Want to shorten points in ATP matches?

[stevepidge]

it's simple to understand why nadal, Murray and djokovic are able to get back a ridiculous amount of would be winners. Racket head size.

if the ATP was to ban any rackets larger than 95 inches nadal would not be the monster he is today, djokovic would not be anywhere as effective. A smaller racket size emphasizes better control and accuracy and would inherently return the game to a more finesse oriented sport, return net play and reduce the impact of physically gifted individuals and high topspin junk balls.

[joeri888]

Smaller racquets, faster surfaces, less time between points (or just enforcement of the current rules), lower net, more VARIETY on surfaces, a third serve.. There's many things that could be done, but I don't think it is generally viewed as a problem yet. By me and you, yes. But not by the ATP or the players.

[Rogael Naderer]

Originally Posted by stevepidge

it's simple to understand why nadal, Murray and djokovic are able to get back a ridiculous amount of would be winners. Racket head size.

if the ATP was to ban any rackets larger than 95 inches nadal would not be the monster he is today, djokovic would not be anywhere as effective. A smaller racket size emphasizes better control and accuracy and would inherently return the game to a more finesse oriented sport, return net play and reduce the impact of physically gifted individuals and high topspin junk balls.

You are wrong.

Racquet headsize is such a small piece of the puzzle which has led to a defensive style of tennis being successful in recent years.

[stevepidge]

Originally Posted by Rogael Naderer

You are wrong.

Racquet headsize is such a small piece of the puzzle which has led to a defensive style of tennis being successful in recent years.

Wrong! Racket head size is the main culprit behind the development of modern extreme western forehand. If you watch a vast majority of Rafas winners in slowmo you will see that in many instances he is contacting the far outside of a normal sweet spot. If he was to try this with a smaller racket he would not be able generate the same racket head speed and consistency he does now

[stevepidge]

Here is an example

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plpp&v=J46Dc4_i5zI

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by stevepidge

Here is an example

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plpp&v=J46Dc4_i5zI

Isn't that a shot that SHORTENS the point?

[cucio]

Not happening. Big heads make non-pro players play better. They are 100% of the market and want the "same" racquets pros use, so manufacturers are not going back to 65 sqi woodies.

For your own mental health, stop worrying about it.

[dimeaxe]

Originally Posted by stevepidge

it's simple to understand why nadal, Murray and djokovic are able to get back a ridiculous amount of would be winners. Racket head size.

if the ATP was to ban any rackets larger than 95 inches nadal would not be the monster he is today, djokovic would not be anywhere as effective. A smaller racket size emphasizes better control and accuracy and would inherently return the game to a more finesse oriented sport, return net play and reduce the impact of physically gifted individuals and high topspin junk balls.

Its' such non sense talk about head size, just ask Agassi who used to play with 107 in. head, and many others.We can reverse the situation if, you give guys like Federer, Sampras and Edberg large head racquets they would then hit many "sky" balls, and their net play, and serves wouldn't be effective as before.

[diggler]

Um, isn't it the strings more than the racket head size?

[augustobt]

Faster courts as Paris 2010.

[zam88]

if you lower the height of the net, isner and karlovic will start winning majors as it will become a serving contest and tall guys will dominate.

what if you shortened the court so that deep moonballs weren't as much of an option

[MindoverMatter]

Originally Posted by cucio

Not happening. Big heads make non-pro players play better. They are 100% of the market and want the "same" racquets pros use, so manufacturers are not going back to 65 sqi woodies.

For your own mental health, stop worrying about it.

This.

The reason they switched to larger head sizes in the first place was to get more people interested in tennis, because more people can play tennis. As tennis racquets get cheaper and more easily usable, tennis gets a larger audience and more money is made. There will be no going back.

[Apun94]

Originally Posted by stevepidge

it's simple to understand why nadal, Murray and djokovic are able to get back a ridiculous amount of would be winners. Racket head size.

if the ATP was to ban any rackets larger than 95 inches nadal would not be the monster he is today, djokovic would not be anywhere as effective. A smaller racket size emphasizes better control and accuracy and would inherently return the game to a more finesse oriented sport, return net play and reduce the impact of physically gifted individuals and high topspin junk balls.

WOW ****s, you people have nothing else to do in life, than try to diminish the players who are owning Grandpa??

[Bud]

[jottect]

some people have anger management issues...

[coloskier]

It is all a matter of going back to the balls and court speeds of the 70-80's majors. The clay courters/grinders/pushers will still win on clay courts, but they won't have a chance on anything else. You'll get a larger variety of types of players, the same three guys won't be winning every tournament, etc. The only players that are benefiting from today's courts are the above mentioned types. Even Fed falls into this group, but he would definitely have an edge on the other courts as well because of his more well rounded game. It might even give Murray a chance to win a major. Speed up the game and the rabbits will die.

[Rock Strongo]

Originally Posted by stevepidge

it's simple to understand why nadal, Murray and djokovic are able to get back a ridiculous amount of would be winners. Racket head size.

if the ATP was to ban any rackets larger than 95 inches nadal would not be the monster he is today, djokovic would not be anywhere as effective. A smaller racket size emphasizes better control and accuracy and would inherently return the game to a more finesse oriented sport, return net play and reduce the impact of physically gifted individuals and high topspin junk balls.

Jack&Coke did a CAD thing on a Pure Drive and the actual hitting area was 96 square inches. Wouldn't believe that an APD would be much more than that. Clay will always be clay, It's just the other surfaces that need to return to their former glory, plus the revival of indoor carpet.