arche3
Banned
very strong facts such as "i hear sounds from my tv = fact"? (or something along those lines, i can't remember the exact quote :mrgreen:
I think it was bp can hear the different amount of kevlar. So the strings sounded different.
very strong facts such as "i hear sounds from my tv = fact"? (or something along those lines, i can't remember the exact quote :mrgreen:
Much like pro wrestling? Maybe! although I couldn't see Sampras being bothered to participate, if that were the case. Unless they're all business partners in the venture, or something.
I think, not sure by any means, that Courier is behind the startup. It gives the players money, hopefully keeps tennis in the spotlight (though based on attendance numbers judged solely by pitiful number of spectators it all may may not last too on long), and players help out a friend and the sport they love. *shrug* Hard to say what the actual motivation is.
Sometimes you have different philosophies about racquets depending what stage of you tennis life you are in. I know that after I lost an important match playing with the Prestige MP, I was fed up with it and crusaded for a more powerful racquet with at least a 16x19 pattern. After going full circle with my tirade (after months and demoing an ungodly amount of racquets) my philosophy of my situation changed, as did my racquet (to a slightly heavier, smaller headed racquet, w/ 16x19 pattern). I also found out more about what I like in a racquet, and that my tastes are completely different than everyone else's.
Um...Yes, it is a fact I heard a difference. Do you not understand that's not the same statement as - "The fact is there is a difference and I heard it."?very strong facts such as "i hear sounds from my tv = fact"? (or something along those lines, i can't remember the exact quote :mrgreen:
Um...Yes, it is a fact I heard a difference. Do you not understand that's not the same statement as - "The fact is there is a difference and I heard it."?
In the first statement, the "fact" is the "hearing", not the "difference".
Besides, if you couldn't even hear the difference between Djokovic's and Dimitrov's racquets, then I wouldn't expect you to hear the difference between Federer's old and new racquets, either. In both cases, it's quite obvious and exactly as expected since they are very different racquets, and at least in Federer's case, very different string tensions.
Um...Yes, it is a fact I heard a difference. Do you not understand that's not the same statement as - "The fact is there is a difference and I heard it."?
In the first statement, the "fact" is the "hearing", not the "difference".
Besides, if you couldn't even hear the difference between Djokovic's and Dimitrov's racquets, then I wouldn't expect you to hear the difference between Federer's old and new racquets, either. In both cases, it's quite obvious and exactly as expected since they are very different racquets, and at least in Federer's case, very different string tensions.
all those Pure drives, you are right.........LOL. PUre drives are one of the MOST powerful rackets out there. it is almost as powerful as those 115 sq inch widebodies
I can't agree with you more.
For some reason most people associate hitting harder with being "better". Nothing could be further from the truth. Being "better" means controlling the ball, whether you hit the ball hard or not. McEnroe never hit the ball hard in his entire life yet he won a higher percentage of his matches than even the GOAT Federer.
In 2006, at the age of 47, McEnroe won an ATP tournament in doubles with Jonas Bjorkman. I watched every single one of his matches during the tournament from courtside. He was by far the best player out of the four on the court in every single match. Most of his opponents were at least 20 years younger than him. He served great and his volleys were just sublime. He could precisely place the ball just an inch out of an opponent's reach no matter where he was on the court. He literally made his opponents look like amateurs and probably should have charged them for the tennis lesson.Yep, Mc hit it "crisply" or "softly" but I don't remember him ever belting the ball off the ground. It was amazing to watch him live and see the feel, variety, placement and lack of pace. An absolute freak of nature. I think he played with pretty heavy rackets - about 13 oz, HL and loose gut strings.
Wow, what a trashy person you are. You've been wrong countless times before over the years yet I've never seen you have the strength of character to apologize but the moment you think somebody else is wrong, you're on them like flies on feces.
Well, if you can achieve a better winning percentage than even the GOAT Federer with "awful technique", then I guess there's nothing wrong with playing with "awful technique".McEnroe never looked like he had the technique to reliably hit with power. I always thought his stroke technique was awful.
Then again, McEnroe was the main reason tennis turned me off when I first started watching it. Couldn't get past what a jerk he seemed to be, and had no interest in a game that rewarded such antics.
Well stated.
It's why NoPoint is the only account on my ignore list. I'd genuinely encourage everyone to try it.
All the kooky assertions, non-sequiturs, straw men, and irrelevant minutae immediately disappear.
He can then nitpick and bloviate to his Aspergery heart's content, and we'll never know it happened.
Well, if you can achieve a better winning percentage than even the GOAT Federer with "awful technique", then I guess there's nothing wrong with playing with "awful technique".
But it's his unique technique that allows him to take the ball incredibly early which puts his opponents under pressure, allows him to use his opponent's own power against them, enables him to place the ball on a dime, gives him sharp angles and variety, and his short strokes mean they never break down and he never mishits. It's genius. Brad Gilbert called McEnroe the most talented tennis player he ever played against.
Gilbert had a much more lopsided H2H against Lendl but he never thought Lendl had much talent at all. Gilbert also thought Connors had almost no talent but only won because of his intensity. :shock:Brad Gilbert would say that given their extremely lopsided head to head.
That said, no denying the guy's talent
Meanwhile, most of your posts are about me rather than the topics at hand. Did you mention "derailing" threads? I guess "some things just aren't going to change."yup, some things just aren't going to change. it's a shame really. over the years, how many threads have been derailed, hijacked, locked or deleted because of one person going down a never ending rabbit hole with irrelevant minutae?
There's this popular myth out there that the better player you are, the more under-powered racket you'll play with. This is of course very far from the truth.
In fact they play with very powerful rackets but they know how to control all that power.
Now in the case of the pros, most of this power comes from the racket's swingweight, as opposed to a stiff, oversize tweener that most people would refer to as a power frame.
The higher swingweight allows them to have power and stability when having to defend, as well as power and spin when attacking.
Of course the higher the racket's power, the smaller the margin for error in its application. That ability to control power is what separates the contenders from the pretenders
So my suggestion to players who want to be the best they can be, is not to get caught up in the "control" craze, certainly not at the cost of your arm health. Have a comfortable setup that provides good stability, spin and power on tap when needed. Practice to tame that power.
Gilbert had a much more lopsided H2H against Lendl but he never thought Lendl had much talent at all. Gilbert also thought Connors had almost no talent but only won because of his intensity. :shock:
There's this popular myth out there that the better player you are, the more under-powered racket you'll play with. This is of course very far from the truth.
In fact they play with very powerful rackets but they know how to control all that power.
Now in the case of the pros, most of this power comes from the racket's swingweight, as opposed to a stiff, oversize tweener that most people would refer to as a power frame.
The higher swingweight allows them to have power and stability when having to defend, as well as power and spin when attacking.
Of course the higher the racket's power, the smaller the margin for error in its application. That ability to control power is what separates the contenders from the pretenders
So my suggestion to players who want to be the best they can be, is not to get caught up in the "control" craze, certainly not at the cost of your arm health. Have a comfortable setup that provides good stability, spin and power on tap when needed. Practice to tame that power.
Do you have a source or quote for those statements? I know McEnroe said Lendl had little talent (but how could you possibly be such a good ball striker with little talent), but Gilbert?
McEnroe never looked like he had the technique to reliably hit with power. I always thought his stroke technique was awful.
Then again, McEnroe was the main reason tennis turned me off when I first started watching it. Couldn't get past what a jerk he seemed to be, and had no interest in a game that rewarded such antics.
Having played against him in juniors, I can attest to how much of a jerk he was. But he was an extremely talented jerk.
Interesting thread topic. I haven't read the whole thing, but I'm curious about your argument, given that your signature suggests that you use a Babolat Pure Storm LTD, which has to be among the lowest powered control sticks on the market over the past several years. If that is still true, then how to reconcile this with your argument (which I don't agree with at all, on the surface, by the way?
High swingwqeight is not the same as high powered. a high swingweight Frame can be high powered but a high SW Frame generates power because you swing it fast.
if you have the strength to swing a high SW Frame fast it will generate more power than a lighter Frame because it Transfers more energy.
a high powered Frame is stiffer and generates energy by itself.
McEnroe's efficient stroke mechanics means that he expends much less energy while redirecting his opponent's power and uses it against them. You can pressure your opponents by either hitting the ball hard or by taking the ball early. McEnroe was a master of the latter.Where did he develop that disgusting looking technique of his? Was everyone hitting the ball like that, of that American generation? I know his fellow pros at the time (Borg and Lendl) had much smoother looking strokes.
McEnroe's efficient stroke mechanics means that he expends much less energy while redirecting his opponent's power and uses it against them. You can pressure your opponents by either hitting the ball hard or by taking the ball early. McEnroe was a master of the latter.
I'm not saying it wasn't effective, of course it was. Just that his strokes look stunted and extremely unaesthetic.
Maybe my English is bad but I'm assuming "stunted and extremely unaesthetic" means beautiful right?
I can't agree with you more.
For some reason most people associate hitting harder with being "better". Nothing could be further from the truth. Being "better" means controlling the ball, whether you hit the ball hard or not. McEnroe never hit the ball hard in his entire life yet he won a higher percentage of his matches than even the GOAT Federer.
There's this popular myth out there that the better player you are, the more under-powered racket you'll play with. This is of course very far from the truth.
In fact they play with very powerful rackets but they know how to control all that power.
Now in the case of the pros, most of this power comes from the racket's swingweight, as opposed to a stiff, oversize tweener that most people would refer to as a power frame.
The higher swingweight allows them to have power and stability when having to defend, as well as power and spin when attacking.
Of course the higher the racket's power, the smaller the margin for error in its application. That ability to control power is what separates the contenders from the pretenders
So my suggestion to players who want to be the best they can be, is not to get caught up in the "control" craze, certainly not at the cost of your arm health. Have a comfortable setup that provides good stability, spin and power on tap when needed. Practice to tame that power.
When I see McEnroe hit, I see a deeply accomplished park hack with a good serve. I cannot imagine his stroke mechanics ever being considered beautiful.
Dear Attila,I was referring to stiff string setups. String pattern, string type and tension are what are commonly used to create control.
But that is just a side issue. My main point is that to maximize your potential and achieve the best results, you must learn to play with a powerful racket and control it. As opposed to the popular focus being on "generating your own power".
Dear Attila,
I will never be a pro. There's more than one way to maximize potential. You go right ahead learning to control that Big Bubba.
Have a nice day,
Moi