Found this on the net: Federer racket theories?

[AlpineCadet]

I prefer to use some logic in determining what he actually uses, as opposed to just mindlessly believing something to be true.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

I prefer to use some logic in determining what he actually uses, as opposed to just mindlessly believing something to be true.

You mean the same logic that says that there's no way that Davydenko could switch from a Head Radical to a Prince O3 Tour, and that there's no way that Nalbandian can switch from a POG to a Yonex RDS, and that there's no way that the Bryan brothers could possibly switch from a PS 6.1 Classic to the Prince Speedport Black, and that there's no way that Ljubicic could switch from a Babolat Pure Drive to a Head Microgel Extreme, and that there's no way that Hewitt could switch from a SRD Tour 90 to a RQiS Tour 95, and that there's no way Agassi could switch from the POG to the Head Radical, and that there's no way that McEnroe could switch from a wood racqet to a graphite racquet, and that there's no way that Federer could switch from an 85 to a 90? Oh, OK I see, THAT logic.

[Blank]

Originally Posted by flyboy1

Why is it so difficult to understand what BreakPoint is saying????

It's not like he's saying that whatever Wilson says is gospel. What he's saying is that he's inclined to believe them because:

a) this is the first time they have claimed that the public has access to the racket that Federer plays

AND

b) there is no empirical evidence to contradict Wilson's statements

Now.....was that sooooo difficult?!

Nice!! Couldn't have said it better myself.

Some addition:
a) this is the first time they have claimed that the public has access to the racket that Federer plays, BEFORE customisation by Priority One or Wilson Pro Room.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Blank

Some addition:
a) this is the first time they have claimed that the public has access to the racket that Federer plays, BEFORE customisation by Priority One or Wilson Pro Room.

Exactly!

It is only BECAUSE Federer is NOT using a paintjob with the K90 that Wilson is making this kind of statement for the first time. They know that the public knows about paintjobs, which is why they went out of their way this time to make it abundantly clear that this time it's not a paintjob but the ACTUAL racquet that Federer uses and it's EXACTLY the same one that Federer pulls out of his bag. If Wilson had thought the public did not know about paintjobs, this would have been a very odd statement to make because then people would think - what do you mean "one of the very few times in history", and that's it's the "actual racquet used by Federer", and that it's "exactly the same one Federer gets"??? Aren't ALL racquets that we buy in the stores the actual and same exact ones that the pros use?

If it wasn't true, they wouldn't have gone way out of their way this time to say - HEY, THIS TIME IT'S NOT A PAINTJOB. IT'S THE ACTUAL ONE THAT FEDERER USES AND IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ONE SOLD IN THE STORES.

How anyone can misinterpret this is beyond me.

[Richie Rich]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

So where exactly in that press release does Wilson state that the K95 we can buy in the stores is the exact same racquet that Tursunov or Fish uses? Please show me because I must have missed it.

And, yes, I believe Fish uses a "K95". It's just not the same K95 that we can buy in the stores. Unlike Federer and the K90.

of course it doesn't state that either Fish or Tursunov use a k95 that we can buy in stores. but that isn't the point. the press release clearly states that Tursunov uses a k95. it's clear that he does not. wilson is deceiving us. it's clear they want you to believe that Tursunov uses a real k95. otherwise, why go through the bother of a press release announcing it or painting his racquet like a k95?

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

If it wasn't true, they wouldn't have gone way out of their way this time to say - HEY, THIS TIME IT'S NOT A PAINTJOB. IT'S THE ACTUAL ONE THAT FEDERER USES AND IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ONE SOLD IN THE STORES.

How anyone can misinterpret this is beyond me.

no one is misinterpreting what Wilson has said. it may be true, it may not. why you choose to believe them now is the question.

why do you suddenly believe wilson about Fed's racquet when history shows that they lied about other players using their racquets?

i know why - it's only because Wilson's press release regarding the Federer racquet supports your opinion. everything else that might give someone reason to discount your theory gets ignored. just because wilson puts something in writing doesn't make it true

[jaykay]

...which is heavily customized by Priority One and consequently would be nothing like the stock frame avlbl in the retail stores. The precise wt (and consequently, the balance and the swingwt) is a secret.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/fa...tml?ref=tennis

Copy-pasting the article below for your perusal:

Federer Unstrung

By PAUL BERGER
Published: October 18, 2007

TENNIS fans may lust after Roger Federer’s racket strung with Roger Federer’s string. But if they bought a racket customized to his specifications, they might regret the choice.

For one thing, such a racket would be hard to control. “You either have to have a real Roger Federer fetish or really good skills,” said Nate Ferguson of Priority 1, based in Florida, who does customization work for Mr. Federer and other top professionals like Novak Djokovic. “Of the 100 guys out there at the top of the game, none of them play with Roger’s racket.”

Ordering a racket strung the Federer way is a bit like ordering a Starbucks coffee. Just ask for “a Wilson 16 gauge gut main string and a Luxilon Big Banger ALU Power Rough cross string,” and then hope you won’t have to say it again. The racket itself is a Wilson K Factor Six One Tour with a 90-square-inch head. The precise weight of his customized racket is a secret.

Assuming you’ve overcome the hurdle of ordering the strings, you would also need a bit of cash.

At the Madrid Masters tournament this week in Spain, Mr. Federer is playing with 12 rackets, swapping on or near every ball change and alternating string tension depending on the bounce of the ball (and his mood), so a full arsenal of customized Federer rackets would cost about $3,500, including the cost of the rackets.

“The racket gives you very little as a player,” Mr. Ferguson said. “It’s Federer’s God-given talent that creates the pace and spin.”
...PAUL BERGER

[saram]

Originally Posted by jaykay

...which is heavily customized by Priority One and consequently would be nothing like the stock frame avlbl in the retail stores. The precise wt (and consequently, the balance and the swingwt) is a secret.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/fa...tml?ref=tennis

Copy-pasting the article below for your perusal:

Federer Unstrung

By PAUL BERGER
Published: October 18, 2007

TENNIS fans may lust after Roger Federer’s racket strung with Roger Federer’s string. But if they bought a racket customized to his specifications, they might regret the choice.

For one thing, such a racket would be hard to control. “You either have to have a real Roger Federer fetish or really good skills,” said Nate Ferguson of Priority 1, based in Florida, who does customization work for Mr. Federer and other top professionals like Novak Djokovic. “Of the 100 guys out there at the top of the game, none of them play with Roger’s racket.”

Ordering a racket strung the Federer way is a bit like ordering a Starbucks coffee. Just ask for “a Wilson 16 gauge gut main string and a Luxilon Big Banger ALU Power Rough cross string,” and then hope you won’t have to say it again. The racket itself is a Wilson K Factor Six One Tour with a 90-square-inch head. The precise weight of his customized racket is a secret.

Assuming you’ve overcome the hurdle of ordering the strings, you would also need a bit of cash.

At the Madrid Masters tournament this week in Spain, Mr. Federer is playing with 12 rackets, swapping on or near every ball change and alternating string tension depending on the bounce of the ball (and his mood), so a full arsenal of customized Federer rackets would cost about $3,500, including the cost of the rackets.

“The racket gives you very little as a player,” Mr. Ferguson said. “It’s Federer’s God-given talent that creates the pace and spin.”
...PAUL BERGER

So am I to understand that Nate is suggesting that Roger is not playing with a standard stick afforded to the general public as Wilson claims? Or, am I to understand that Nate customizes it in a way and he will not reveal the secrets? I guess we still don't know if Roger is playing with a stock/available stick as the general public can purchase....hmmm...

[Shangri La]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Like I said before, someone is innocent until proven guilty. Thus, Wilson/Federer is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, Federer uses a retail K90 until proven otherwise. It doesn't work the other way around. You are not guilty until proven innocent.

Wilson and Federer have been proven guilty -- use pj and make the public think Federer was using an n90 or whatever. When they make the same claim this time again that Federer is using a retail Winson racquet (although they may be phrasing differently this time), people would reasonably question their credibility. Thye're guilty AGAIN until proven otherwise.

[Richie Rich]

would anyone here bet the mortgage on Fed really using a retail k90, as per Wilson's claims??????

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Richie Rich

would anyone here bet the mortgage on Fed really using a retail k90, as per Wilson's claims??????

No .......................

[saram]

Originally Posted by Richie Rich

would anyone here bet the mortgage on Fed really using a retail k90, as per Wilson's claims??????

Not a stock K90...lol.

[flyboy1]

Originally Posted by Shangri La

Wilson and Federer have been proven guilty -- use pj and make the public think Federer was using an n90 or whatever. When they make the same claim this time again that Federer is using a retail Winson racquet (although they may be phrasing differently this time), people would reasonably question their credibility. Thye're guilty AGAIN until proven otherwise.

I think we're having semantic difficulties here. Instead of using the words "guilty" and "innocent", let's use "true" and "false". YES.....it is clear that Wilson falsly sold rackets that were used by Federer when they weren't (although there are some here who would even disagree with THAT claim too). But we do not judge "truth" based on previous statements. The truth or falsness of a statement is based on a specific statement. The statement in question is regarding the current racket - the K90. We cannot use previous statements to judge the "truth" or "falsness" on this specific question.

So where does that leave us? Yes, we can say that Wilson has not been honest in the past. But all that means is that those past statements were not true. Does that mean that Wilson has the propensity to lie.....yes. Does that mean that they necessarily ARE lying.....no. I use the word necessarily for a reason. Asking if anyone would "bet the mortgage" is missing the point. Those are probabilistic questions, not empirical ones. Asking the likelihood of something being true is different from asking if something is actually true. I think that the breakdown in communication about this issue is summed up by the lack of being able to make the aforementioned distinctions.

Is it likely that Wilson is lying? Sure, yeah.
Is Wilson ACTUALLY lying? We don't know. We need empirical evidence.

^^ This is the distinction that must be made.

[saram]

Originally Posted by flyboy1

I think we're having semantic difficulties here. Instead of using the words "guilty" and "innocent", let's use "true" and "false". YES.....it is clear that Wilson falsly sold rackets that were used by Federer when they weren't (although there are some here who would even disagree with THAT claim too). But we do not judge "truth" based on previous statements. The truth or falsness of a statement is based on a specific statement. The statement in question is regarding the current racket - the K90. We cannot use previous statements to judge the "truth" or "falsness" on this specific question.

So where does that leave us? Yes, we can say that Wilson has not been honest in the past. But all that means is that those past statements were not true. Does that mean that Wilson has the propensity to lie.....yes. Does that mean that they necessarily ARE lying.....no. I use the word necessarily for a reason. Asking if anyone would "bet the mortgage" is missing the point. Those are probabilistic questions, not empirical ones. Asking the likelihood of something being true is different from asking if something is actually true. I think that the breakdown in communication about this issue is summed up by the lack of being able to make the aforementioned distinctions.

Is it likely that Wilson is lying? Sure, yeah.
Is Wilson ACTUALLY lying? We don't know. We need empirical evidence.

^^ This is the distinction that must be made.

Well said...are you a lawyer????

[flyboy1]

Originally Posted by saram

Well said...are you a lawyer????

hehe, no. I'm working on my post-graduate degree in political science.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by saram

So am I to understand that Nate is suggesting that Roger is not playing with a standard stick afforded to the general public as Wilson claims? Or, am I to understand that Nate customizes it in a way and he will not reveal the secrets? I guess we still don't know if Roger is playing with a stock/available stick as the general public can purchase....hmmm...

Nate is saying that Wilson sends Federer the same K90 as we can buy in the stores but that he then takes it and customizes it to Federer's exact liking (e.g, molds the exact grip size and shape Federer prefers, adds lead tape, etc.).

[saram]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Nate is saying that Wilson sends Federer the same K90 as we can buy in the stores but that he then takes it and customizes it to Federer's exact liking (e.g, molds the exact grip size and shape Federer prefers, adds lead tape, etc.).

That was my assumption. I doubt Nate would share that information. He is making the majority of his income via Roger and a handfull of others on tour. Roger was his first big client--doubt he'd tarnish that friendship and trust for an interview.

[Richie Rich]

Originally Posted by flyboy1

Is it likely that Wilson is lying? Sure, yeah.
Is Wilson ACTUALLY lying? We don't know. We need empirical evidence.

^^ This is the distinction that must be made.

that's my point. maybe they are telling the truth but odds are they are not. just because wilson issues a press release proclaiming something does not mean it is true. a press release is not irrefutable evidence as some here think.

[TennezSport]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Wilson, DID however, claim that Federer's K90 and the retail K90 sold in the stores ARE indeed identical.

Yes, identical as in from the same mold (although this is marketing speek), but that is about it. But you know that.

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

In fact, I'd bet most people would prefer the retail K95 as it's much easier to use with it's lighter weight, more power, and open string pattern.

Not one of the racquets used by the pros are on sale to the public, they are all customized for each pro player. What we are buying is a racquet from a similar mold or PJ made to look like the pro version. Most rec players would hurt themselves with the actual pro version racquets. Do you really think Rafa is playing with an identical Cortex Aero Drive you can go out and buy???

They all have their equipment customized (not just racquets), just like the NASCAR drivers cars or Pro golfers clubs, it how they make their living.

TennezSport

[saram]

Originally Posted by TennezSport

Yes, identical as in from the same mold (although this is marketing speek), but that is about it. But you know that.



Not one of the racquets used by the pros are on sale to the public, they are all customized for each pro player. What we are buying is a racquet from a similar mold or PJ made to look like the pro version. Most rec players would hurt themselves with the actual pro version racquets. Do you really think Rafa is playing with an identical Cortex Aero Drive you can go out and buy???

They all have their equipment customized (not just racquets), just like the NASCAR drivers cars or Pro golfers clubs, it how they make their living.

TennezSport

Well, most of us rec players on here have customized sticks as well. Once you add lead or an overwrap, you have customized it. From threads in the past from stringers that strung Rafa's stick. There is just a little lead on a stock APD ....

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I don't think Wilson could have made what they said any clearer or blatant. Even a person with an IQ in the single digits would understand that the K90 they can buy in the stores is the same racquet that Federer uses. There's no amount of "twisting" that can change what they've stated about Federer's racquet being the same K90 that's sold in the stores. Any other meaning is nothing but a fantasy of your runaway imagination.

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Exactly!

It is only BECAUSE Federer is NOT using a paintjob with the K90 that Wilson is making this kind of statement for the first time. They know that the public knows about paintjobs, which is why they went out of their way this time to make it abundantly clear that this time it's not a paintjob but the ACTUAL racquet that Federer uses and it's EXACTLY the same one that Federer pulls out of his bag. If Wilson had thought the public did not know about paintjobs, this would have been a very odd statement to make because then people would think - what do you mean "one of the very few times in history", and that's it's the "actual racquet used by Federer", and that it's "exactly the same one Federer gets"??? Aren't ALL racquets that we buy in the stores the actual and same exact ones that the pros use?

If it wasn't true, they wouldn't have gone way out of their way this time to say - HEY, THIS TIME IT'S NOT A PAINTJOB. IT'S THE ACTUAL ONE THAT FEDERER USES AND IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ONE SOLD IN THE STORES.

How anyone can misinterpret this is beyond me.

Did Federer ever use the nCode Six-One Tour 90?

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

May 24, 2004

Federer keeps abreast of technological advances
By Ashling O'Connor
There is a new weapon in the world No 1’s armoury



ROGER FEDERER’S game is already considered beautiful to behold. So it may come as a surprise that the world No 1 has had cosmetic surgery on his racket. When Federer, the Wimbledon and Australian Open champion, steps on court at Roland Garros this week in his bid for the French Open title, it will be with an injection of silicone implants in his graphite frame.
The 22-year-old from Switzerland hopes that the “molecular nanotechnology” will give him the edge he lacks on clay. In the past two years Federer has not made it past the first round of the French Open and this year’s draw potentially pits him against Gustavo Kuerten, the three-times winner, in the third round.



The revolutionary new technology developed over the past two years by Amer Sports, the company that owns the Wilson brand, involves the injection of silicone oxide crystals into the microscopic air pockets between the graphite fibres in an ordinary tennis racket. The result is twice the strength and twice the stability. Wilson claims that the racket is 22 per cent more powerful than carbon fibre.

“The racket is stiffer and more powerful. It’s more controllable because the silicone can be placed in certain spots,” Roger Talermo, chief executive of Amer Sports, said.

Federer has been practising with the new nCode Six One Tour racket — branded in his red and white national colours — for two months. It is his first change in model for six years. “He is completely happy,” Talermo said. “The top players are so picky, he would not put it in his hands if he was not 100 per cent confident.” Amer Sports, which also makes Atomic skis and Precor fitness machines, is the first tennis racket manufacturer to apply nanotechnology to its products. It initially injected silicone, best known for its use in breast implants, into its Double Core tennis balls, giving them durability beyond the standard set and a half of play. The technology has been used to improve ski wax and is being developed in the aerospace industry.

The company hopes that all its tennis players, including the Williams sisters and Justine Henin-Hardenne, the No 1-ranked female player, will be serving with silicone by the US Open in August. More than a third of tour professionals play with Wilson rackets. The racket will retail for £150.[img][/img]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Yes, but I would hope that the marketing people wouldn't put that "it's his first change in racquet in six years" in print without it having some shred of truth to it. I mean, they wouldn't want to so blatently open themselves up to lawsuits do they? But then again, this is a tennis racquet company, and like all the others, are guilty of the liberal use of paintjobs so they are accustommed to using a lot of marketing spin in their PR. Then again, these companies haven't exactly come out in writing stating that their sponsored pros DO NOT use paintjobs.

Through out the years you've been lead back and forth to believe whatever they tell you in the news. Yet each new day, you come up with something a little different because the fact remains that it's ultimately all just a guessing game.