Federer's racquet head size.

A lot of people have suggested that Federer should switch to a bigger head because he shanks so many balls on his backhand side.

If he were to switch to a bigger sized head and he made contact with the ball the way he does when he shanks on a 90, would there be a significant difference? I doubt the ball would be all that great anyways.

I think it's more due to the fact that it's a one hander at such high racquet speeds which require impeccable timing. Doubt a few sq. inches will help produce a winner.

it wouldn't matter. Put a 90 next to a 95 and look at the head size difference. It's insignificant as far as shanking is concerned.

kingdaddy41788 said:

it wouldn't matter. Put a 90 next to a 95 and look at the head size difference. It's insignificant as far as shanking is concerned.

Click to expand...

Yea that's what I'm thinking. I came from a 100 to a 93 and when I shank a ball, I know it wouldn't have had much of a chance to go over the net on the 100 anyways.

I don't think Federer will benefit from a larger sized frame. If he did who would ever beat him? (and no I'm not really a fan so I ain't kissing "butt").

pow said:

I think it's more due to the fact that it's a one hander at such high racquet speeds which require impeccable timing. Doubt a few sq. inches will help produce a winner.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I actually think he would shank even more balls as most bigger racquets have wider beams than the K90's thin 17 mm. With his super high racquet head speed, he's more likely to shank more balls off of a wider edge.

BreakPoint said:

I agree 100%. I actually think he would shank even more balls as most bigger racquets have wider beams than the K90's thin 17 mm. With his super high racquet head speed, he's more likely to shank more balls off of a wider edge.

Click to expand...

I suppose it's possible that he'd shank more with a 95, but I doubt it. I really think it would be just about the same. Having owned both PS85s and PS95s, I never noticed a difference in frequency of frame hits (granted, though, I'm not a pro). The sweet spot is certainly larger, but I personally never felt like one shanked the ball any more than the other.

I agree with the poster above who suggested that it's simply the amazing speed of the racquet. I would add that he also brushes up and around the ball as much or more than anyone else, and that sort of brushing motion could result in more frame shots at such a high racquet speed than someone who doesn't swing as fast or doesn't brush up and around the ball so much.

BreakPoint said:

I agree 100%. I actually think he would shank even more balls as most bigger racquets have wider beams than the K90's thin 17 mm. With his super high racquet head speed, he's more likely to shank more balls off of a wider edge.

Click to expand...

beams inbetween 17mm to 18mm according to TW.

Its irrelevant as mentioned. Bigger head size = higher tension = "bigger racquet does not equate bigger sweet spot".

kingdaddy41788 said:

it wouldn't matter. Put a 90 next to a 95 and look at the head size difference. It's insignificant as far as shanking is concerned.

Click to expand...

ditto. sorry I keep quoting you, but you keep beating me to the punch. People have this notion that a 95 is a monster size leap in size compared to a 90. It isn't. One could hardly notice the difference.

by the way, his opponents who use larger frames shank as many, if not more shots per match than he does.

MTXR said:

beams inbetween 17mm to 18mm according to TW.

Click to expand...

What's one millimeter amongst friends?

In any case, most other websites as well as Wilson themselves lists the K90 as 17mm. It's in all the Wilson marketing literature and catalogs as well as on their website: http://www.wilson.com/wilson/racque...older_id=2534374302757041&bmUID=1181111985330

But anyway, it's still much thinner than the K95's 22mm beam.

For all the comments of Federer's shanks, I'm surprised more haven't commented about how many balls that he is able to drive off the 5th-6th main from the center of racquet, just over 2 inches shy of the frame. Most of that comes from his raw ability to drive the ball cleanly with godly racquet head speed of course, but I can't picture Federer being able to do this without the his setup being what it is now.... Small racquet head that stable when ball is hit way off center, extremely large sweet spot due to low tensions, poly in the crosses to lock down the mains for more spin potential.

Sampras is using essentially the same racquet and strings as Federer these days (at his prefered weight/balance and tension which is much lower with luxilon crosses than during his touring days). With hand gestures on in regards to the size of the sweet spot compared to his old PS85, it is over twice the dimensions, meaning roughly 4x the size of the old PS85. Thats more than enough hitting surface for anyone who swings the log quickly.

pow said:

Yea that's what I'm thinking. I came from a 100 to a 93 and when I shank a ball, I know it wouldn't have had much of a chance to go over the net on the 100 anyways.

Click to expand...

I'm the opposite -- whenever I shank the ball with a 90, I always think it absolutely would not have happened if only I'd used my WilsonianPrincetonHeadcase 91!