They Say Racket Tech Has Changed The Pro Game, Yet Most Pros Use Old Racket Models?

[El Nino]

Commentators know that Lots of pros are using Classic Prestiges, ProStaffs, POGs etc under their paintjobs ,yet say racket tech has changed the game. Now we all no the names of the rackets I've just mentioned don't have gimmicky racket tech. A lot of the Rackets that pros play with, have been used by Older pros as far as the 90's. Do commentators know that most rackets are paintsjobs or are the just trying to sell the product?

P.S - Sorry if i posted this tread on the wrong page. Should I have posted it on the Pro gear page

[PhrygianDominant]

When commentators say that, they are talking about increase in head size in combination with new string technology. Most former player commentators would know that Luxilon is the real game changer, but probably don't want to delve into that much detail on air for fear of seeming too technical to uninformed viewers.

As to your point about old racquets, it's true that a lot of players continue to play with whatever racquet they came out of the juniors having success with, and procede to get new paintjobs to match their endorsements; but it's not like they're using PS85s (headsize) or POG mids (crossbar!). There are limits to what a paintjob can accomplish.

[BevelDevil]

Maybe they were talking about the change from wood to graphite and other materials that happened in the 80s (in addition to the new strings more recently).

It is important to note that racket technology changes faster than swing technique.

In the case of graphite, it appears to have taken two generations (almost 20 years) for swing technique to fully evolve to the racket. This is because contemporary pros can't suddenly change their swing in mid-career. Furthermore, even juniors are either trying to emulate the current pros (who may be a step behind in swing technique) and/or are being taught by coaches from prior generations.

[LeeD]

I also think they are referring to wood to carbon/composites, from 66 sq in to 90+'s.
Exact material matters less, as it's not really the exact material making the differences, but the general layup.
If you can hit as well as Lendl did in 1988, using HIS racket, you'd beat anyone and everyone you'd ever play against.

[morten]

strings and slower courts... ruined tennis, for me anyway..

[Devilito]

Originally Posted by El Nino

Commentators know that Lots of pros are using Classic Prestiges, ProStaffs, POGs etc under their paintjobs

No they don’t. It’s proven time and time again most commentators and even former players know almost jack **** about gear.

[Power Player]

Younger pros use lighter sticks compared to years past, but more importantly it is the strings that changed the game, and that is what I hear most announcers discussing.

[Magnetite]

The biggest change in the last 10 years are strings.

The rackets don't make a huge difference unless you go back 20 years or more.

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by morten

strings and slower courts... ruined tennis, for me anyway..

Agree, especially the slowing of the courts.

Bjorn Borgs accomplishments at Wimbledon surpasses those of Nadal's.

[mattennis]

It is the strings AND the slowness of courts/balls.

[dominikk1985]

rackets make a lot of difference but in the last 7-8 years there was not much developement in weight, stiffness and frame size. It seems like they have reached about the limit in those 3 factors which are the main factors in determining racket performance.

the "revolutions" of the last 5 years were mostly marketing gags the real difference was the introduction of carbon fibre.

[watungga]

Strings and slower courts kind of canceled each other.

Its just the acceleration of the ball in the 90s, speed up after bouncing.

Whereas, today, the ball speed up when its hit by the string and it slowed down after boucing.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by watungga

Strings and slower courts kind of canceled each other.

Its just the acceleration of the ball in the 90s, speed up after bouncing.

Whereas, today, the ball speed up when its hit by the string and it slowed down after boucing.

No, that never happened.

[LeeD]

We talking PRO games, or OUR games?
Pros play on super slow courts.
I play on worn slick cement.

[cork_screw]

In a wide sense, many people are referring to it when they still used wooden racquets in borg's days and aluminum and even other sticks like the pro staff 85. But moving forward, there are a lot of players who have moved beyond even the sticks that came out 20 years ago (that are still considered modern) like the pro staff 95 classic and more and more players are going to stuff like the aero pro drive, prince O Tours, pure drive and similar more modern frames. You even see guys like Berdych and cillic using instinct/radical pro stocks that were made very recently. Sharapova is using a previous generation radical youtek. So these are all variations of newer technology/frames even when you compare the pt57a and e, these are still considered modern. Every year, the crop of new guys will be playing with more stuff they played when they were younger. Some will stick to them and use them throughout the majority of their careers and some will migrate back to older stuff when they get signed and get access to older stuff that's only available to pro players.
When they toss the idea that everything is getting more modernize, you need to take it with a grain of salt. Things you don't think are modern, are considered modern, the head bumblebee is considered still modern. But the overall trend is that we're moving forward where more players are converting over to aero pros than you find people using pro staffs classics and whatnot.

Here's also something to think about. Some kid who plays with something growing up will play with that for his/her entire career. But you realize that what they played with when they were 15; at age 25 when they are hitting their peak and they're name is getting high up in the rankings, they will be playing with that racquet that is technically now 10 years out of date and that will project a more re-enforced image of something that is not as "modern" as you would come to believe.

[cork_screw]

Originally Posted by BevelDevil

Maybe they were talking about the change from wood to graphite and other materials that happened in the 80s (in addition to the new strings more recently).

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thank you. My point exactly.

[LeeD]

All that new trick stuff, names, and labels. Why not just hit your shot in more balance, hit it where you want, know where you want to hit it, and get in shape to hit it there over and over?
You can focus only on so much, after that, it's a general skip thru highlighting only what you already know.

[akind]

V Cortex, Basalt, D3O, Isometric, nano technology and so on and so forth will not help you to win the game. It is your mind, mental and body that help you.

[TennisCJC]

Pure Drive and AeroDrives and Wilson Pro Open style rackets are fairly new to pro game. These "tweener" clubs are great for power bashers like Nadal, Tsonga and Roddick. You did not see a lot of these type frames in the 80s and 90s.

But, Federer, Murray and Djoko all use relatively old school thin beam and heavy rackets not too far removed from what was used in the 80s and 90s. A slew of other top pros are similar too - thin beam, flexy and heavy. At least heavy in today's terms - 12-13.5 oz while it would have been 12.5-14 oz in the 80s and 90s.

[Power Player]

Did you never see a Wilson Hammer? A Spalding Assault?