Heavy Metal Tennis Star
Professional
matter of fact, i see mroe 4.0-5.0 use the ncode 90 tour and kfactor 90 than pos, why is that?
Why more 5.0s use midsize than pros?
- Thread starter Heavy Metal Tennis Star
- Start date
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
Why do you think that is? Do you have a theory?
Steve Huff
G.O.A.T.
I think there's a lot of truth to that. With "today's game" of heavy topspin, the smaller the head size, the greater the disadvantage (when it comes to hitting the string and not hitting frame).
Plus, pro's play for money. Club players often play with what they think will make them a better player. Truthfully, I really don't know what percent or 5.0 players use midsize frames. I've only seen a few.
Plus, pro's play for money. Club players often play with what they think will make them a better player. Truthfully, I really don't know what percent or 5.0 players use midsize frames. I've only seen a few.
Not saying this is the main reason but I do believe one factor to consider is that ,at the levels below 5.0, people tend to play a flatter (lower bouncing) game whereas at the 5.0+ level they tend to play with more and much heavier (heavier doesn't mean loopy) topspin. Tougher to counter that high bouncing, heavy top with a midsize but not as tough when dealing with a flatter, lower ball.
Again, I'm not saying that's the sole reason, just something to consider.
Again, I'm not saying that's the sole reason, just something to consider.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
keithchircop
Professional
Exactamundo.
That's why it is possible to improve your game AND be competitive with a mid especially at 4.0 and under. At those levels, how often will you meet someone whose balls will bounce heavy, penetrate ten feet till your shoulder height on hard-courts? At 3.5 and below, you'll meet players with late preparation, swinging off their back leg - no wonder they need 10oz sticks to generate some power and hit the ball over the net. And so many people on these boards believe you're doomed to be a 2.5 forever unless you use an OS.
Here's the difference between a 90 and a 107:
{sarcasm}No way a 3.0 can advance with a mid...{/sarcasm}
Last edited:
galatti
Rookie
keithchircop
Professional
There is the Federer Factor for sure. Many will deny though
If they're 4.0-5.0 they've probably been playing since before Federer won a slam.
three eights
Rookie
That is just silly...
you could expand this to also say that 'more 3.5's use the k90 frame than 5.0's'
the reverseness of racquet selection
Not to hijack either - but as an old guy coming back to the game, I certainly want an advantage. I have a 110 now, but it is too stiff for my arm. If you take the common recommendations that I have read here - I am looking for a flexible racket with the most weight I can swing comfortably. Most rackets I find that meet those specs are around 95-100.
I have just embarked on this quest and I could be wrong - but that is just the way it seems right now to me. The bigger the head, the lighter the racket and an older arm could use more weight thus you have to choose a smaller head.
I have just embarked on this quest and I could be wrong - but that is just the way it seems right now to me. The bigger the head, the lighter the racket and an older arm could use more weight thus you have to choose a smaller head.
Bubbatex, have you tried the POG OS? Very arm-friendly, 107 in., around 12 oz. Wish I hadn't sold mine years ago...:-(
OK, I will show my ignorance now - what is a "POG"? Prince? I have all of the other acronyms figured out but that one! Thanks.
Prince Original Graphite
keithchircop
Professional
Check your sarcasm meter.
keithchircop
Professional
That means a lot of players reached 3.5 using mids, which is something some people around here deem impossible.
right..they get to the 3.5's and are forever stuck there stuffed <in part> by their bad choice in gear. lots of people also say they use a mid sized frame because anything larger is just too powerful. it's very easy to hit most any racquet long..just takes a bit of bad technique. they hit more balls in the court with their midsize frame with their bad technique so I guess that does give them better control in an odd sort of way
the reverseness of racquet selection
Last edited:
The comment about hitting the string and not hitting the frame was hilarious! Don't tell that to those who believe that going from a 90 to 95 will not matter at all in this respect.
Today, even physically short and undeveloped juniors who take lessons regularly can hit a high bouncing top spin from either wing. Granted they are not Nadals, but I have seen adults struggle with their 1 handed backhand trying to return this. A bigger head gives you much more stability when taking this kind of ball, which is curving higher and away.
bluegrasser
Hall of Fame
Radical or Prestige IMO...
keithchircop
Professional
Or maybe they can keep the ball in with an nBlade 106 but don't want to turn themselves into topspin monkeys.
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
I knew that the thread would turn into an indictment of players who use mid sized racquets as posuers. Some players prefer to use sticks with small heads. Many more prefer mid plus frames which range betwee 95 and 100 inches.
Most of the 4.0 to 5.0 players that I know in South Florida use mid plus racquets. I use an old Prestige. I chose what works best for me.
My point is that it is an illusion that so many 4.0 to 5.0 players use small head sizes. It seems like many players are using mid sized frames because they tend to be a vocal group on these forums.
I don't know too many people who use mid sized frames, so I welcome the opportunity to have discussions with like minded people on the web.
Most of the 4.0 to 5.0 players that I know in South Florida use mid plus racquets. I use an old Prestige. I chose what works best for me.
My point is that it is an illusion that so many 4.0 to 5.0 players use small head sizes. It seems like many players are using mid sized frames because they tend to be a vocal group on these forums.
I don't know too many people who use mid sized frames, so I welcome the opportunity to have discussions with like minded people on the web.
couch
Hall of Fame
Definitely agree.
Perhaps you've been drinking the TW forum KoolAid. Older arms usually benefit from lightrer racquets not heavier racquets as older arms typically cant handle the higher swingweights of most midsized frames, nor do they generate the power they used to and can benefit from something lighter and stiffer..midsized frames are often heavier frames. Also midsized frames have smaller sweetzones and miss hitting with a racquet is never very good for an older arm...or any arm for that matter
There are comfortable frames with larger heads
If you know what your ideal swingweight range is and what headsize you can typically reliabnly hit the sweetzone on, most everything else can take care of itself and racquet selection isnt so confusing and difficult
Thanks blue - I am on a Radical OS demo now. BTW - the SP Black felt way too light to me.
Yep, I was on that koolaide......but, for me that scenario makes sense. I can't swing a lighter stick as good as I can a heavier one. My problem is I have not been playing long enough (again) to figure out exactly what my idea weight is. Gotta swing more sticks!
Definitely don't go for more than 100 and less than 11 oz strung. Otherwise you will become another old guy wearing an elbow brace and icing all the time.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
I just attended the United States Clay Court Championships for 45's. This was 128 draw. I saw only one guy using a frame larger than 100 square inches. Most of these guys were using 90-98 square inch frames. >>> On clay of all things (oh my!). Most of these guys are 5.0 plus players with a few ex ATP pros.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=161872
By the way, for the poster who said 3.5 players are stuck at 3.5 because of their frame selection>>> buy a clue. They are stuck at 3.5 because they don't want to improve>>> not because of their frame selection. If that is the case, how do you explain so many 3.5 players using big bubbas who are stuck at 3.5??
ps: Only two Volkls.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=161872
By the way, for the poster who said 3.5 players are stuck at 3.5 because of their frame selection>>> buy a clue. They are stuck at 3.5 because they don't want to improve>>> not because of their frame selection. If that is the case, how do you explain so many 3.5 players using big bubbas who are stuck at 3.5??
ps: Only two Volkls.
Last edited:
I am already that guy! Does this not contradict what Mojo said above? However, those numbers are in line with my "comfort zone".
I just attended the United States Clay Court Championships for 45's. This was 128 draw. I saw only one guy using a frame larger than 100 square inches. Most of these guys were using 90-98 square inch frames. >>> On clay of all things (oh my!). Most of these guys are 5.0 plus players with a few ex ATP pros.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=161872
By the way, for the poster who said 3.5 players are stuck at 3.5 because of their frame selection>>> buy a clue. They are stuck at 3.5 because they don't want to improve>>> not because of their frame selection. If that is the case, how do you explain so many 3.5 players using big bubbas who are stuck at 3.5??
ps: Only two Volkls.
.........................
I just attended the United States Clay Court Championships for 45's. This was 128 draw. I saw only one guy using a frame larger than 100 square inches. Most of these guys were using 90-98 square inch frames. >>> On clay of all things (oh my!). Most of these guys are 5.0 plus players with a few ex ATP pros.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=161872
By the way, for the poster who said 3.5 players are stuck at 3.5 because of their frame selection>>> buy a clue. They are stuck at 3.5 because they don't want to improve>>> not because of their frame selection. If that is the case, how do you explain so many 3.5 players using big bubbas who are stuck at 3.5??
ps: Only two Volkls.
Good points. (Yours is a great thread with the pics/videos btw, drakulie, thanks)
The frame size fixation by some on the board has become laughable and is bad information. Many players as they get older stay with their heavier frames and avoid arm injury by not making a switch to lighter and often stiffer racquets. I also attend many Open level tournaments (and over 45/50 events) and numerous players use 90 and 95 racquets. This is fact and to ignore it and say otherwise is foolish. Of course there are 98 frames too and a few 100's. ITS NOT A BIG DEAL. I thought this head size stalking had disappeared, LOL. (Of course I rarely see Volkls too, drak,
..)
There are hardly any pros that use a 90 sq inch racket. Federer used a 90, Hewitt used to use a 90 and someone on the WTA tour uses a 90. (I dont remember her name) I dont even know any club players and people that i play against that use a 90. The only people i have seen use 90s are traditionalists and Federer fanboys.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
But guess what? Hitting more balls in at any level below 5.0 usually means winning the match.
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
I think the premise of the thread is flawed. It's unlikely that more 4.0 - 5.0 players use mid sized frames than the pros, it just seems that way because like minded people discuss their frames on these boards.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
"Lighter and stiffer" also usually equals tennis elbow for older players with old arms and tendons.
Right..in the real world <the non TW Forum world>, midsized frames are rarely even discussed other than as a trip down memory lane...they're pretty much a non factor. Lots more oversized frames being used at the club level than mids for sure. Lots more club level players posting on the forum than 5.0's. Point of fact is that there isnt a single thing a midsized frame does that cant be done with a larger/more realistic headsize and you lose the disadvantages of a mid in the process. Thankfully, I havent had to give a midsized lesson in about 6 years. This forum just isnt very indicative of the real world. There are some other players on the ATP using a mid..players like Safin, but noteworthy is the fact that these players rankings have slipped. of course the reverseness of racquet selection rule always applies
people are sure free to use whatever they like and for whatever reasons they like, but what is bad, is the bad info parsed on this forum by the midsized zealots <some of whom wont even acknowledge things like Hewitt actually making the move to a MP headsize>. these people are the ones who flip things around saying that those of us who actually know what we are talking about are the ones causing the trouble around here when they are the ones misdirecting people who come here looking for decent advise and attacking people for giving good advice
vkartikv
Hall of Fame
One of my hitting partners switched from an i.radical MP to a k90. He is a solid 4.5 but his game has suffered since the change. It's been over 10 weeks and he is still suffering from pain in his wrist and balls landing very short on the court. You would think 10 weeks is more than enough to settle into your groove with a racquet. He changed purely because Federer uses it and he wants his game to mirror Federer's.
I, on the other hand took all the advice on this board with a pinch of salt and moved from the PS 85 to a more forgiving and spin-handling 200G, albeit with a denser string pattern. Is my game better? Definitely. Would I go back to a mid? Certainly not - why change a winning formula that's comfortable and full of fun (which is what rec players look for)? Did I do the right thing? I didn't by using an 85 which was not suited for my level of play but am certainly moving in the right direction by using a bigger head that helps me handle those college kids' extreme topspin better.
I, on the other hand took all the advice on this board with a pinch of salt and moved from the PS 85 to a more forgiving and spin-handling 200G, albeit with a denser string pattern. Is my game better? Definitely. Would I go back to a mid? Certainly not - why change a winning formula that's comfortable and full of fun (which is what rec players look for)? Did I do the right thing? I didn't by using an 85 which was not suited for my level of play but am certainly moving in the right direction by using a bigger head that helps me handle those college kids' extreme topspin better.
now we're getting some real world practical applications. along the same lines, one of my regular hits <a 5.0 at the time> changed to the n90 and since then his level of play has also eroded. he is the ideal candidate for this frame..very strong and very grooved flatter strokes and mild grips and plays at least 4 times a week. he's too stubborn to change back to something reasonable. i wish he would as he's not much of a challenge for me anymore. i am sure things like this will get flipped right around it will be said that some players games have improved since making the change to a mid, but that is much less likely and far more rare and the trend is quite clearly the other direction.
beyond my n90 friend, i have hit with a small handful of mid users over the past 5 years. one is a 3.5 teaching pro who was using an iPrestigeMid but who has moved on to a MP, another played the singles draw at Wimbledon and WAS swinging PMacs frame at the time..i am hard pressed to think of others at the moment. this was by playing at/teaching at resorts where people visit from all over the world. almost hit with the venerable Craig Clark but he chickened out <teasing>....or am I?????? ;O
I bet there are pockets where midsized frames are being used...that doesnt mean the people have made a good choice in choosing the mid frame. yes, i know the k90 may be a TW best seller, but again, that doesnt mean the people buying these frames have made a good choice...kFactor often = FedFactor
I just attended the United States Clay Court Championships for 45's. This was 128 draw. I saw only one guy using a frame larger than 100 square inches. Most of these guys were using 90-98 square inch frames. >>> On clay of all things (oh my!). Most of these guys are 5.0 plus players with a few ex ATP pros.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=161872
By the way, for the poster who said 3.5 players are stuck at 3.5 because of their frame selection>>> buy a clue. They are stuck at 3.5 because they don't want to improve>>> not because of their frame selection. If that is the case, how do you explain so many 3.5 players using big bubbas who are stuck at 3.5??
ps: Only two Volkls.
Didn't you mention in the other thread that the lone guy with the big Bubba defeated the Volkl guy?
No it doesn't. Avoid the extremes of too demanding player's sticks and the grandpa sticks.
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
It's tough to extrapolate the reason for his decline in performance because there are so many different factors that go into a racquet. Yes, the difference may have been the smaller head size, but it may also have been the change in stiffness, string pattern, beam size, static weight, swing weight, etc.
Hopefully people understand that my not responding to your posts directed at me, do not indicate that I agree with what you've said...most usually, it's the opposite
Last edited:
Similar threads
