Tell me, IYO, what is better and why, a 90 inch head or a 100+

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

Simple question, I'm not taking sides, but what is better?

Was Sampras wrong playing a 85 inch head all his career, or Fed going up to a 90? Sampras has said "If I played today I'd have a bigger racquet and better strings". Are those of us insisting on small head sizes wrong, and if so why? The great Nadal plays a 100 inch head.

I won't tell you what I think, just want to hear opinions, one thing tell us your ratings as best as you can as a player.

klementine · Nov 5, 2012

98 square inches.

Cause that's what Sampras plays.

Fuji · Nov 5, 2012

95 is pretty prime real estate IMO. You get the benefit of usually solid touch, decent pop, enough margin for error and they have a huge range of specs in that head range.

That being said, I play with anything between 95-100. It's not a huge difference in playability, I think it comes down to more static weight and swing weight! I'm an above average level rec player.

-Fuji

UCSF2012 · Nov 5, 2012

Who cares? The secret is in the massive amount of lead jam packed into each nook and crannie.

The AeroPro? Too light and powerful and erratic. Solution? Lead, full poly, and 15g strings at 55lbs.

The 90? Too lower powered. Solution? Gut/poly at 48/44lbs and lead.

The 85? Way too low powered. Solution? 6 strips of lead on each side and full bed natural gut.

...we all adjust each frame to how we need it eventually anyway. The end result is about the same.

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

Fuji said:
95 is pretty prime real estate IMO. You get the benefit of usually solid touch, decent pop, enough margin for error and they have a huge range of specs in that head range.

That being said, I play with anything between 95-100. It's not a huge difference in playability, I think it comes down to more static weight and swing weight! I'm an above average level rec player.

-Fuji

I agree, I started my son with a 75 inch wood so he could work on footwork and placement. Then we moved to a 90 6.1, you could just see him miss because of the racquet, then the K-Factor 95, boy did he love that as he moved from JV, to Varsity, to starting Varsity singles.

This weekend he is craving the 98 blade I am testing.

Fuji · Nov 5, 2012

Mick3391 said:
I agree, I started my son with a 75 inch wood so he could work on footwork and placement. Then we moved to a 90 6.1, you could just see him miss because of the racquet, then the K-Factor 95, boy did he love that as he moved from JV, to Varsity, to starting Varsity singles.

This weekend he is craving the 98 blade I am testing.

Good call on the Blade! I've been using it for a while now and I dig it. I serve pretty big with it and I enjoy that part the best. The Blade is really a jack of all trades though.

-Fuji

Say Chi Sin Lo · Nov 5, 2012

92.324 sq inch.

zapvor · Nov 5, 2012

UCSF2012 said:
Who cares? The secret is in the massive amount of lead jam packed into each nook and crannie.

The AeroPro? Too light and powerful and erratic. Solution? Lead, full poly, and 15g strings at 55lbs.

The 90? Too lower powered. Solution? Gut/poly at 48/44lbs and lead.

The 85? Way too low powered. Solution? 6 strips of lead on each side and full bed natural gut.

...we all adjust each frame to how we need it eventually anyway. The end result is about the same.

lol yes...classic TT player

Xonemains · Nov 5, 2012

UCSF2012 said:
Who cares? The secret is in the massive amount of lead jam packed into each nook and crannie.

The AeroPro? Too light and powerful and erratic. Solution? Lead, full poly, and 15g strings at 55lbs.

The 90? Too lower powered. Solution? Gut/poly at 48/44lbs and lead.

The 85? Way too low powered. Solution? 6 strips of lead on each side and full bed natural gut.

...we all adjust each frame to how we need it eventually anyway. The end result is about the same.

Perfect answer!

Just want to add that the person who has the most focus/concentration during the match usually wins.

Head size means nothing, if your head is not screwed on. You will still frame an oversize racquet

3fees · Nov 5, 2012

Smaller racket head smaller power,,larger racquet head larger power,,weights can be helpful,too heavy you'll rip your shoulder,,then your a aching spectator for months.

UCSF2012 · Nov 5, 2012

This is what happens if you don't focus....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNnb1UQRYIk

No racket will fix the problem.

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

Fuji said:
Good call on the Blade! I've been using it for a while now and I dig it. I serve pretty big with it and I enjoy that part the best. The Blade is really a jack of all trades though.

-Fuji

See, that's a great answer, not blah blah you're an idiot. But "Jack of all trades". I agree, like I said about my new love, the K95, it has the control, plough through of the 90 pluse the spin potential and forgiveness of a 100.

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

Xonemains said:
Perfect answer!

Just want to add that the person who has the most focus/concentration during the match usually wins.

Head size means nothing, if your head is not screwed on. You will still frame an oversize racquet

It means EVERYTHING for advanced players, why do pro's use specific head sizes? Why does Sampras say he'd use a bigger head size?

Think guys! Yea, if you are just rallying, it doesn't matter, I can hit anything, give me a 75 inch wood racquet, I'll be there with you, but in real competition, where nano-seconds counts? Come on guys.

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

UCSF2012 said:
This is what happens if you don't focus....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNnb1UQRYIk

No racket will fix the problem.

Nice picture of Nadals head band, don't see how that relates to my question.

LISTEN, PLEASE, WHY DO YOU USE A 100 INCH HEAD, WHY DO YOU USE A 90 INCH HEAD?

Morons with nothing better to do in life post if you wish, but please guys and girls tell me why you use or prefer a 90 over a 100 or the other way around.

Example; I like a 95 K-factor because it has the control and plough through of a 90 with the spin potential and forgiveness of a 100, get it?

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

I can't resist, what is that advantage if you are playing a 90 inch head? Same question if you play with a 100 inch head?

Rafa4Ever · Nov 5, 2012

Mick3391 said:
It means EVERYTHING for advanced players, why do pro's use specific head sizes? Why does Sampras say he'd use a bigger head size?

Think guys! Yea, if you are just rallying, it doesn't matter, I can hit anything, give me a 75 inch wood racquet, I'll be there with you, but in real competition, where nano-seconds counts? Come on guys.

There is no reason to use a 90 for match play unless you want to "dumb yourself down" for a lower level player. All it does it put you at a disadvantage

Mick3391 · Nov 5, 2012

Rafa4Ever said:
There is no reason to use a 90 for match play unless you want to "dumb yourself down" for a lower level player. All it does it put you at a disadvantage

Thanks for a second REAL answer. I agree totally.

I'm not saying 100 is the answer, but why not be mobile when it becomes tough.

Aside from learning, I don't see the advantage of a smaller frame.

UCSF2012 · Nov 5, 2012

Mick3391 said:
Nice picture of Nadals head band, don't see how that relates to my question.

LISTEN, PLEASE, WHY DO YOU USE A 100 INCH HEAD, WHY DO YOU USE A 90 INCH HEAD?

Morons with nothing better to do in life post if you wish, but please guys and girls tell me why you use or prefer a 90 over a 100 or the other way around.

Example; I like a 95 K-factor because it has the control and plough through of a 90 with the spin potential and forgiveness of a 100, get it?

I've already answered your question. And with all your bit ching at people, I'm going to have to vote you as the biggest f ag of TT.

Fed's 90 is customized to have a HUGE sweetspot, while Nadal's 100 is customized to have a much smaller sweetspot. Sampras's 85 was close to 14oz with full natural gut. Would you like to know how powerful that is? This infatuation of 90 vs 100 is pointless and it demonstrates your ability to consider the full picture.

UCSF2012 · Nov 5, 2012

I rarely shank with the BLX90 and KPS88, but I shank all the time with the 6.1 95's and Prestige Pro. Why? Because they swing too fast. The larger head size of 95/98 is offset by the low swingspeed, making them poorer performers to me.

Why didn't Fed use the 93? Maybe because he hit too many shots out.

Sampras never shanked the ball. Why? Because a 14oz racket swings so slowly. Even against Agassi's oversized racket, Sampras effectively never shanked.

I'm more likely to shank with a light 100 than with a heavy 90. The reality doesn't simplify to "larger head=better"

Xonemains · Nov 5, 2012

Rafa4Ever said:
There is no reason to use a 90 for match play unless you want to "dumb yourself down" for a lower level player. All it does it put you at a disadvantage

What a dumb answer!

Xonemains · Nov 6, 2012

Ok Mick3391,

Let me explain. 90's are not better than 100's. And 100's are not better than 90's.

We are talking about open tournament players here, not your usual tt hack.

You agree that when playing a serious match, you need to know how your stick behaves. The guys that have grown up using mids are use to the way it feels and hits. They have trained and played with that stick for years, they know exactly what shot they will get with every strike or volley. When they do try a larger size frame, it feels very strange and cannot control the ball. That's why they still use mids. It's feel very natural in the heat of battle. This is crucial, when you are huffing and puffing, sweating and stressing, you need something that you can trust to get that shot done.

Say Chi Sin Lo · Nov 6, 2012

Rafa4Ever said:
There is no reason to use a 90 for match play unless you want to "dumb yourself down" for a lower level player. All it does it put you at a disadvantage

Xonemains said:
What a dumb answer!

When one can't use something because of the difficulty associated with the equipment, one can always come up with some BS excuse and generalize as to why it doesn't make sense for everyone.

Xonemains · Nov 6, 2012

Same thing applies to the 100 's.

Those boys have grown up with it, it's very hard to change anything much when the level gets really high.

Tennis is started at an earlier age now, they all start the young with large frames and the kids get use to it. That's why 100 are dominating the ATP.

But if those kids were using mids when growing up, they would not switch to a bigger frame either. And there will be more mids in the ATP ATM.

Can you imagine Sampras going with a larger frame in his prime?? forget it!!

Bdarb · Nov 7, 2012

^ seriously! Having heavier racquets can be good because you can allow the racquets weight to carry it through your stroke. Ie I hit a one hand backhand, ibwas using light racquets and it felt flimsy like my stroke wasn't clean and I was nervous to try heavier racquets. When i did ibwas shocked at the power i could create with marginally lower swing speed. To ask why one is better is kind of dumb, I think youde get diff answers from diff people. All boils down to what works for you and your game.

Chotobaka · Nov 7, 2012

UCSF2012 said:
I've already answered your question. And with all your bit ching at people, I'm going to have to vote you as the biggest f ag of TT.

Fed's 90 is customized to have a HUGE sweetspot, while Nadal's 100 is customized to have a much smaller sweetspot. Sampras's 85 was close to 14oz with full natural gut. Would you like to know how powerful that is? This infatuation of 90 vs 100 is pointless and it demonstrates your ability to consider the full picture.

+1 <10.....>

Mick3391 · Nov 8, 2012

UCSF2012 said:
I rarely shank with the BLX90 and KPS88, but I shank all the time with the 6.1 95's and Prestige Pro. Why? Because they swing too fast. The larger head size of 95/98 is offset by the low swingspeed, making them poorer performers to me.

Why didn't Fed use the 93? Maybe because he hit too many shots out.

Sampras never shanked the ball. Why? Because a 14oz racket swings so slowly. Even against Agassi's oversized racket, Sampras effectively never shanked.

I'm more likely to shank with a light 100 than with a heavy 90. The reality doesn't simplify to "larger head=better"

It is strange that when you put the 90 next to the 95 you can hardly tell the difference, but you really can in play.

Mick3391 · Nov 8, 2012

Xonemains said:
Same thing applies to the 100 's.

Those boys have grown up with it, it's very hard to change anything much when the level gets really high.

Tennis is started at an earlier age now, they all start the young with large frames and the kids get use to it. That's why 100 are dominating the ATP.

But if those kids were using mids when growing up, they would not switch to a bigger frame either. And there will be more mids in the ATP ATM.

Can you imagine Sampras going with a larger frame in his prime?? forget it!!

I saw an interview with Sampras, and they were asking him if he'd change his style for todays guys, he said no, that he only had one speed. Then they asked "What about powerful baseliners with powerful racquets and strings", he said "Well I would have had a more powerful racquet and strings". Even now he plays a 100 Bab if I'm not mistaken.

I do agree with you 100% on the rest, I was raised with a tiny head size and I'm comfortable with anything, can hit a 75 inch wood no problem, but I just like the 95 over the 90, I personally feel I can do anything with it.

martini1 · Nov 8, 2012

Just look at where the PS6.0 85 is today. Only the old timer and collectors like to swing with this stick. Almost nobody play that as a main stick. Certainly no up and coming star plays with one.

A few years later when Fed retires, the same thing would happen to the 90 frames today. The 95 will be the new mid as rackets get more and more powerful. There will be little interest to go 90 in the future. I doubt many coaches will start a kid with a 90 knowing 10 yrs later all top pros would NOT use that kind of setup.

treblings · Nov 8, 2012

i´m using a midsize/90 because it is more manoeuvrable. helps me with my onehanded-bh and volleys, also serve.
i learned my game playing woodies and i guess i´m more used to smaller headsizes.
that said, i use a mp as well. i think it´s less about a real difference but more a personal preference.
i also have the luxury to be an amateur, who can play with what he likes

makinao · Nov 8, 2012

Head size is just one variable. I've been playing since the small wood racquet era, and has favorites in various sizes. Right now I'm back to an OS after ten years of mid-plusses, and I love it.

Tell me, IYO, what is better and why, a 90 inch head or a 100+

Professional

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Similar threads