Feds racquet upgrade enabled #18

danbrenner

danbrenner

Legend
One point that came to mind after Feds win, is that this time around against Nadal, he is using a 97 instead of a 90.
In the past his 90 was way more at risk in lieu of high bouncing strokes to his backhand.
 
moon shot said:
Yep, the crosses only have something like 2cm more hitting area.
Click to expand...

Great point mate. Rogi would have likely snagged a major in 2014 or 2015 had he been able to trust his frame at key moments in those finals against Novak. You can't justify a direct correlation between the frame change and his play against Nadal because he was a measly 2-5 against Nadal after his switch to the 97 in 2013...

You could argue he'd be better if he stayed with the PS90 and balanced his schedule from the 2013-2016 time frame. Either way, an epic triumph for Roger and it showed that he truly is the most complete player to ever play our sport. A true inspiration both of these men are. Especially Nadal, handling his defeat with class and grace. The RF97 now has a 1-4 record in major finals. Hopefully Rog can snag one more with it before he sets off into the sunset
 
moon shot said:
Yep, the crosses only have something like 2cm more hitting area.
Click to expand...

Great point mate. Rogi would have likely snagged a major in 2014 or 2015 had he been able to trust his frame at key moments in those finals against Novak. You can't justify a direct correlation between the frame change and his play against Nadal because he was a measly 2-5 against Nadal after his switch to the 97 in 2013...

You could argue he'd be better if he stayed with the PS90 and balanced his schedule from the 2013-2016 time frame. Either way, an epic triumph for Roger and it showed that he truly is the most complete player to ever play our sport. A true inspiration both of these men are. Especially Nadal, handling his defeat with class and grace. The RF97 now has a 1-4 record in major finals. Hopefully Rog can snag one more with it before he sets off into the sunset
 
more important than area is the balance and lightness of weight in the head giving upward mobility more ease - even string gauge is critical - most people today have not discovered the additional weight of natural-real gut but it is there in the final balance after stringing.
 
Le Master said:
It is very unlikely that extra 7 sq inches made any difference.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If the racquet helped him at all, I'd be more inclined to believe it would be attributable to the increased stiffness of the new frame, and possibly the increase in beam thickness...

Of course, Fed just took 6 months off. I suspect the break also enabled him to win #18 as well.
 
It's not simply headsize, but the extra twistweight and stability it has allowed while keeping around the same weight. Made a great difference, rejuvenated his career. No way he'd be hitting those backhands with his old 90.
 
"... I'm coming over the backhand on the return much more than I ever have in the past. That's definitively due to the racquet as well with the bigger racquet head size. It allows me to swing a bit freer on the backhand side... " - Roger Federer in interview with Matts Wilander the day before the Aus Open final this year.
 
old man stringer said:
more important than area is the balance and lightness of weight in the head giving upward mobility more ease - even string gauge is critical - most people today have not discovered the additional weight of natural-real gut but it is there in the final balance after stringing.
Click to expand...

You could be right, if having a larger head didn't do the exact opposite of everything you said and hypothesized. Swinging a stock RF97 was way harder to me than swinging a K90 with added weight under bumper guard. The RF97A is supposed to be a little easier to swing though (compared to the RF97, not compared to the tour 90s).
 
I don't think so. Huge difference. He made lots of kinds of shot he was not able to do with the 90s. If you played with all the 90s, K-factor + Blx + Pro-staff and then play the RFA97. You will know.
 
Federer seems to have changed his stroke mechanics on his backhand. I think that has had more of an impact than the racquet. Although those who sell racquets will say differently, but that's their job.

Since 2008, it seems Federer has had two obstacles to overcome, Nadal and injuries. His backhand was always a target for Nadal and that was still evident in the final. So many shots going to the Federer backhand, but when that wasn't proving as successful, there didn't seem to be a plan b.

73 winners to 35 though. There's not many matches when Nadal is on the receiving end of those sorts of stats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bkr
cuteflu said:
I don't think so. Huge difference. He made lots of kinds of shot he was not able to do with the 90s. If you played with all the 90s, K-factor + Blx + Pro-staff and then play the RFA97. You will know.
Click to expand...

The only ones I saw were the offensive backhands. And he probably could've done the same with a 90 in his prime with a slight change to the way he hits the ball or his mentality when hitting it. Everything else I've seen him hit just as well, if not better, with the 90. If the 97 was such a miracle racket for him, he would've been winning more majors with it.
 
robbo1970 said:
Federer seems to have changed his stroke mechanics on his backhand. I think that has had more of an impact than the racquet.
Click to expand...

He changed his stroke mechanics because the racquet is different and thanks to those differences. A 97" just allows different stroke mechanics. Since he started using the 97" I've seen him produce both crazy spinny backhands and flat bombs. Try taking Nadal's ball that early and so effectively for 5 sets with a 90" at 35.
 
PeterFig said:
"... I'm coming over the backhand on the return much more than I ever have in the past. That's definitively due to the racquet as well with the bigger racquet head size. It allows me to swing a bit freer on the backhand side... " - Roger Federer in interview with Matts Wilander the day before the Aus Open final this year.
Click to expand...
But what does @BreakPoint have to say about the racket head size and its effect on Fed.

WHere is BP anyway ?
 
Attila_the_gorilla said:
It's not simply headsize, but the extra twistweight and stability it has allowed while keeping around the same weight. Made a great difference, rejuvenated his career. No way he'd be hitting those backhands with his old 90.
Click to expand...

Yes, his new racquet likely has quite a significantly higher twistweight which could easily account for him having much more confidence hitting topspin backhands as incredibly early as he does. The skill required to hit a full topspin OHBH so early against Nadal's topspin-laden ball time after time is immense. Even with Federer's talent he benefits from the extra off-centre stability of a 97 compared to a 90 sq in.
 
Attila_the_gorilla said:
It's not simply headsize, but the extra twistweight and stability it has allowed while keeping around the same weight. Made a great difference, rejuvenated his career. No way he'd be hitting those backhands with his old 90.
Click to expand...

Yes, his new racquet likely has quite a significantly higher twistweight which could easily account for him having much more confidence hitting topspin backhands as incredibly early as he does. The skill required to hit a full topspin OHBH so early against Nadal's topspin-laden ball time after time is immense. Even with Federer's talent he benefits from the extra off-centre stability of a 97 compared to a 90 sq in.
 
The larger and stiffer frame has definitely helped with every aspect of his POWER game. The only minus are the control on the slices and dropshots.

You have to give Lubajic a lot of credit here in showing Fed how to strike a backhand using a large stiff frame (pure drive 100sq in).
 
I think the argument about the backhand is finished.

I still think the forehand gets sprayed more with the new racquet and that Roger looks like he's pushing the ball sometimes with it.

The serve is where it's difficult to tell. Roger served 1,000 aces against Roddick in 2009 with the old racquet. I personally feel a smaller head is better for serves. That said, I think an argument can be made that he would not be serving like he is at this age with the 90.
 
Last edited:
xFullCourtTenniSx said:
The only ones I saw were the offensive backhands. And he probably could've done the same with a 90 in his prime with a slight change to the way he hits the ball or his mentality when hitting it. Everything else I've seen him hit just as well, if not better, with the 90. If the 97 was such a miracle racket for him, he would've been winning more majors with it.
Click to expand...
His post match interviews suggest as much as well. His racquet wasn't putting in balls that would have been framed with the 90, but he did miss balls long or wide on shots that would have stayed in had he used the slightly less powerful 90.

Then again, at his age, he probably needs the extra power--the accuracy can be recovered via training.
 
racket is only 1 reason:

1. Federer backhand much better after the break, not the power - bigger racket face size helps
2. Nadal plays with less spin and is moving slower then at his best years, does make it easier to play fast against him
3. Federer moving better, especially his balance at extreme hitting points at the outside of the court
4. May be Federer has learned how to play against Nadal: attack fast to his forehand!!!

If you watch older games between this two, Dimitrov in his SF played like Federer against Nadal 10 years ago! Making the same mistakes he did.
 
PeterFig said:
"... I'm coming over the backhand on the return much more than I ever have in the past. That's definitively due to the racquet as well with the bigger racquet head size. It allows me to swing a bit freer on the backhand side... " - Roger Federer in interview with Matts Wilander the day before the Aus Open final this year.
Click to expand...

And if Roger says it's helped, then it's helped. There really is nothing more to say or theorize about. Heck, I know the difference between my M-Fil 100 and M-Fil 200. It's slight, but there is one and the 200 helps my backhand. The faster one swings the margins for error go down drastically as any error is highly exacerbated due to the forces involved. So yes, 1 cm forgiveness in either direction can have a positive effect, especially in Roger's case where he's historically been so precise.
 
robbo1970 said:
Federer seems to have changed his stroke mechanics on his backhand. I think that has had more of an impact than the racquet. Although those who sell racquets will say differently, but that's their job.

Since 2008, it seems Federer has had two obstacles to overcome, Nadal and injuries. His backhand was always a target for Nadal and that was still evident in the final. So many shots going to the Federer backhand, but when that wasn't proving as successful, there didn't seem to be a plan b.

73 winners to 35 though. There's not many matches when Nadal is on the receiving end of those sorts of stats.
Click to expand...


I think there was a difference in his BH stroke mechanics during the Nadal final. I think he was hitting them with a flatter racket path and more compact follow through. In the past, Federer would sometimes use that type of backhand on a return of serve but he stepped in and took a lot of groundstrokes early with that flatter more compact stroke. He also used the normal stroke with a bit more topspin, steeper racket path upward, and a bigger follow through too. I remember he changed the pace in the 5th set with a loopy topspin BH and Nadal pooped all over it for an unforced error.
 
big ted said:
didn't federer switch in jan. 2014? that would mean he has a winning record against nadal with the new racquet at 2W-1L
Click to expand...


gino said:
Great point mate. Rogi would have likely snagged a major in 2014 or 2015 had he been able to trust his frame at key moments in those finals against Novak. You can't justify a direct correlation between the frame change and his play against Nadal because he was a measly 2-5 against Nadal after his switch to the 97 in 2013...

You could argue he'd be better if he stayed with the PS90 and balanced his schedule from the 2013-2016 time frame. Either way, an epic triumph for Roger and it showed that he truly is the most complete player to ever play our sport. A true inspiration both of these men are. Especially Nadal, handling his defeat with class and grace. The RF97 now has a 1-4 record in major finals. Hopefully Rog can snag one more with it before he sets off into the sunset
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Service Ace
Fed would have probably won number 18 by now had he stuck with the 90.
2
Replies
80
Views
5K
mxmx
mxmx
G
Racquet advice for returning 44 year old
Replies
16
Views
1K
bluegrasser
bluegrasser
tennis_pro
LOL to all of those who claim Sampras wouldn'tve allowed Nadal to dominate him
2
Replies
55
Views
5K
Crazy man
Crazy man
I
Racquet Upgrade from Babolat Evo Drive Tour 21
Replies
0
Views
494
invisible-hand
I
T
Upgrade option from Dunlop HM 200g XL?
Replies
5
Views
607
tennisinvegas
T
Back
Top