeared from pro tennis. At this year's French Open beginning May 24, 65% of men and 45% of women will use a Luxilon string, and almost all those who don't will use an imitation. This despite the fact that the family-owned company based in Antwerp refuses to pay top players to use its products and requires most to buy the string — almost unheard of in the freebie-filled world of professional tennis.

But is the "Luxilon shot" all down to Luxilon string? In a 2006 article titled "The Inch that Changed Tennis Forever," Rod Cross, a physics professor at the University of Sydney, argued that the innovation in equipment that transformed topspin from a looping, defensive shot into a dive-bombing, offensive play actually happened in the late 1970s, when equipment makers widened the heads of professional rackets from nine inches to 10 (they also dropped wood for metal and eventually graphite). The extra inch allowed players to tilt the racket forward and swing from low to high without worrying about clipping the edge of the frame when brushing up on the ball.

According to Cross, nothing much has changed since that innovation; it's only in the last 10 years that players have developed the physique and technique to take advantage of the extra width by whipping the racket up in a motion that generates about five times more spin than the ground strokes players were hitting in the 1970s. "Players were given an inch in the 1970s and they took a mile," he says.

Pinpointing the role equipment has played in tennis's evolution can be tricky, however. Conventional wisdom once held that more powerful racket frames led to the hard-serving power game of the late '90s. But a 1997 test by Tennis Magazine found that 6 ft. 5 in. (1.96 m) Australian Mark Philippoussis served at an average speed of 124 m.p.h. (200 km/h) with his own graphite racket, and an only slightly slower 122 m.p.h. (196 km/h) with a classic wooden racket.

Polyester monofilament strings do generate "slightly more" spin than older generation strings, according to the International Tennis Federation (ITF), which started testing the playing characteristics of strings three years ago, but ITF head of science Stuart Miller says he's not sure why. One theory is that far from "biting" the ball, as many players describe it, the strings are "slippery" — when the ball pulls the strings out of their gridded alignment, they snap back quickly, propelling the ball's rotation. (See pictures of Pete Sampras.)

Yet even as strings offer greater potential for spin, players need technique to fulfill that potential. As Miller says, "the most important factor in the generation of spin is racket speed." Research by Cross at the University of Sydney has shown that pro tennis players have much less feel for strings than they think, and tend to overestimate their importance. A study published last year found that 90% of professionals could not feel a 6 lb. (2.7 kg) difference in the tension of strings in two different frames — even though most professionals insist on exacting string specifications for their matches.

Players who use Luxilon string say it feels "stiff" and "dead" on impact. But Luxilon general manager Nico van Malderen says that internal testing has shown the string is actually more powerful than the average. So it's possible that players developed aggressive topspin strokes with Luxilon because they felt they needed to swing harder to generate the same pace. As former world No. 1 Jim Courier says, "Technology has been the catalyst, but my guess is that if you forced all players to go back to technology from 1950 they would play much more aggressively than previous generations. The new style is working for them." Whatever the exact interplay of man and equipment may be, it has allowed fans to witness a thrilling revolution.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

You're right. Fewer crosses is nothing new. They had them back in the 1970's and it was called "spaghetti strings". They were quickly and promptly banned by the ITF for producing too much spin. So I don't see why they shouldn't ban this new racquet from Wilson. Oh, and they should ban ALL poly strings while they're at it for producing too much spin, which is the same reason they banned spaghetti strings 35 years ago.

And, no, my post was not tongue-in-cheek but quite serious.

Are you really that stupid? "spaghetti strings" are completely different from just fewer crosses.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If that's true, then yes, it should be banned. But the thing is, I get just as much spin, sometimes even more spin, with 18x20 racquets as I do with 16x19 racquets. Why? Because I generate spin with my technique and not with my racquet or strings. I generate just as much spin with multis as I do with poly strings, which is why I don't use poly. I don't choose racquets because of string pattern because I can hit with as much spin with any pattern.

Doesn't matter, with your stupid logic, it still have to be banned.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

All players should have to generate their own spin using a 65 sq. in. racquet with an 18x20 pattern because that was the standard for over 100 years. Bjorn Borg could do it. If you can't do it then your technique is the problem.

Why don't you just permanently blind fold yourself so you don't have to see the world progresses?

[Sander001]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

All players should have to generate their own spin using a 65 sq. in. racquet with an 18x20 pattern because that was the standard for over 100 years. Bjorn Borg could do it. If you can't do it then your technique is the problem.

Completely avoids the question and tries to question my form instead. Wow.
You never directly answered so I'll take that as a "yes, the main reason I want to ban any tech is so I would have the advantage over everybody else. I'm most important."

[DevilDog]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If that's true, then yes, it should be banned. But the thing is, I get just as much spin, sometimes even more spin, with 18x20 racquets as I do with 16x19 racquets. Why? Because I generate spin with my technique and not with my racquet or strings. I generate just as much spin with multis as I do with poly strings, which is why I don't use poly. I don't choose racquets because of string pattern because I can hit with as much spin with any pattern.

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

And why should standards change? Aren't the standards for equipment in baseball the same in 2012 as they were in 1980? Isn't the size of the standard tennis court the same in 2012 as it was in 1980?

I don't produce spin with poly because I hit flat and I swing pretty fast. And I don't use poly because I don't want my arm to fall off and I want to be able to play tennis for the rest of my life.

You generate as much spin with poly as with multis, but you dont use spin.
I see now how you have 35k post. I think this is called a "circular argument".

[themitchmann]

Originally Posted by Sander001

Completely avoids the question and tries to question my form instead. Wow.
You never directly answered so I'll take that as a "yes, the main reason I want to ban any tech is so I would have the advantage over everybody else. I'm most important."

I don't think he's saying that, exactly. I think it has more to do with the idea of using a racquet as a shortcut to improvement. As a coach, I understand and agree with that. Technique is vital to becoming better.

However, I think the game is a lot more fun with current technologies.

[Mig1NC]

I wonder if the triangle pattern of the Vortex mains causes less friction as the mains would slide down the crosses at an angle instead of straight on.

If so, then Wilson's fewer crosses may not yield much more spin improvement if any over Vortex's greater number of crosses, while the Vortex may have more control due to the greater number of crosses.

Somebody will need to buy both and experiment!

[sureshs]

It is probably just a gimmick. Somebody is not telling us the full story about the disadvantages of fewer strings.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by sureshs

It is probably just a gimmick. Somebody is not telling us the full story about the disadvantages of fewer strings.

Control .....less control with open pattern.....

But really not a big deal in my opinion

[Cavaleer]

Originally Posted by Justin-JP

I would hope that is tongue-in-cheek. There is nothing new about fewer crosses allowing the mains to move more freely (at the expense of some control, typically). I can imagine the only R&D Wilson spent on this was down the coffee shop thinking up the next gimmick.

Haha, so true. Of course they recommend using their string to maximize the benefits. lol

This should be their most interesting gimmick in some time though.