Topspin Shot
Legend
Really? When everyone used wood racquets strung with gut and they set the court dimensions and net height accordingly, who did it favor?
You apparently, or you wouldn't be running your mouth off about it.
Really? When everyone used wood racquets strung with gut and they set the court dimensions and net height accordingly, who did it favor?
Really? I was playing tennis back in 1870? :???:You apparently, or you wouldn't be running your mouth off about it.
Hitting the ball as hard as you can with as much topspin as possible over and over is NOT a strategy. You don't need to have a brain to do that. That's NOT point construction nor is it trying to out-smart your opponent. Tennis was originally designed to be a game of chess on a big board. That's why the court size and net height were set as they are.Those who say tennis today consists of mindless ball bashing don't know much about strategy. There is still strategy, even if you don't know what it is.
Really? I was playing tennis back in 1870? :???:
Hitting the ball as hard as you can with as much topspin as possible over and over is NOT a strategy. You don't need to have a brain to do that. That's NOT point construction nor is it trying to out-smart your opponent. Tennis was originally designed to be a game of chess on a big board. That's why the court size and net height were set as they are.
Really? When everyone used wood racquets strung with gut and they set the court dimensions and net height accordingly, who did it favor?
Now that the racquets and strings have completely changed, why haven't the the court dimensions and net height also changed? They should be set accordingly to the current equipment being used. If they don't want to do that, then limit the head size back to 65 sq. in. and ban poly strings. Because those were the equipment being used when they originally set the current court dimensions and net height.
Yes really. You will be asking may top players to stop their strategies and play like a few others.
If you can't see that there is no point in debating you any longer. Good day!
And everyone using wood racquets and gut strings favors no one, just like when they set the size of the court and the height of the net. The size of the court and the height of the net was NOT set AFTER Babolat racquets and poly strings started being used. Which is why they now need to be revised to keep up with the times.Lol. I was referring to wood rackets and gut strings in general.
Sure, when was the last time you heard any current WTA player described as a "genius"?You really do know nothing about baseline tennis.
You'll be happy to know there's much more going on than that. Maybe one day when you shed your obviously nostalgic bias, you'll see that.Hitting the ball as hard as you can with as much topspin as possible over and over is NOT a strategy. You don't need to have a brain to do that. That's NOT point construction nor is it trying to out-smart your opponent.
No, there isn't. I know because I play against some players who play like that. No variety whatsoever. They never come to the net unless you drop shot them. They never serve and volley. They never chip and charge. They just hit the same topspin shot over and over ad naseum and hope you miss. You can be brain dead and still play like that. Oh, and they even admit to me that they would be nothing without their big powerful racquet and poly strings.You'll be happy to know there's much more going on than that. Maybe one day when you shed your obviously nostalgic bias, you'll see that.
And everyone using wood racquets and gut strings favors no one, just like when they set the size of the court and the height of the net. The size of the court and the height of the net was NOT set AFTER Babolat racquets and poly strings started being used. Which is why they now need to be revised to keep up with the times.
Sure, when was the last time you heard any current WTA player described as a "genius"?
No, there isn't. I know because I play against some players who play like that. No variety whatsoever. They never come to the net unless you drop shot them. They never serve and volley. They never chip and charge. They just hit the same topspin shot over and over ad naseum and hope you miss. You can be brain dead and still play like that. Oh, and they even admit to me that they would be nothing without their big powerful racquet and poly strings.
And everyone using wood racquets and gut strings favors no one, just like when they set the size of the court and the height of the net. The size of the court and the height of the net was NOT set AFTER Babolat racquets and poly strings started being used. Which is why they now need to be revised to keep up with the times.
Sure, when was the last time you heard any current WTA player described as a "genius"?
What, you mean your little pick up tennis opponents aren't as good as the pros? Shocking revelations don't get more shocking than this!No, there isn't. I know because I play against some players who play like that. No variety whatsoever. They never come to the net unless you drop shot them. They never serve and volley. They never chip and charge. They just hit the same topspin shot over and over ad naseum and hope you miss. You can be brain dead and still play like that. Oh, and they even admit to me that they would be nothing without their big powerful racquet and poly strings.
So you mean some time around 1981 when Polystar released their first polyester string or 1988 when Pro Kennex released the precursor to the Pure Drive six years later, the Destiny?
I had some Pro Kennex Bronze Aces earlier than that, open string pattern, thickish beam, total cannons..
Don't respond to BP, it's pointless, see if you can find his thread about Sam Stosur if you don't believe me, it's amazing!
in fact, here, look on in awe http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=330720&highlight=Stosur
But if he was really better than me, shouldn't he be able to beat me with a wood racquet? I've beaten guys using modern 100 sq. in. modern racquets before with my 65 sq. in. wood racquet. That's how I knew I was the better player, because it was way harder for me to keep the ball in play or to win points than it was for him.
I had some Pro Kennex Bronze Aces earlier than that, open string pattern, thickish beam, total cannons..
Don't respond to BP, it's pointless, see if you can find his thread about Sam Stosur if you don't believe me, it's amazing!
in fact, here, look on in awe http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=330720&highlight=Stosur
Actually, just remembered I had this photo. This is my racket, got it as a gift.
Why don't we go all the way, leather grips are too technologically advanced and take away from the true nature of the sport. They ruin the game we love!!! Ban leather grips as well!!!
I mean who doesn't love a 380gram racket flying out of the hands of a sweaty overweight weekend warrior, frisbee'ing across the net, locked on right at your head. It'll make tennis exciting. F%$k overgrips as well, too much technology, sawdust too and rosin bags. That's so 1970's! 1930's is where its at!!
As a chef, I say ban sous-vide and ban convection ovens. Use only fire.
You must also only be able to start that fire rubbing two sticks together, or banging two rocks against each other. Otherwise you're not a true chef and rely too much on technology!!
I had some Pro Kennex Bronze Aces earlier than that, open string pattern, thickish beam, total cannons..
Don't respond to BP, it's pointless, see if you can find his thread about Sam Stosur if you don't believe me, it's amazing!
in fact, here, look on in awe http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=330720&highlight=Stosur
Wait, if you beat Federer in tennis using a badminton racquet, you're not going to claim that you're the better player?You were not the better player. You were the sore loser.
If I use a badminton racquet to play against Federer, I'm not going to claim I'm the better player because it's way harder for me to keep the ball in play or to win points. Blaming equipment reeks of excuses.
If you have to ask, you must be a baseline basher. Not surprising for someone who chose the screen name - "Topspin Shot". It takes brains to play chess or tennis as you try to out-think your opponent. Hitting the ball with topspin as hard as you can from the baseline all day long takes zero brains. What is there to think about? Should I hit this ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin or should I hit the next ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin?By your logic, everyone using graphite rackets and poly/hybrid strings favors no one except those fools who do nothing but complain about it.
And what on Earth does genius have to do with anything? Wait, I don't want to know. Whatever it is, a facepalm is imminent.
I mean over 100 years earlier when they settled on the official size of the court and the height of the net. It hasn't changed since then despite the fact that the racquets and strings have changed drastically since then. It's illogical.So you mean some time around 1981 when Polystar released their first polyester string or 1988 when Pro Kennex released the precursor to the Pure Drive six years later, the Destiny?
I mean over 100 years earlier when they settled on the official size of the court and the height of the net. It hasn't changed since then despite the fact that the racquets and strings have changed drastically since then. It's illogical.
Nah...only in the past 10 years or so have we seen the massive topspin produced by Babolat-type racquets and poly strings. Sampras and Edberg were still playing classic style tennis with small graphite racquets and gut strings. It's the modern big-headed racquets strung with poly that effectively makes the court play bigger and the net lower. That's why we need to shrink the size of the court and raise the height of the net to even it back out. Either that or ban these types of racquets and strings, just like they banned spaghetti strings back in the 70's.Then they should also have changed it with the introduction of graphite and fiber inlays in wooden racquets.
If you have to ask, you must be a baseline basher. Not surprising for someone who chose the screen name - "Topspin Shot". It takes brains to play chess or tennis as you try to out-think your opponent. Hitting the ball with topspin as hard as you can from the baseline all day long takes zero brains. What is there to think about? Should I hit this ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin or should I hit the next ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin?
You're right. You chose the name - "Topspin Shot" because you are a pure serve and volleyer who uses a continental forehand and hits only underspin on every shot off of both sides, right? :shock:Nah, I'm way smarter than you. For one, I don't make assumptions about someone's username. You can start there.
Yes, I get lots of break points on my opponents whenever I play. That's why I chose the name.same reason you chose the name Breakpoint, right?
Nah...only in the past 10 years or so have we seen the massive topspin produced by Babolat-type racquets and poly strings. Sampras and Edberg were still playing classic style tennis with small graphite racquets and gut strings. It's the modern big-headed racquets strung with poly that effectively makes the court play bigger and the net lower. That's why we need to shrink the size of the court and raise the height of the net to even it back out. Either that or ban these types of racquets and strings, just like they banned spaghetti strings back in the 70's.
You're right. You chose the name - "Topspin Shot" because you are a pure serve and volleyer who uses a continental forehand and hits only underspin on every shot off of both sides, right? :shock:
So you just admitted that it was because of his Midplus Aero Pro Drive than he beat me? Meaning that if were both using wood racquets, he couldn't do the same thing? Thus, I didn't lose to him, I lost to his big, powerful racquet that requires minimal skill and talent to use. Big deal. He wasn't the better player, he just used the better racquet.
Oh, and tennis is the U.S. was way more popular back when there were 2 ball rallies than it today with the mind-numbing rallies that never seem to end, thereby putting spectators to sleep.
http://www.tennis.com/gear/2015/01/...are-so-powerful-right-now/53795/#.VMZMIf7F_mc
Spain's Feliciano Lopez says more players on tour are now producing massive first serves. Rafael Nadal and Bernard Tomic also mentioned during the week that there are some players whose performances are purely dictated by huge first serves and nothing else.
“You see the average of the players, is between 185 and 180 [KMH],” said Lopez, who reached the fourth round of the Australian Open. “Everybody became stronger now in the game. Everybody serves huge. Everybody hits the ball with a lot of power. The racquets are so powerful right now.
Feliciano is using a modern racquet, too (Juice PJ, not sure what's under the paint). How come others using the same technology he has access to are benefiting from it, but he's not and is complaining about it?
Honestly, Federer was the only player--until switching to the RF97--who had the right to complain about that.
No, it's because they know if every batter who stepped up to the plate hit a home run, the spectators would be bored to tears.
So college baseball pitchers don't like to keep their heads on? Nobody watches college baseball so they don't have to worry about losing spectators and revenue.
It sounds like a complaint to me coming right after his loss.I'm not sure Lopez is complaining, I think he's merely stating a fact that modern racquets give players easier access to power, particularly on their serves.
And I'm not sure Federer had the right complain, he wasn't being forced to use the 90, it was his choice. He could have switched to a larger racquet at any time and Wilson would no doubt have made him anything he wanted.
It sounds like a complaint to me coming right after his loss.
Respectfully agree to disagree.
Sure, results will change. And once 1 or 2 players start winning majors, they may rack up some nice totals. But ticket sales and TV viewership will take a huge hit when the Big 3 leave. Big stars don't become massively popular by wins alone; no way Fed would be as popular if he didn't have the style and grace to go with the 17 majors, 1000 wins, etc. Nadal - the huge FH, the fight for every point attitude, the muscles, the looks.
But again, no way the game should attempt to make any equipment changes; it's not F1 where the wealthy teams can get a huge advantage by pouring billions into R&D. Every player can use the same sticks and strings; the winner is still the guy who can hit the shots under pressure.
No wonder you hate tennis, you're missing half the game if all this is all you can see. There's much more to it.If you have to ask, you must be a baseline basher. Not surprising for someone who chose the screen name - "Topspin Shot". It takes brains to play chess or tennis as you try to out-think your opponent. Hitting the ball with topspin as hard as you can from the baseline all day long takes zero brains. What is there to think about? Should I hit this ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin or should I hit the next ball from the baseline as hard as I can with topspin?