I think you'll find he used the 90sq frame at Queens and Wimbledon in 1990 and otherwise continued to use his normal frame.
Wish I could click Shift+Pi to make this thread disappear.
Good question. Perhaps, some people need a larger brain
Yet, when Federer beat Berdych a few months ago at Madrid, it wasn't?
Because nobody else hits the ball just as early off the bounce AND has the same high racquet head speed AND rolls over the ball at the point of contact as Federer does. Combine those 3 things and you're going to shank regardless of the size of your racquet.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that Almagro, Querrey, Zopp, and Goffin ALL need to switch to bigger racquets as well since they all got crushed by Berdych at this US Open.
But still good enough to win 17 Slams with and become the GOAT.
Then why is it that no other pro using bigger racquets are good enough to hit those shots?
Then that racquet would be too light and thus less stable. And like I said, you can't get a larger hoop as close to the ground as you can a smaller hoop.
Same thing. The result is he rolls over the ball. If you don't pronate your forearm/wrist at all, you can't roll over the ball.
Maybe, but that has nothing to do with the size of his racquet. Nadal beats EVERY right-hander with a one-handed backhand regardless of the size of the racquet they're using. In fact, I haven't checked but I believe Federer has more wins against Nadal than any other right-handed 1HBH player.
Yes, I'd say the lack of match play (especially the lack of competitive matches) probably had more to do with Federer's loss last night than the size of his racquet. He's beaten Berdych many times before and he did look a bit off of his game last night. Berdych also played great.
If that were true I'm sure Federer would have switched to a larger-head racquet already.
If that were true I'm sure Federer would have switched to a larger-head racquet already.
It may help you reduce your shanks but it wouldn't help Federer reduce his shanks because no one else on the planet hits the ball the way that he does. Besides, most of his shanks are off of the side of the frame and a larger head racquet has more side to the frame to shank.
Heck, even I shank just as many balls with a larger racquet as with a smaller racquet and I don't take the ball nearly as early nor do I swing nearly as fast nor do I roll over the ball on contact like Federer does. I'm sure this is even more true with Federer.
But isn't that what you're doing? You think Federer would shank less with a larger racquet because YOU shank less with a larger racquet, right? I mean if you shanked MORE with a larger racquet, I highly doubt you would be suggesting that Federer switch to a larger racquet to reduce his shanks.
But if that was really true, how did Sampras with his 85 sq. in. racquet beat Agassi with his 107 sq. in. racquet in every single U.S. Open and Wimbledon match they ever played (which was a lot of them)?
Do you play tennis? I'm doubting it. A shank is WAY off center - some are off the frame. A move from 90 to 95 (or even 98) - Fed's shanks are still either shanks or such weak returns that his opponent would crush the next shot for a winner.
If shanking makes me the greatest player who ever lived and the #1 ranked player for 300 weeks, PLEASE let me shank EVERY SINGLE ball.
