Federer needs new racket and new string.

[Consolation]

He'd solidify his position as an ambassador of the game if he switched. I don't think he'd benefit, but he probably wouldn't lose anything either. On the other hand, there are tens of thousands of tennis players worldwide that are using the wrong racquet (too heavy, not forgiving enough) in large part because of his near 10 year reign as the top player. If he switched to a more forgiving racquet (even just a PJ), the worldwide community of tennis players would benefit.

 

[Pioneer]

It's not the K90 that's 93", it's the PB10 that's 90". A lot of mids labeled 93" are actually 90"

I'd give him my RDS mids to him all at 368g.

Of course it does,that's why you see rackets with SP 16x18,16x19,16x20..
I have had several rackets and playetested more than 20 rackets among sizes 88 and 105.

The K 90 is actually 93,the same size of my RDS 001 mid,Volkl Power Bridge 10,they are all the same size ,but all play different even with 16x19.The bigger the racket,with the same string pattern more spin,no doubt about it.

 

[sureshs]

He'd solidify his position as an ambassador of the game if he switched. I don't think he'd benefit, but he probably wouldn't lose anything either. On the other hand, there are tens of thousands of tennis players worldwide that are using the wrong racquet (too heavy, not forgiving enough) in large part because of his near 10 year reign as the top player. If he switched to a more forgiving racquet (even just a PJ), the worldwide community of tennis players would benefit.

My favorite story is about this small, short 3.5 guy I saw playing with a KPS88 in the hot sun. He cramped twice and we had to help him get back on his feet. Of course he lost. But he still plays with the same racquet.

 

[Djokolate]

i selected his own custom blx90
maybe he could give the pure storm a try
it'd be good for fed to try wawrinkas setup
but to be honest he should stick 2 the blx90

strings? no idea

 

[xRain]

Maybe strings, but not the racquet.

 

[Buckethead]

Maybe strings, but not the racquet.

Actually after reading all these articles of late, I'd keep the strings and definitely change the racket, or the string pattern and try at least.
The string set up is damn good.

 

[Pioneer]

My favorite story is about a 6'4 guy who played Head Liquidwhatever Radical Fire MP W.E. and sent forehands 60m long with it but started hitting winners at will with a K Blade Tour strung with RPM 17 at 30kg matched to Safin specs.

My favorite story is about this small, short 3.5 guy I saw playing with a KPS88 in the hot sun. He cramped twice and we had to help him get back on his feet. Of course he lost. But he still plays with the same racquet.

 

[klementine]

What Federer (and Nadal) need ..... is rest!!!!

I think Federer and Nadal had, what??? a week for the offseason??? Maybe a little more.....

Rest,rest, and more rest.....

Even if he had a 110sq.in., super-thin beam, 14x18 racquet with super-gut-poly hybrid that God had strung for him.... he still would've walked-out in the semis.... He is TIRED!!! He went from the WTF to exos to more exos....

Let's talk about this in 3months or so....

 

[Buckethead]

Fed needs the Yonex R-22, bigger sweet-spot, much better racket, more forgiving, more plow through, in Roger's hands He'd be back in number 1.
Even Brad Gilbert mentioning it now. Nothing wrong with the 90in frame, but Roger would be better with a bigger frame since his game has very little margin for mistakes.

 

[MrFlip]

Double-edged tennis racquet is what Roger needs

 

[FedererBestTennis]

NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! He doesn't need these things. He has tried 95 sq in frames and he doesn't like them. The fact that he choses to go old school shows the amount of talent he has.

 

[oscar_2424]

he needs a babolat apd

 

[SplitStepper]

:twisted:

he needs a babolat apd

:twisted: Seriously, the smaller head size is much more manueverable for the one hander. Thats also why he has a polarized frame. Much easier to manipulate the face of the racket. If you aren't a one hander, I don't feel that you can make a proper assumption of what he should use. Even if you are a one hander, you don't have the judgement of the best that ever played.

 

[Buckethead]

:twisted:

:twisted: Seriously, the smaller head size is much more manueverable for the one hander. Thats also why he has a polarized frame. Much easier to manipulate the face of the racket. If you aren't a one hander, I don't feel that you can make a proper assumption of what he should use. Even if you are a one hander, you don't have the judgement of the best that ever played.

I think He was being sarcastic.

 

[SplitStepper]

I think He was being sarcastic.

Yeah, I know. Good stuff.

 

[SplitStepper]

Btw...what band is that in your avatar? I'm pretty sure they played at bonaroo.

 

[Canadian Kid]

Sampras said that he should have changed to a bigger headsize later in his career. I think Federer will be the same in a few years.

Sampras uses a babolat now...doesnt he?

 

[Buckethead]

Btw...what band is that in your avatar? I'm pretty sure they played at bonaroo.

Buckethead, his own band, but He played with GN'R before(recorded Chinese Democracy), played with Les Claypool and many other appearances for other artists, movie recordings... One of the best guitar players ever, technically better than anybody.

 

[stringertom]

Wilson Outer Limits or Weed

Yes the Swiss ex-Maestro must accept Father Time is against him and it's time to revamp the arsenal. I say go all in, make sure you can win the club Sat. AM round-robin. Fight fire with fire! Stay true to the brand and switch to the Outer Limits, throw some Gamma Ruff in there and beat up on some guys your age to get sharp for those whippersnappers that routine you now. If your results don't improve, consider a Weed! 4/1 plus 1!

 

[Lsmkenpo]

I don't see any less power than before, what I see are slower surfaces that are very difficult to hit through consistently, everyone's power is down as a result not just Federer.

 

[wksoh]

Can't help but notice Federer's shots seem slow compared to Nadal's..

 

[Devilito]

I don't see any less power than before, what I see are slower surfaces that are very difficult to hit through consistently, everyone's power is down as a result not just Federer.

i'm pretty sure they mess with the balls too depending on the surface

 

[cork_screw]

I want to doggie knap your pooch, he is just too cute.

why don't you give your racket?

No need to change..

 

[carlosp]

He needs a different racket than what He has,at least for a change.That BLX or K90,has a dense string pattern for that size,and his strings don't grab the ball as much as He needs,hence getting more spin and control.
What racket would you guys think would be a great change for Federer weather You agree with the thesis or not.
I also think the change would be a motivational thing,since He is used to the same thing for the past 10 years.There are better strings He could try than that Alu Power/Natural gut combo He has.


PS-It is a multiple choice so you can vote for a racket and string

You should add the BLX Blade Tour and BLX Pro (he´s still Wilson after all)

 

[AlpineCadet]

Anything would work as long it's 95+. He also needs to youtube himself starting from 04.

 

[BreakPoint]

Where's the "None of the Above" option?

Nadal hasn't won a tournament this year. How come there aren't 50 threads about how Nadal needs to switch to a different racquet or different strings?

Djokovic is playing significantly better this year than last year and is now unbeatable. How come nobody is attributing his recent success to his racquet?

Repeat after me: IT'S NOT THE RACQUET!!!!!!!!!

The racquet is less than 1% of tennis.

 

[F-T-S]

Where's the "None of the Above" option?

Nadal hasn't won a tournament this year. How come there aren't 50 threads about how Nadal needs to switch to a different racquet or different strings?

Djokovic is playing significantly better this year than last year and is now unbeatable. How come nobody is attributing his recent success to his racquet?

Repeat after me: IT'S NOT THE RACQUET!!!!!!!!!

The racquet is less than 1% of tennis.

I'm inclined to agree, but I wonder if he'd at least experiment and see, after all Pete has expressed regrets.

 

[BreakPoint]

I'm inclined to agree, but I wonder if he'd at least experiment and see, after all Pete has expressed regrets.

And if Sampras had switched to a bigger racquet, he probably would have regret never having won even one Wimbledon and wished he had used a smaller racquet. Regret means nothing. Things happen the way they happen. Any changes may have turned out even worse.

 

[F-T-S]

And if Sampras had switched to a bigger racquet, he probably would have regret never having won even one Wimbledon and wished he had used a smaller racquet. Regret means nothing. Things happen the way they happen. Any changes may have turned out even worse.

It's a definite possibility!

 

[stringertom]

It's Not the Bow, It's the Indian!

Where's the "None of the Above" option?

Nadal hasn't won a tournament this year. How come there aren't 50 threads about how Nadal needs to switch to a different racquet or different strings?

Djokovic is playing significantly better this year than last year and is now unbeatable. How come nobody is attributing his recent success to his racquet?

Repeat after me: IT'S NOT THE RACQUET!!!!!!!!!

The racquet is less than 1% of tennis.

What would the ****s post about? It's hard for most to accept their favorite Indian chief might be surpassed by other chiefs. "I know he'd bag that buffalo with a new bow!" is easier to say than "did you see that young brave take out that bison with his first shot?"

That being said, his string choice is something to consider. ALU Rough is no longer "cutting edge" technology. Agassi made a switch to Lux late in his career and won majors. Nadal has switched with positive results. Even if he maintains brand loyalty, Wilson and Lux are teaming to produce newer technology. Use late '11 to find some new formulas appropriate for the tactical tennis he chooses to play.

 

[AlpineCadet]

Aging/slow footwork/less aggressive game = upgrading your frame to a bigger headsize FTW.

 

[Xizel]

Aging/slow footwork/less aggressive game = upgrading your frame to a bigger headsize FTW.

This.

Federer doesn't just decline, his competition also increases. While he takes a step back, everybody around him is taking a step forward. If he doesn't admit and adjust, he's past, which is what a lot believe as of now.

 

[BreakPoint]

Aging/slow footwork/less aggressive game = upgrading your frame to a bigger headsize FTW.

Pros like Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver played on the tour until they were 40 using the same tiny racquets (65 sq. in. or less) and kept winning without having to upgrade to a bigger headsize.

 

[BreakPoint]

This.

Federer doesn't just decline, his competition also increases. While he takes a step back, everybody around him is taking a step forward. If he doesn't admit and adjust, he's past, which is what a lot believe as of now.

Do YOU switch to a bigger racquet every time you lose a match or do you just go out there and practice more?

 

[Buckethead]

Pros like Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver played on the tour until they were 40 using the same tiny racquets (65 sq. in. or less) and kept winning without having to upgrade to a bigger headsize.

BP,
as Fed fans, we have to recognize, that is a small racket and very hard to with in the high level it is now.
Tennis has developed so much that it is not a fair comparison with 15 years ago, let alone 30, 40.
Fed can only gain with a bigger racket, more forgiving, powerful...
I think Fed is still playing great tennis and still can beat top players, and a bigger racket would help his job to become easier.

 

[BreakPoint]

BP,
as Fed fans, we have to recognize, that is a small racket and very hard to with in the high level it is now.
Tennis has developed so much that it is not a fair comparison with 15 years ago, let alone 30, 40.
Fed can only gain with a bigger racket, more forgiving, powerful...
I think Fed is still playing great tennis and still can beat top players, and a bigger racket would help his job to become easier.

Federer won 16 Slams with a 90 sq. in. racquet, so shouldn't the converse also be true? Wouldn't have all the other pros been more competitive against Federer if they also used a SMALLER racquet? Maybe all the other pros in the Top 20 would have a lot more Slam titles if they had used a smaller racquet to compete with Federer over the past 8 years? It's the same argument, isn't it?

Most pros in the Top 20 have never won even a single Slam while Federer has won 16 Slams with a 90 sq. in. racquet. The only logical conclusion (if you buy into the idea that the racquet makes a big difference) is that a smaller racquet is better for winning than a bigger racquet. :shock:

 

[Xizel]

Do YOU switch to a bigger racquet every time you lose a match or do you just go out there and practice more?

The difference is that Federer is competing at the absolute highest level where his technique, strategy, and experience is near perfect. The thing that's holding him back (AT THIS POINT, which is late into his career) is his equipment. The argument that says that he won his Majors using an outdated racquet is faulty because of the time frame when he won his Majors. I doubt Federer played better in 2010 than he did years ago. I DON'T doubt that Nadal played better in 2010 than years ago. Back then, Federer could play with his small racquet because he was at his peak (independent reason) while others are still improving (independent reason). At this point, he's not at his peak, he's PAST it and again, his opponents are also BETTER. His physical abilities are declining as we speak. There's a reason why you see senior players with 125" pans, but played with 95" when they were younger.

 

[BreakPoint]

The difference is that Federer is competing at the absolute highest level where his technique, strategy, and experience is near perfect.

Which is exactly why he shouldn't switch racquets as his entire game is honed to his current racquet and switching would more than likely screw him up.

The thing that's holding him back (AT THIS POINT, which is late into his career) is his equipment.

It's his body and his motivation that are holding him back.

The argument that says that he won his Majors using an outdated racquet is faulty because of the time frame when he won his Majors.

Why? Didn't all the people he beat to win those 16 Slams use bigger racquets just like they do today?

I doubt Federer played better in 2010 than he did years ago.

He didn't. That's why he only won 1 Slam instead of 3. But it had nothing to do with his racquet.

I DON'T doubt that Nadal played better in 2010 than years ago.

So did many other pros. And many other pros played worse in 2010 than years ago, while many others played the same. Pick a year, any year, and that will be the case. Some pros played better, some worse, some the same.

Back then, Federer could play with his small racquet because he was at his peak (independent reason) while others are still improving (independent reason).

Huh? You mean EVERYONE was still improving back then? No one else on the tour was also at their peaks for nearly 10 years?

At this point, he's not at his peak, he's PAST it and again, his opponents are also BETTER.

Really? ALL of his opponents are now better? How about Blake, Hewitt, Ljubicic, Davydenko, Andreev, Ferrero, Stepanek, Tursunov, etc.?

His physical abilities are declining as we speak. There's a reason why you see senior players with 125" pans, but played with 95" when they were younger.

I also see lots of senior players using PS 6.0 85's, Max200G's, and other smaller racquets. Oh, and are any of these senior players using 125 sq. in. pans going to beat Nadal or Djokovic regardless of what size racquet they use?

 

[tennisexecutor]

at his age and highest level of competition, there's just no reason to make such a drastic change and risk having to go through the adjustment period just to see if he can get back to the same level of play and form.

if anything, it would be smarter to make smaller, subtle, incremental changes like going back to 5 power pads to open up the sweet spot a little.

 

[FedExpress 333]

http://undergroundcoders.com/forums/uploads/1275200534/med_gallery_1_3_57968.jpg

 

[AlpineCadet]

BP is just one man who can argue his opinion all day, ignore him.

 

[auburnlull]

I remember a thread where Breakpoint and others like him were going on about how amazing it was that Fed could win with such a small racquet. I argued that it was an advantage for him, given his style, to have the added precision and consistency of a smaller headsize. Now he's arguing that a smaller racquet is inherently better. So is it an advantage or a handicap. can't be both... unless you dissolve the dilemma by just accepting the fact that every player has spent more time than we can conceive of building a game around a almost infinite number of expectations so no racquet is inherently better. My take aligns with BP's current stance. Any head size he would realistically migrate to would not give him enough of an advantage to be counter balance all the other changes he would have to make. 90 is not that much smaller than 100. At the pro level a shank and ball hit outside a very small sweet spot have the same result 95% of the time - a lost point. ATP singles is not doubles or the WTA, people. His margin for error with the few players he can't get by is tiny.

 

[Hidious]

When a 6.0 or 6.5 asks for racquet advices in the Racquet section, everybody goes on about how irrelevant the question is because at this level, you know what you want and what you need (see this thread http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=377182).

Yet, it seems like Roger Federer himself should change racquet based on the silly opinion of some lunatic TT users. Ridiculous much?

 

[BreakPoint]

I remember a thread where Breakpoint and others like him were going on about how amazing it was that Fed could win with such a small racquet. I argued that it was an advantage for him, given his style, to have the added precision and consistency of a smaller headsize. Now he's arguing that a smaller racquet is inherently better. So is it an advantage or a handicap. can't be both... unless you dissolve the dilemma by just accepting the fact that every player has spent more time than we can conceive of building a game around a almost infinite number of expectations so no racquet is inherently better. My take aligns with BP's current stance. Any head size he would realistically migrate to would not give him enough of an advantage to be counter balance all the other changes he would have to make. 90 is not that much smaller than 100. At the pro level a shank and ball hit outside a very small sweet spot have the same result 95% of the time - a lost point. ATP singles is not doubles or the WTA, people. His margin for error with the few players he can't get by is tiny.

Huh? I've never argued that a smaller racquet is better or worse. No racquet is "better" or "worse". A racquet is only better or worse FOR a specific individual player. It is what it is.

And I've always been very consistent in saying that Federer switching to a bigger racquet would hinder him more than it would help him because his strokes and game have been so finely tuned to his current racquet for so long that changing to a bigger racquet would more than likely mess him up. It is way too late in his career to be changing his strokes and his style to accommodate a bigger racquet.

Oh, and why would I be amazed that Federer could win with a 90 sq. in racquet when I used to win with a 65 sq. in. racquet?

 

[max]

I appreciate fully BP's point here: I like sticking with the same frame for 6-7 years, since my body "wraps itself around it" or knows the frame response so well that it puts things on automatic. It's nice not having question marks bouncing around what the frame will do to a hit.

 

[Bender]

What makes you think that the racquets and strings you've listed here are worth considering in Federer's eyes? For all we know, Volkl and Dunlop may not have enough money to endorse Fed and he could easily choose (God forbid) a Babolat racquet.

 

[(K)evin]

He needs a different racket than what He has,at least for a change.That BLX or K90,has a dense string pattern for that size,and his strings don't grab the ball as much as He needs,hence getting more spin and control.
What racket would you guys think would be a great change for Federer weather You agree with the thesis or not.
I also think the change would be a motivational thing,since He is used to the same thing for the past 10 years.There are better strings He could try than that Alu Power/Natural gut combo He has.


PS-It is a multiple choice so you can vote for a racket and string

I think he needs a new Six One Tour but with a 19 mm beam and 93 to 95 With the 16 by 19 string pattern and a full set up of timo or ALU rough

 

[Larrysümmers]

I think at this time his racket feels like an extension of his arm. this racket gives fed the best chance to win in his mind. Fed is past his prime and going on the decline, while the younger guys are entering their prime.

 

[nadalex]

you can't speak about the players back in the day winning with their small headisze because they all had the small headsize theres no argument there. Federer needs to adapt because the others around him already have. He's playing a classical game with a classical typed racquet and i think he can play the same game with a 95 or 98 it will just give him a larger margin of error. What's their to argue against

 

[BreakPoint]

you can't speak about the players back in the day winning with their small headisze because they all had the small headsize theres no argument there. Federer needs to adapt because the others around him already have. He's playing a classical game with a classical typed racquet and i think he can play the same game with a 95 or 98 it will just give him a larger margin of error. What's their to argue against

What's there to argue about is that if 95 or 98 were better than 90, then Roddick, Blake, Ferrer, Verdasco, Tsonga, Berdych, Murray, Fish, Soderling, Wawrinka, Gasquet, Robredo, Baghdatis, Querrey, Davydenko, Haas, etc. would all have more than 16 Slams by now.