Wilson will shut down Vortex

[Chotobaka]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

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.

Excellent way to end the point quickly in doubles. Unfortunately, not in your favor.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Chotobaka

Excellent way to end the point quickly in doubles. Unfortunately, not in your favor.

I do it more often in singles than in doubles unless both opponents are in the back court. In doubles, if both opponents are at the net and I get to the low ball late, I'll either flick the ball down the middle or down the sideline or at an sharp angle or lob over their heads.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I do it more often in singles than in doubles unless both opponents are in the back court. In doubles, if both opponents are at the net and I get to the low ball late, I'll either flick the ball down the middle or down the sideline or at an sharp angle or lob over their heads.

But why not use topspin sometimes? I mean I'm not prejudiced against any stroke . I use them all.....so does Federer and actually all the pros.

And they alway have ......Borg used topspin , Laver had some top as well believe it or not.

[dmcb101]

Originally Posted by sureshs

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

http://www.tennis.com/gear/2012/09/g.../#.UHejkcXR5qU

http://www.tennis.com/gear/2012/09/g.../#.UHejtcXR5qU

http://www.tennis.com/gear/2012/09/g.../#.UHejysXR5qU

http://www.tennis.com/gear/2012/09/g.../#.UHej2MXR5qU

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

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"?

You are stupid, if you play with 65 woody now, you LOSE.

[Readers]

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.

So you have 1 RPM slice as well? LOL.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

You are stupid, if you play with 65 woody now, you LOSE.

Um....and you think that was my point?

If EVERYONE used a 65 sq. in. wood racquet, who would win? I'd bet you that the better player would win and not the one with the better racquet or strings. THAT'S my point!

So who did you say was "stupid"?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

So you have 1 RPM slice as well? LOL.

How many people switch to poly strings because they slice every single ball? You don't need poly strings to help you slice better.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

How many people switch to poly strings because they slice every single ball? You don't need poly strings to help you slice better.

Doesn't matter, by your logic, it has to be banned.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Um....and you think that was my point?

If EVERYONE used a 65 sq. in. wood racquet, who would win? I'd bet you that the better player would win and not the one with the better racquet or strings. THAT'S my point!

So who did you say was "stupid"?

You are, why would everyone use 65 sq woody when 90-110 sq graphite let them play better and WIN? That's called progress you idiot. 90-110 sq graphite = play better tennis= beat people with 65 woody.

[Readers]

BTW when everyone use 90-110 sq graphite frame, better player still wins, you indeed do not have a point and is hopelessly ********.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

You are, why would everyone use 65 sq woody when 90-110 sq graphite let them play better and WIN? That's called progress you idiot. 90-110 sq graphite = play better tennis= beat people with 65 woody.

Why would all fencers use swords when an AK-47 would do the job so much better and make it easier for them to win? Isn't that progress? Why do baseball players use wooden bats when aluminum bats would make it easier for them to hit home runs? Isn't that progress? Why do cyclists ride bicycles when motorcycles would make it so much easier for them to win races? Isn't that progress?

Oh, and how is today's tennis "better" than before? Because it isn't! It's worse! That's regression, not progress.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

BTW when everyone use 90-110 sq graphite frame, better player still wins, you indeed do not have a point and is hopelessly ********.

If that's the case, why are there so many threads saying that Federer needs to switch to a bigger racquet if he wants to keep winning? Obviously, a lot of people think a bigger racquet makes it easier for you to win than a smaller one, right? So why do people think Federer would play better if he switched to Murray's or Djokovic's or Nadal's racquet?

During the wood era, I NEVER heard anyone say that McEnroe would win more if he switched from his wood racquet to Borg's wood racquet or Gerulaitis' wood racquet. Why? Because everyone knew that they were all pretty much the same and didn't give any player an advantage over another. That's obviously no longer true today. Or else why do so many people here keep buying or trying new racquets and new strings all the time? Obviously, they feel they gain an advantage with them.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Why would all fencers use swords when an AK-47 would do the job so much better and make it easier for them to win? Isn't that progress? Why do baseball players use wooden bats when aluminum bats would make it easier for them to hit home runs? Isn't that progress? Why do cyclists ride bicycles when motorcycles would make it so much easier for them to win races? Isn't that progress?

Oh, and how is today's tennis "better" than before? Because it isn't! It's worse! That's regression, not progress.

Dude you are totally ********, first, no one in sports of fencing is trying to kill, so AK-47 or 74 won't work... also there rules about racquet, no one is going to bring a wall or a ball shooting machine-gun on court.

You are just so stupid.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If that's the case, why are there so many threads saying that Federer needs to switch to a bigger racquet if he wants to keep winning? Obviously, a lot of people think a bigger racquet makes it easier for you to win than a smaller one, right? So why do people think Federer would play better if he switched to Murray's or Djokovic's or Nadal's racquet?

During the wood era, I NEVER heard anyone say that McEnroe would win more if he switched from his wood racquet to Borg's wood racquet or Gerulaitis' wood racquet. Why? Because everyone knew that they were all pretty much the same and didn't give any player an advantage over another. That's obviously no longer true today. Or else why do so many people here keep buying or trying new racquets and new strings all the time? Obviously, they feel they gain an advantage with them.

Because he plays BETTER with a bigger racquet.

Because the world is progressing, that's why things never happened before happens now.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

Dude you are totally ********, there rules about racquet, no one is going to bring a wall or a ball shooting machine-gun on court.

Your example holds no water, what so ever.

The rule should be no racquet bigger than 65 sq. in. and no poly strings. Just like the rule in fencing is no rifles allowed and the rule at the Tour de France is no motorcycles allowed. Just because something exists or can be made doesn't mean it should be allowed in the sport because it changes the sport. Everyone agrees that tennis does not resemble the sport it was 40 years ago and that it's completely different today. And no one is going to argue that allowing motorcycles would completely change the sport of cycling. That's why they don't allow them.

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

The rule should be no racquet bigger than 65 sq. in. and no poly strings. Just like the rule in fencing is no rifles allowed and the rule at the Tour de France is no motorcycles allowed. Just because something exists or can be made doesn't mean it should be allowed in the sport because it changes the sport. Everyone agrees that tennis does not resemble the sport it was 40 years ago and that it's completely different today. And no one is going to argue that allowing motorcycles would completely change the sport of cycling. That's why they don't allow them.

Sorry, but it's a good thing we don't have retards making rules for tennis.

Also, stop comparing powered illegal **** to legit tennis gear without power source.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

Because he plays BETTER with a bigger racquet.

Because the world is progressing, that's why things never happened before happens now.

So then you admit that the racquet today makes a difference and that it's not just who the better player is that will win. No one discussed the differences in wood racquets when one player beat another during the wood era. No one ever said that this pro should switch to a different wood racquet if he wants to play better. Everyone knew that it was the player himself who won or lost and that the racquet he used made no difference whatsoever. Not so today, is it?

[Readers]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

So then you admit that the racquet today makes a difference and that it's not just who the better player is that will win. No one discussed the differences in wood racquets when one player beat another during the wood era. No one ever said that this pro should switch to a different wood racquet if he wants to play better. Everyone knew that it was the player himself who won or lost and that the racquet he used made no difference whatsoever. Not so today, is it?

No, you are stupid, everyone is using the racquet that let them play the best, so the better player still wins.

If some pro is just stupid as you are and refuse to use the racquet that let them play the best tennis, they are just bad players, as intelligence is part of tennis skill set

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Readers

Sorry, but it's a good thing we don't have retards making rules for tennis.

Also, stop comparing powered illegal **** to legit tennis gear without power source.

How many time does the word "power" appear in advertising for today's modern racquets?

And there are restrictions to the weight and size of bicycles and the type of tires that can be used in competition. Why are there essentially no restrictions to tennis racquets and strings? If there were, there wouldn't be so many different racquets of all shapes, sizes, and weights on the market and hundreds of different strings on the market, all of which can be legally used in tennis.