After watching Nadal play at this RG, how can they NOT ban poly strings?

[Bud]

So let's ban poly strings then since it gives Federer too much advantage over Nadal. Nadal should have no problem agreeing to this since banning poly would benefit him much more than it would benefit Federer, right?

Federer is a baseline basher like Nadal and Djokovic. Removing his poly strings would kill him at this stage of his career. He uses that combo for a reason... it suits his game style.

Where was all that beautiful tennis and variety in his straight set loss in the SF to Djokovic? He tried to go toe to toe from the baseline with Djok and lost miserably.

 

[BreakPoint]

They didn't slow down the grass. They changed to a more durable variety of grass and packed the sub-base tighter to further increase court durability due to the modern baseline game. The result is a slightly higher bounce and fewer bad bounces. The playability of the court is primarily affected by the amount of rain prior to the tournament. The ball still slides on the grass if the proper shot is played... a slice (on both serves and groundstrokes).

There are so few slicers left in the game today... everything is topspin.

Keep thinking that. The players who actually play at Wimbledon disagree with you.

The "modern baseline game" couldn't have happened at Wimbledon without the change in grass first. You've got it backwards. Sampras vs. Rafter in 2000 and Ivanisevic vs. Rafter in 2001. What modern baseline tennis? Then they changed the grass seeding in September 2001 after the 2001 Wimbledon was over so that when the grass grew for the 2002 Wimbledon, we had two baseliners - Hewitt and Nalbandian in the final.

 

[BreakPoint]

Wouldn't it be better if they had pitch black courts and neon pink balls?

How awesome would that be?

That wouldn't show up very well on TV at all.

 

[Bud]

Keep thinking that. The players who actually play at Wimbledon disagree with you.

The "modern baseline game" couldn't have happened at Wimbledon without the change in grass first. You've got it backwards. Sampras vs. Rafter in 2000 and Ivanisevic vs. Rafter in 2001. What modern baseline tennis? Then they changed the grass seeding in September 2001 after the 2001 Wimbledon was over so that when the grass grew for the 2002 Wimbledon, we had two baseliners - Hewitt and Nalbandian in the final.

Did Agassi win Wimbledon by serving and volleying, too?

There is no more modern baseline game than that.

 

[mellowyellow]

The grass is slower, the bounce however is so much higher now their is time to play most balls after the first wed.

 

[Mick]

i sure hope BreakPoint doesn't blame his match losses for the equipments that his opponents used

 

[mellowyellow]

Did Agassi win Wimbledon by serving and volleying, too?

There is no more modern baseline game than that.

That waz returning skill almost completely. Any ball Andre hit in a rally was waist high or lower and mostly flat trajectory. Far different than 2002 tennis.

 

[ctoth666]

Clearly Nadal has an edge over the competition on clay. That is an understatement. It's a combination of things. After watching Nadal play for many years now, I've personally grown tired of his antics and his style of play. I'm not the only one who's fed up with this Spaniard flailing around with his oversized racquet and poly strings, but Djokovic has become a close second. Baseline-bashing is trending and Djokovic and Nadal are the best at it, and it's no coincidence that they are at the top of the sport. I think that a ban on poly strings would be a step in the right direction, but I think further changes need to be had to restore variety and artistry to the game. But seriously? Why not place a hold on new technology in coming years?

 

[BobFL]

Everyone can commit murder so should we not ban it?

Something is terribly off in your cognitive processing if you really think this.

 

[mellowyellow]

That wimby win Andre had was actually more like hisearly style, agressive and wild, trying to hit winners, not th second version of high percentage tennis Andre wins the numerous Aus O titles with.

 

[Ronaldo]

Clearly Nadal has an edge over the competition on clay. That is an understatement. It's a combination of things. After watching Nadal play for many years now, I've personally grown tired of his antics and his style of play. I'm not the only one who's fed up with this Spaniard flailing around with his oversized racquet and poly strings, but Djokovic has become a close second. Baseline-bashing is trending and Djokovic and Nadal are the best at it, and it's no coincidence that they are at the top of the sport. I think that a ban on poly strings would be a step in the right direction, but I think further changes need to be had to restore variety and artistry to the game. But seriously? Why not place a hold on new technology in coming years?

Modify the clay

 

[darrinbaker00]

It's ridiculous. Nadal can take huge cuts on almost every ball and put so much topspin on the ball that it almost never goes out. That is NOT tennis. There's a reason why a tennis court had boundaries - to prevent players from hitting the ball as hard as they can on every shot without the fear of hitting the ball outside of the boundaries. This is not baseball. Almost all of Nadal's balls landed in no matter how hard he hit the ball. He could hit ridiculous angles and the ball would still land inside the sidelines.

The effect on the ball using polyester strings is really NO DIFFERENT than the effect on the ball using spaghetti strings - and they BANNED spaghetti strings back in the late-70's. So why haven't they banned poly strings yet?

Eliminating poly strings would force players to use more variety, more strategy, differing pace and spins, attack the net more, and be more creative in keeping the ball in play rather than just taking huge swings and hitting the ball as hard as you can from the baseline on every single shot. It would also save a lot of recreational players who like to copy the pros from arm injuries and leaving the sport.

Let's face it, poly strings have made playing against Nadal on clay almost unplayable and made watching pro tennis almost unwatchable because it's like watching a game of Pong (the video game). There's basically no variety and no strategy other than bludgeoning every ball with no fear of hitting out.

If they came out with a technology which allowed Tiger Woods to hit a hole-in-one on every shot, don't you think they would immediately ban it as it would ruin the sport of golf? So why haven't they banned poly strings yet that is ruining the sport of tennis from what it used to be and supposed to be?

Exactly how much money did you bet on Djokovic to win?

 

[tistrapukcipeht]

Federer is a baseline basher like Nadal and Djokovic. Removing his poly strings would kill him at this stage of his career. He uses that combo for a reason... it suits his game style.

Where was all that beautiful tennis and variety in his straight set loss in the SF to Djokovic? He tried to go toe to toe from the baseline with Djok and lost miserably.

1- I don't think so, Federer's technique is the best out there, He can hit with anything, however most players nowadays rely on the polyester more to improve, rather than technique wise. Nadal without polyester would be very interesting, He molded his game behind the usage of polyester, I'm not saying other players aren't in the same boat as He is neither.

2-He also has a chance to use full poly and bigger racquet, so it's his problem if He doesn't do it, I still think there is a big advantage in that combo.

3-On clay almost nobody has played beautifully, because of the surface.

4- He had a bad tournament, not saying that if He played great He would've won the match, but He could have played better.

Polyester should really be banned.

 

[BreakPoint]

Federer is a baseline basher like Nadal and Djokovic. Removing his poly strings would kill him at this stage of his career. He uses that combo for a reason... it suits his game style.

Where was all that beautiful tennis and variety in his straight set loss in the SF to Djokovic? He tried to go toe to toe from the baseline with Djok and lost miserably.

Exactly! Same thing against Del Potro in the 2009 US Open final. Take Federer's poly strings away and force him to serve and volley more, just like Sampras did in the latter part of his career. When you get older it's much easier to win by serving and volleying than trying to out slug younger opponents forever from the baseline.

 

[BreakPoint]

Loser argument for something that is legal, which any player can choose to use. Nadal didn't invent the poly strings, or are you saying that he's only a tennis great because he invented poly strings! I've never heard Nadal more complimented!

Everything is legal until it's made illegal.

Slavery was legal until it was made illegal.

 

[tistrapukcipeht]

Exactly! Same thing against Del Potro in the 2009 US Open final. Take Federer's poly strings away and force him to serve and volley more, just like Sampras did in the latter part of his career. When you get older it's much easier to win by serving and volleying than trying to out slug younger opponents forever from the baseline.

So you're calling Federer an imbecile?

It's a lot easier to say what people should do than actually go there and do it.

Federer knows a lot more than you and everybody else his limitations and what He should do.

 

[bullfan]

Everything is legal until it's made illegal.

Slavery was legal until it was made illegal.

I've heard it all now!!!! Nadal is equated to slavery! GMAFB, the insanity must stop!

 

[10is]

Formula 1 limited overt use of technology as well. The cars in the 90s were actually way more advanced technologically and more powerful than the ones used in the sport today.

 

[BreakPoint]

Did Agassi win Wimbledon by serving and volleying, too?

There is no more modern baseline game than that.

And how many Wimbledons did Agassi win compared to Sampras? How about Courier and Chang?

Aside from 1992, how many non-serve and volleying baseline bashers won Wimbledon between 1981 and 2001? How about none? All were serve and volleyers, e.g., McEnroe, Becker, Cash, Edberg, Stich, Sampras, Krajicek, Ivanisevic, etc. Even Connors won in 1982 by serving and volleying, as did Borg between 1976 and 1980.

 

[Chopin]

Everything is legal until it's made illegal.

Slavery was legal until it was made illegal.

Fitting comparison when we're talking about some guys playing tennis.

 

[BreakPoint]

Exactly how much money did you bet on Djokovic to win?

None, as I couldn't care less who won. It was as boring as watching Pong.

BTW, Djokovic also uses poly crosses, so it's almost as bad.

 

[tistrapukcipeht]

Formula 1 limited overt use of technology as well. The cars in the 90s were actually way more advanced technologically and more powerful than the ones used in the sport today.

Not really, because in the 80's and 90's the engines were bigger, 4.5 (if not bigger) V8-V10-V12 to produce 750HP.

Nowadays, it's 2.4 V8, still they are a lot faster than in the 90's and have to last 4 races at least.

The early 2000's were probably the highest in term of power and the fastest.

 

[namelessone]

Most butthurt thread I've seen in a long time.

And on TW that's saying something.

Perhaps we should ban poly and take away titles from every active or retired player that had some poly in his stringbed. That would probably please BP.

 

[BreakPoint]

I've heard it all now!!!! Nadal is equated to slavery! GMAFB, the insanity must stop!

This is about poly strings, not Nadal. I didn't say Nadal should be banned, just poly strings. But I guess deep down inside most *********s know its the same thing as they acknowledge that Nadal wouldn't be half the player he is without those miracle poly strings.

The point is, people once thought slavery was OK, too. Everything is OK until it's not. Same with poly strings.

 

[BreakPoint]

Most butthurt thread I've seen in a long time.

And on TW that's saying something.

I said the same thing about Samatha Stosur after she got to the RG final in 2010. It's about the poly strings, not about any one player. So who am I "butt hurt" about? Federer? Djokovic? They both use poly strings, too. Nobody should be allowed to use them, just like with spaghetti strings.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Everything is legal until it's made illegal.

Slavery was legal until it was made illegal.

Fed and co should learn to serve volley while it is still legal and try to use it to displace Joker and Nadal.

 

[Ronaldo]

Poly, Polystar has been available since the 70s. When did poly become popular on the pro tour?

 

[BreakPoint]

Perhaps we should ban poly and take away titles from every active or retired player that had some poly in his stringbed. That would probably please BP.

You can't retroactively take titles away because of something that was legal at the time that it was used. Just ban poly strings going forward to give tennis a chance of regaining its variety and creativity.

 

[10is]

Not really, because in the 80's and 90's the engines were bigger, 4.5 (if not bigger) V8-V10-V12 to produce 750HP.

Nowadays, it's 2.4 V8, still they are a lot faster than in the 90's and have to last 4 races at least.

The early 2000's were probably the highest in term of power and the fastest.

Not only in terms of V12 engines in the 90s but also use of technology like traction control, automatic suspension, launch control, which were banned in the early 90s, some of them were reintroduced in early 2002s but then banned again a couple of years later.

Anyway, I used F1 to illustrate the point that there is a precedent for professional sports banning technology in order to make the sport more competitive/entertaining. Human endeavour should always count for more in sports.

 

[BreakPoint]

Poly, Polystar has been available since the 70s. When did poly become popular on the pro tour?

I think Kuerten was the first one to use it to win Slams in the late-90's, thereby, popularizing it.

 

[darrinbaker00]

None, as I couldn't care less who won. It was as boring as watching Pong.

BTW, Djokovic also uses poly crosses, so it's almost as bad.

Yes, we can tell by this thread that you couldn't care less who won. Your apathy just oozes through your posts.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

BP has never recovered from 5 year retired Sampras + Poly thumping prime Fed in Macau.:lol:

 

[willshot]

None, as I couldn't care less who won. It was as boring as watching Pong.

BTW, Djokovic also uses poly crosses, so it's almost as bad.

pong with no poly? here you go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBaqY2Ojqo

 

[BreakPoint]

Yes, we can tell by this thread that you couldn't care less who won. Your apathy just oozes through your posts.

All the top pros use poly strings. Banning poly strings will affect all of them. So why would I care who won? I have no problem with Nadal winning as long as he did it without the aid of poly strings.

 

[BreakPoint]

pong with no poly? here you go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBaqY2Ojqo

Where do you see Borg and Lendl hitting the ball as hard as they can with massive topspin that makes the ball dip in at the last second? They were both hitting softly with just enough loopy spin to make sure the ball stayed in. How well would either Borg or Lendl have done against today's Nadal or Djokovic and their poly strings playing like that?

 

[Jay_The_Nomad]

I think you are missing the point that was very apparent in the final between djokovic and nadal.

Spin is not a problem and polyester strings that allow players to hit with more spin than ever is not a problem. Djokovic has shown that you can attack these spiny shots with a short sharp flat groundie...even on claycourt.

You look at players that have troubled nadal. Players like soderling, del Potro. They all hit flat. Even almagro.

Tennis is like rock paper scissors. There is no ultimate way. There is always a solution to a particular playing style.

It's ridiculous. Nadal can take huge cuts on almost every ball and put so much topspin on the ball that it almost never goes out. That is NOT tennis. There's a reason why a tennis court had boundaries - to prevent players from hitting the ball as hard as they can on every shot without the fear of hitting the ball outside of the boundaries. This is not baseball. Almost all of Nadal's balls landed in no matter how hard he hit the ball. He could hit ridiculous angles and the ball would still land inside the sidelines.

The effect on the ball using polyester strings is really NO DIFFERENT than the effect on the ball using spaghetti strings - and they BANNED spaghetti strings back in the late-70's. So why haven't they banned poly strings yet?

Eliminating poly strings would force players to use more variety, more strategy, differing pace and spins, attack the net more, and be more creative in keeping the ball in play rather than just taking huge swings and hitting the ball as hard as you can from the baseline on every single shot. It would also save a lot of recreational players who like to copy the pros from arm injuries and leaving the sport.

Let's face it, poly strings have made playing against Nadal on clay almost unplayable and made watching pro tennis almost unwatchable because it's like watching a game of Pong (the video game). There's basically no variety and no strategy other than bludgeoning every ball with no fear of hitting out.

If they came out with a technology which allowed Tiger Woods to hit a hole-in-one on every shot, don't you think they would immediately ban it as it would ruin the sport of golf? So why haven't they banned poly strings yet that is ruining the sport of tennis from what it used to be and supposed to be?

 

[BrooklynNY]

Yes, it is a totally different sport right now.



Now it looks more and more an endurance and top-spin context everywhere.
I can watch and even enjoy tennis today, but not as much as in former eras. But there are many people (especially young people) that possibly prefer this "Ping-Pong-Tennis" than former tennis.

Table-tennis is a totally different sport now as well. From "Classic Hardbat Table Tennis" to "Super-Mega-Spin Sponge Rubber Table Tennis".

Both sports have evolved into a totally different sport because of technology.

This is not an ideal tennis world where the rules and technology is always the same so we have it easier to compare different eras.

This is the real, chaotic, money-driven world.

This is the most sensible post in the entire thread that I've read.

If you have actually played table tennis with the 2 different paddles, you will completely understand the way the game of actual tennis has changed. You can basically feel the effect by playing with 'like Nadal' using a Pips-in(super slick stringbed-like Luxilon/Poly), Sponge(super low tension) basically dead feeling string bed/paddle surface which allows for plenty of spin and control via spin the completely dead surface which if you hit with enough racquet head speed you will hit hard enough, with an insane amount of spin to hit the table and virtually take the net out of the equation.

If you compare the default traditional ping pong paddles, with the tiny grip bumps, which we all know,that have the high pitch ping sound,to one of the ultra modern, completely flat(no grip bumps) super soft spongey paddle, you will see how the properties differ completely.

With the traditional paddles you are best to play on the rise dinks and slices, and its relatively easier to half volley the ball, than it is to hit.

Compare that to the modern paddle, where it's extremely hard to hit dinks and drops, and 'push' the ball using timing... You need to basically control the ball via 'licking' up on the ball... the difference in trajectories is insane if 2 players of the same ability to play against each other using different paddles, it would be like using a prostaff 85 strung with gut, vs someone playing with a modern frame and poly strings. The balls are just extra heavy and it makes playing a control based game 4x more difficult atleast.

I know some of you will say table tennis doesn't compare to real tennis..blah blah... but its a basically a microcosm simulation of the effect of poly strings on the game of real tennis.


Great Post Mattennis.

 

[BreakPoint]

I think you are missing the point that was very apparent in the final between djokovic and nadal.

Spin is not a problem and polyester strings that allow players to hit with more spin than ever is not a problem. Djokovic has shown that you can attack these spiny shots with a short sharp flat groundie...even on claycourt.

If that's so easy to do, why can't anyone else do it? How did Nadal win 52 matches at RG without hardly the loss of a set and not even many games?

 

[bullfan]

This is about poly strings, not Nadal. I didn't say Nadal should be banned, just poly strings. But I guess deep down inside most *********s know its the same thing as they acknowledge that Nadal wouldn't be half the player he is without those miracle poly strings.

The point is, people once thought slavery was OK, too. Everything is OK until it's not. Same with poly strings.

Once again, you are absurd for your comments, Nadal and poly strings have nothing to do with slavery, but that seems to be above your IQ. YOu seem to be competing with Clarky in as far as completely idiot commentary goes. Clarky told the rest of us what to believe no matter how idiotic Clarky was, and you sound like you are soul mates with Clarky using the same type of logic.

 

[darrinbaker00]

If that's so easy to do, why can't anyone else do it? How did Nadal win 52 matches at RG without hardly the loss of a set and not even many games?

He's just that good.

 

[willshot]

He's just that good.

- athleticism
- mental toughness
- intelligent court sense
- will of a champion

 

[BreakPoint]

Once again, you are absurd for your comments, Nadal and poly strings have nothing to do with slavery, but that seems to be above your IQ. YOu seem to be competing with Clarky in as far as completely idiot commentary goes. Clarky told the rest of us what to believe no matter how idiotic Clarky was, and you sound like you are soul mates with Clarky using the same type of logic.

But obviously it's above YOUR IQ. Where did I say that Nadal or poly strings have anything to do with slavery? Both are things that were once not banned but later became or can be banned. They have nothing at all to do with EACH OTHER! I could have said texting while driving or telemarketing or plastic bags instead of slavery or used a million other examples. Get it now? My God! Have you ever heard of using an example to make a point?

 

[BreakPoint]

He's just that good.

- athleticism
- mental toughness
- intelligent court sense
- will of a champion

So then Nadal would have achieved the exact same thing without the use of poly strings? Would you be willing to bet your life savings on that?

 

[Murrayfan31]

The strings made him that good. It is almost robotic.

 

[darrinbaker00]

So then Nadal would have achieved the exact same thing without the use of poly strings? Would you be willing to bet your life savings on that?

To answer your first question, if everyone else also didn't use poly strings, yes. To answer your second question, I wouldn't bet my life savings on anything.

 

[BreakPoint]

To answer your first question, if everyone else also didn't use poly strings, yes. To answer your second question, I wouldn't bet my life savings on anything.

I'm willing to bet that if both Nadal and Federer used all natural gut that Federer wins all of their past meetings at RG (except maybe 2008 when Federer had mono).

 

[darrinbaker00]

I'm willing to bet that if both Nadal and Federer used all natural gut that Federer wins all of their past meetings at RG (except maybe 2008 when Federer had mono).

Great. All you need to do now is invent a time machine.

 

[dtrain]

It's obvious that BP hates the environment. He wants to cut down trees to make wooden racquets and kill cows for natural gut strings.

BreakPoint = BP
British Petroleum = BP

Coincidence? I think not.

 

[ninman]

Great. All you need to do now is invent a time machine.

Not necessary you see there are infinitely many parallel universes, and in one of them (probably) is the scenario where poly strings were either banned or never invented, with both Nadal and Federer playing each other in 4 FO finals.

All we have to do is figure out a way to visit that universe to discover what happened.

 

[ninman]

It's obvious that BP hates the environment. He wants to cut down trees to make wooden racquets and kill cows for natural gut strings.

Actually doing that would create a greater demand for wood, which in turn would lead to more trees being planted and more sustainable forests becoming larger, which would help the environment.