Is racquet technology really responsible for the increased power of today's game?

[monologuist]

I was watching some of the Madrid Masters today : Mathieu vs. Verdasco, and the commentators mentioned how guys are hitting clean winners from the baseline these days, and how it is b/c of racquet technology. Of course, this is the kind of comment that I've grown accustomed to hearing from the likes of P.Mac and Drysdale, and granted, there is some truth to it, when it comes to pros who are wielding racquets like Babolats, but in this particular match, it appeared that both players were using realtively low-powered "traditional player's frames" : Mathieu with either an LM Prestige MP or similar Head paintjob, and Verdasco with either a Tecnifibre 315 or 325 or similar paintjob. Verdasco, especially, has amazing power on his forehand, and I can imagine him hitting clean winners from the backcourt using just about anything. I think the tenedency is for ex-players from the pre-Babolat era to attribute the increased power and speed of today's game to equipment technology rather than acknowledge that today's athletes are actually physically stronger, more explosive, or have adopted techniques that allow them to hit with greater pace and accuracy than previous eras...question is, are they just ill-informed or ignorant about the kind of racquets guys are using on tour these days or is about their egos attempting to preserve the legacy of previous eras?

Looking at some of the top "power" players of today's game, I can think of several who seem to be using racquet that are just as heavy and low-powered and demanding as players of 20 years ago were using. Federer, Safin, Blake, J.J., Berdych, Verdasco, are all guys who can hit clean winners from the backcourt with ease, and all of them use relatively traditional, heavy, low-powered racquets. There are others, like Nadal, Roddick, Ljubicic, and several claycourters who use "modern" racquets, and you could argue that they have the technology edge helping their game, but this is by no means the dominating trend.

If guys like Safin and Federer are seemingly able to hit winners from anywhere on the court using racquets that are no different than what champions of 20 years ago were using (Safin is bascically using a Prestige mid and Fed is using something along the lines of a Pro Staff 6.0), and racquet technology is not credited for their ability to do so, what should be credited?

BTW,I already posted this in the Pro's forums, since there is a different pool of people who hang around there...

 

[Cavaleer]

Monolinguist, I copied my reply to your post in the other forum.

As I see it, two events happened in the 80s that fundamentally changed the game: 1)Racquet materials and 2) Borg's exclusive and devastating use of topspin and western grip.

The racquets became stiffer and more powerful than wood, although many were as heavy as wood, and Borg's introduction of topsin allowed an entirely new series of strokes and footwork (think open-stance) to develop. To see the difference you only need to watch a pre-Borg player, say Ashe or Connors, to see my point. Their footwork, stance, hips and shoulders are very different from today's players, all because of their grip. The S&V game, however, has not benefitted from these changes because control and precision are more valuable than power.

These two developments combined to gradually give us the game we have today. Even wood-racquet players like Sampras and Lendl adapted their games to take advantage of these changes. Sampras, Graf, along with Agassi and Courier to a lesser degree, maximized all of the above by being stronger and better conditioned. I'm sure others did as well but these come to mind immediately.

The racquet materials combined with topspin and open-stance actually allow smaller players to generate amounts of pace they would never be able to generate with wood or even early graphite racquets.

Furthermore, there's no one on tour today who's as muscular as Rod Laver, or faster or better conditioned than Borg. Tennis is not like the NBA or the NFL where size and speed are priceless. In tennis, almost anyone can generate pace with today's racquets and footwork.

I would also argue that the women's game has benefitted more than the men's from the newer racquets and the open stance, even though many of them use semi-western/eastern grips, like Davenport, Pierce and many Russians.

Please correct my errors or oversights, especially if someone else was using a western-grip, exclusive topspin game before Borg.

 

[drak]

Combo of many things:

1. Racket technology contributes
2. Superior athletes in general in tennis almost all doing strength training
3. New hitting techniques (grips/stance etc)

The synergy of these factors all contribute to more power in the game.

Drak

 

[tom4ny]

i agree with all of you guys but i do wonder what racket borg would use today considering his game style and if he were around now as a youngin'.

however i would consider the Head LM Prestige and TF tflights modern sticks. they might be designed to be lower powered and even paintjobs from slightly older models, but they are midplus' and are made using modern materials with modern techniques.

 

[Cavaleer]

Combo of many things:

1. Racket technology contributes
2. Superior athletes in general in tennis almost all doing strength training
3. New hitting techniques (grips/stance etc)

The synergy of these factors all contribute to more power in the game.

Drak

From top to bottom, yes the men and women are in better shape but the elite players today aren't better athletes than 30 years ago. They may be in better cardiovascular shape but the quality of athleticism is no better.

 

[Cavaleer]

i agree with all of you guys but i do wonder what racket borg would use today considering his game style and if he were around now as a youngin'.

however i would consider the Head LM Prestige and TF tflights modern sticks. they might be designed to be lower powered and even paintjobs from slightly older models, but they are midplus' and are made using modern materials with modern techniques.

That is an interesting question because there aren't any racquets that combine the head-size, weight, and grip length of his gorgeous Donnays.

My first guess would be an nCode 6.1 95 18X20 but the heads is so much bigger than the Donnay. Does Yonex still make that 88'' frame?

 

[Midlife crisis]

Wood rackets are pretty powerful. If you hit with one back to back with your regular racket, and you hit cleanly on the sweetspot of a wood racket, the ball really does fly. What I think has happened though is that rackets have much larger sweetspots and it allows players to swing much harder and less accurately and still get the ball near where they're aiming.

When I absolutely hit a ball as hard as I can with my granny stick, I might be able to get it up to 115 MPH, and do so pretty consistently. If I try to do so with a wood racket, it might go 105 MPH, but I only hit it sweet one time out of ten. There's less than a 10% difference in ball speed when hitting the center of the sweet spot, but there's only maybe a 10% chance that I'll actually hit the ball there with a wood racket when swinging that hard.

 

[doriancito]

i have some factors:

1.Racquet frame felt
2.string tension
3.string type
4.swing style
5.hitting style/technique

 

[tom4ny]

wood simply does not have the strength to weight ratio of today's modern materials. that is why you see so many things cast with some type of carbon fiber and/or polyurethane.

 

[BreakPoint]

Copied from my post under the same exact thread in the Pro Player forum:

Strings and tension make a big difference. The advent of Luxilon strings allows pros to hit the ball harder while still keeping the ball in the court. Roman Prokes of ****, as well as many TV commentators talk about this all the time. Federer may use a similar racquet to what Sampras used, but he uses a Luxilon hybrid which allows him to string at much lower tensions (52 lbs) and hit the ball harder while still keeping the ball in the court. Sampras had to string in the 70's lbs with his full gut job to control the ball and keep it in the court. If he tried to hit even harder or lowered his tension to gain more power, the ball would sail long. Thus, I think today's poly strings and lower tensions have a lot to do with why many pros seem to be able to hit the ball harder than before. Pros in the past can hit the ball just as hard, too, but the ball wouldn't stay in the court with their full gut stringjobs. Today's pros can hit hard while keeping the ball in at the same time, thanks to poly and lower tensions.

 

[Lambsscroll]

Combo of many things:

1. Racket technology contributes
2. Superior athletes in general in tennis almost all doing strength training
3. New hitting techniques (grips/stance etc)

The synergy of these factors all contribute to more power in the game.

Drak

Yep!