Bender
G.O.A.T.
That's because none of those players have anywhere near the skill/talent that Roger possesses...
Federer needs new racket and new string.
- Thread starter Buckethead
- Start date
That's because none of those players have anywhere near the skill/talent that Roger possesses...
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
Yes. We need Anna Wintour, Phil Knight and the ghost of Peter Carter to appear to Rog and Mirka on night, seance-intervention style. They'd make smalltalk over sushi and then the conversation woud turn toward tennis. In walks a certain Pete Sampras with a red and black bag full of Babolat Pure StormTours and Pure Storm Limiteds. In the sidepocket would be a small lawyer with get-out-of-Wilsoncontract free papers.
Then Roger could have a fighting chance at another Wimbledon title and maybe even a Davis Cup.
Then Roger could have a fighting chance at another Wimbledon title and maybe even a Davis Cup.
tennisdad65
Hall of Fame
Any racquet/string (including his own) in the poll choices will work for Fed, but to beat Nadal, he needs a big bubba 
Impossible to just plug the modern racket into the classical game. The larger margin-of-error it gives on topspin strokes is offset by the loss of control on precision strokes. Instead of shanks, Fed's ball would be a foot long or wide.
Whose game should he learn, Nadal or Djokovic?
stingstang
Professional
Dang I just got 15 KPS88's, strung each one with luxilon at 70lbs and stuck on 200lbs of lead. Wouldn't make it to 3.5 without them the forum said. Now fed needs a big bubba???
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
You have potential.
In order to crack the next level, you will need full poly at 43/40, Lunar VaporBarricPulse3s that match your every outfit, and just the right headband.
Oh, and a 12 pack bag with a case of Dunlop Grand Prix Hardcourts or Prince Tours.
And the same color sports drink as Rafa.
li0scc0
Hall of Fame
Sampras' game did just fine with the 98 square inch Pure Storm GT.....
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
BINGO!!!!!
Talent has nothing to do with the racquet. Switching racquets does not make one more talented! If it did, all those guys using bigger racquets would be more talented than Federer. But they're not, are they?
But some are, like Nadal and Djokovic.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Really? How many Slams did Sampras win with it?
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Both Nadal and Djokovic would be just as fast and mentally tough with any racquet.
Actually Djokovic fell apart when he tried a new frame, isn't it?
And Nadal's frame and grip size choice was done by Uncle Toni I think who wanted him to hit like a table tennis player.
Povl Carstensen
Legend
Povl Carstensen
Legend
I think your viewpoint on this is on the loosing side.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
Federer is on the loosing side, hence this thread
Nguyen or loose, tight or lose, soar throtes or knot, I trust you're judgemeant. I ment to say, eye reely loaf boaf of ewe guy's and I re5pek you're up-onions.
That was a great one.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
Thanks, a little phomage to my Vietnamese tennis friends.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
The racquet has little to do with the raw talent of the player, but with the right racquet, the player's talent can really shine through. Not saying that Roger is using the wrong racquet of course (he's won 16 slams with his current one, so there will have to be a really compelling reason to change, which I have yet to see ITT).
LOL that was a good one again. Someone said: Americans make a sandwich out of everything, while the Vietnamese make a soup out of everything.
Most of my tennis mates are Filipino or Vietnamese.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Yeah, his strokes fell apart, but he was just as fast and mentally tough as before.
AlpineCadet
Hall of Fame
I like, will use in sig, thanks.
tennistiger
Professional
The list of former pros who said that they regret not switching rackets during their career is long:
Becker
Sampras
McEnroe
Lendl
Graf
Evert
And there are good examples that switching headsizes can be a good option:
Navratilova: 92 to 102
Seles: 105 to 120
Connors: 75 to 85 to 97
Stich: 90 to 98 - and switching grip from 3 to 5 !
Noah: 90 to 100
Hingis: 105 to 95 to 105 to 98/100 !!!
and many more...
By Federers talent switching may be to 95 can be an option. He can do this easier than many other players.
Becker
Sampras
McEnroe
Lendl
Graf
Evert
And there are good examples that switching headsizes can be a good option:
Navratilova: 92 to 102
Seles: 105 to 120
Connors: 75 to 85 to 97
Stich: 90 to 98 - and switching grip from 3 to 5 !
Noah: 90 to 100
Hingis: 105 to 95 to 105 to 98/100 !!!
and many more...
By Federers talent switching may be to 95 can be an option. He can do this easier than many other players.
It did? So he's as good now as he's always been?
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
100% of pros who didn't win at least 30 Grand Slams regret not switching racquets during their careers, which makes the point completely moot.
It's like saying I wish I had bought Google stock when it was $80 a share.
The_Question
Hall of Fame
I think what Fed really need is a DeLorean w/Flux capacitor and go back to 2006, and swap with his younger self.
Really, a new frame and strings will make very little difference this late in his career. Fed is simply, well, old. No racquet, strings, shoes, or light weight clothes can battle aging...
Really, a new frame and strings will make very little difference this late in his career. Fed is simply, well, old. No racquet, strings, shoes, or light weight clothes can battle aging...
Didn't Nav settle down with the Bosworth 96?
Yeah, his strokes fell apart, but he was just as fast and mentally tough as before.
????????????
Povl Carstensen
Legend
I think your stat is a little worse than Feds.Federer is on the loosing side, hence this thread
Last edited:
li0scc0
Hall of Fame
Well, considering Sampras RETIRED long before making the switch......
li0scc0
Hall of Fame
The comment was that it is impossible to plug a modern racquet into the classical game.
And my response is that Sampras, who still plays a classical game, switched to the 98 square inch Pure Storm, a 'modern' racquet (modern in quotes, as it is a very classical racquet, albeit one with a larger head).
The comments around here are that, somehow, a player who plays a classical game cannot use a modern racquet. Of course, they neglect to define modern.
Is modern anything but wood? Is modern anything larger than 85 square inches? What IS modern?
My take? Provided the grip shape, stiffness/flex, weight and balance were what he was used to, Roger Federer could take a 95-98 square inch racquet and do just fine immediately. Would there be a transition period? Probably. Would this be dramatic? I doubt it.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
What is there not to understand? A racquet doesn't change how fast and athletic you are nor does it change how mentally tough, smart, and competitive you are, which account for 99% of tennis. That's why Federer can beat you even with a spoon. Which is also why most people will never become a pro regardless of what racquet they use.
Federer needs to start beating other players, not me. He has lost his confidence and the small racquet isn't helping.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
I've seen Sampras play live from courtside while he was using the PS 6.0 85, the nCode 90, the K90, the KPS88, and with the Pure Storm GT. He didn't play any better with the Pure Storm GT than he did with any of the other racquets.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
How is this any different than the point I just made? If Federer can't beat Djokovic with his BLX90, he ain't going to beat him with ANY racquet. A bigger racquet isn't going to make Federer any faster nor is it going to make Djokovic any slower. Djokovic is just better this year than he was before, when Federer was beating him regularly with his 90.
No one really knows that. If we all think like this, no one will ever make any change.
Satch
Hall of Fame
i can't see rogers game gains too much with a change in a racquet, not to even mention strings..
pro's don't care for an eq too much, and i am glad its like that. If evreyone on this forum puts 10% of time they have spent on reading and looking for new eq in practice, we would have better players... it's stupid
Last edited:
li0scc0
Hall of Fame
Nope. But by your previous logic, since it is impossible for a classical player to use a modern racquet, he would have to play worse with the Pure Storm GT. and that he did not.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
He did play worse, in my opinion. I said "he didn't play any better". Playing worse is not playing any better.
ptr
Rookie
But he was older maybe? Older in tennis doesn't mean better...
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Povl Carstensen
Legend
He is beating other players.
li0scc0
Hall of Fame
Federer's issue is not his speed, although that seems to have diminished a bit. He is still plenty quick. HIs footwork has gone downhill just a tad. A larger racquet could make up for the occasional bad footwork.
The way Federer swings, a 90 is a precise instrument. Everything has to be functioning perfectly. When it does function perfectly, the result is pristine.
However, everything isn't functioning perfectly as often as it had in the past. With a 95-98, this could compensate for that. It is worth a shot.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
I don't know, when I don't swing a 95-98 perfectly, the ball hits the back fence.
Add more top spin. Otherwise you will have over reliance on timing like Federer and suffer in the latter stages of your career.
AlpineCadet
Hall of Fame
Great post! Also, for BP, since it seems like he doesn't want to adjust his strokes, then he can always tame the power with fully poly, but if he's stuck on using gut mains and poly crosses, then adjust the tension. You can always de-power a frame with customizations, so I can't see how having more room for error in a slightly bigger head is going to negatively affect his game.
BTW, we're obviously not representatives for Fed's game, so I'm sure we're not just putting words into his mouth with our biased opinions, claiming them as the absolute truth, because that would just be SILLY.
Last edited:
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Top spin takes more timing than hitting flat. Not that Federer should be changing his strokes just to accommodate a new racquet at this stage of his career. Should he be developing a reverse forehand and 2HBH while he's at it? :???:
Last edited:
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Then why don't Nadal and Djokovic switch to 120 sq. in. frames? More room for error in a bigger head can't possibly negatively affect anyone's games, right?
Also, using full poly takes all the feel out of your game and gives you tennis elbow, especially if you use a 1HBH. Federer's game relies quite a bit on touch and feel.
Federer's problem isn't the lack of power. It's lack of consistency due to his slowing footwork and just fatigue after being at the top levels for a decade.
No, but you should add more topspin to prevent your shots from sailing long
ollinger
G.O.A.T.
Don't go fraudulent with the arguments, BP. Did you read "Wisdom of the Crowd"? Great book, tells us that Nadal and Joker don't go to 120 because the "crowd" data will find the optimum size, which seems to be 98-100 sq. in. based on the size most often chosen by skilled players. And suggesting that Federer winning 16 slams means he wouldn't be better off now with a larger frame, especially at his advanced age, is sheer sophistry.
