Wilson will shut down Vortex

[dmcb101]

Originally Posted by Cavaleer

Haha, so true. This should be their most interesting gimmick in some time though.

I dont get why people are saying this. Unless the article that was written on Tennis.com does not have actual science behind it I dont understand why people keep calling it a marketing scheme. Have you read the article?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by dmcb101

I dont get why people are saying this. Unless the article that was written on Tennis.com does not have actual science behind it I dont understand why people keep calling it a marketing scheme. Have you read the article?

Do you have a link? I could not find it under Gear

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

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

Um....no. It's the same idea. Fewer or no crosses to allow the mains to move around much more to create the spin. Whether it's spaghetti strings or fewer crosses, the concept is the SAME!

Oh, and here's a tip - calling others "stupid" is a great way to get yourself banned.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

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

How is today's modern baseline bashing game "progress"?

If that's "progress", we should all go back to living in caves.

All the creativity, variety, touch, strategy, intelligence, etc. have been eliminated from the sport. That is NOT 'progress". That is regression. The game is worse now than it was before. Watching baseline bashing is mind numbing. People should get paid for sitting through an entire WTA match.

[BreakPoint]

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."

Um....how do I gain any "advantage"? I'll be using the same exact non-spin enhancing equipment as my opponent. If I can generate more spin, then I have the better technique because there was no help at all from the equipment. If my opponent can generate more spin, then he has the better technique. It's crystal clear who the better player is since it's not muddled by differences in equipment.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by DevilDog

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".

I prefer to hit flatter, so of course I generate the same amount of spin with multis as I do with polys. Why is that hard to understand?

If I generate 1 RPM of spin with a multi and 1 RPM of spin with a poly, then I generate "as much spin with a multi as with a poly", don't I?

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I prefer to hit flatter, so of course I generate the same amount of spin with multis as I do with polys. Why is that hard to understand?

If I generate 1 RPM of spin with a multi and 1 RPM of spin with a poly, then I generate "as much spin with a multi as with a poly", don't I?

I'm not taking sides here....and I understand your desire for the purity of the sport over technology.

However the answer to your question is : no.

All shots even flat shots have some spin on it.

I grant you that a ball coming in waist high you will hit flat with the same RPM regardless of the type of string.

However not all bounces are created equal....for example if someone hits a low skidding slice at you then you must lift that ball to get it over the net. It cannot be hit flat.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

How is today's modern baseline bashing game "progress"?

If that's "progress", we should all go back to living in caves.

All the creativity, variety, touch, strategy, intelligence, etc. have been eliminated from the sport. That is NOT 'progress". That is regression. The game is worse now than it was before. Watching baseline bashing is mind numbing. People should get paid for sitting through an entire WTA match.

No, they are BETTER, because they can WIN. Your argument is all TALK, ATP tour is about who can WIN.

[themitchmann]

Points last pretty long these days. That takes a certain level of fitness, and leads to some pretty incredible shot making when the right players are competing.

Sampras on grass was not always great to watch because points were so quick...that doesn't necessarily make the game more interesting.

Just my 2 cents.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

No, they are BETTER, because they can WIN. Your argument is all TALK, ATP tour is about who can WIN.

And players 40 years ago never "won"?

So how is a win today "better" than a win 40 years ago? And if it's not, how does that make today's players "better"?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

I'm not taking sides here....and I understand your desire for the purity of the sport over technology.

However the answer to your question is : no.

All shots even flat shots have some spin on it.

I grant you that a ball coming in waist high you will hit flat with the same RPM regardless of the type of string.

However not all bounces are created equal....for example if someone hits a low skidding slice at you then you must lift that ball to get it over the net. It cannot be hit flat.

I hit those balls with either slice back or relatively flat and hard which goes over the net by an inch. In either case, poly is not going to help me with spin.

[Gasolina]

Why all the hate for these new racquets? If a person wants or doesn't want to use the racquet then let them be. Let them make the decision.

I use 17 guage co-poly strings at low tensions on 1 16x19 HL flexy racquet. My game revolves around spin. I don't think its cheating if you're just using available gear that works well for your game.

[Sander001]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Um....how do I gain any "advantage"?

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I get just as much spin, sometimes even more spin, with 18x20 racquets.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Sander001

So are you saying that I'm just a better player than you since I can get just as much spin out of an 18x20 racquet and you can't? OK, I guess the truth comes out.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Gasolina

Why all the hate for these new racquets? If a person wants or doesn't want to use the racquet then let them be. Let them make the decision.

I use 17 guage co-poly strings at low tensions on 1 16x19 HL flexy racquet. My game revolves around spin. I don't think its cheating if you're just using available gear that works well for your game.

But that's the point. Maybe this gear shouldn't be made available. Maybe it should be the player that generates the spin and not his gear.

I mean if Borg could generate lots of spin using a 65 sq. in. wood racquet with an 18x20 pattern strung with natural gut, every player should be able too if they worked hard enough on their strokes.

[DoctorBackhand]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

But that's the point. Maybe this gear shouldn't be made available. Maybe it should be the player that generates the spin and not his gear.

I mean if Borg could generate lots of spin using a 65 sq. in. wood racquet with an 18x20 pattern strung with natural gut, every player should be able too if they worked hard enough on their strokes.

Borg was also a tennis pro whose profession it was to play tennis.
For those of us who play for fun, I don't see why having a modern racket is a big deal.

In fact, I don't really get what your fascination is here that causes you to obsess over what racket other people use. If you are winning, you shouldn't really care what racket your opponent uses if your better than them.

Isn't that why Federer still uses a 90?

[Sander001]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

So are you saying that I'm just a better player than you since I can get just as much spin out of an 18x20 racquet and you can't? OK, I guess the truth comes out.

No mods for obvious troll bait? Well then.
Since you like truth coming out, then you'll be glad that we've all discovered that you're an elitist snob with a superiority complex.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I hit those balls with either slice back or relatively flat and hard which goes over the net by an inch. In either case, poly is not going to help me with spin.

On the forehand side ?

What do you do in doubles?

If a ball is sliced low at you then you must lift it to get by the net man.

What about on the run to the the forehand? You slice that as well?

I'm not questioning you I'm just curious ?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by DoctorBackhand

Borg was also a tennis pro whose profession it was to play tennis.
For those of us who play for fun, I don't see why having a modern racket is a big deal.

In fact, I don't really get what your fascination is here that causes you to obsess over what racket other people use. If you are winning, you shouldn't really care what racket your opponent uses if your better than them.

Isn't that why Federer still uses a 90?

Yes, I know but my point is that it CAN be done because we saw Borg do it. Even today, if you use an APD you're not going to hit the ball just like Nadal. But we know it CAN be done because we see Nadal do it all day long.

I just think we need to stop this nuclear arms race now and stop all of these ever increasingly more powerful and more spinny racquets and strings. It should be the player producing the power and spin, not the racquet and strings.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

On the forehand side ?

What do you do in doubles?

If a ball is sliced low at you then you must lift it to get by the net man.

What about on the run to the the forehand? You slice that as well?

I'm not questioning you I'm just curious ?

Yes, I often slice my forehand to lift low balls over the net, especially on the run. It works great. But if I get to the ball a bit earlier, I'll drive it flat with very little net clearance, especially in doubles in which I try to hit all shots very low over the net to make it more difficult for my opponents to hit aggressive volleys.