Milos Raonic Racquet Specs and More

CopolyX

Hall of Fame
It's because Moya found out Fed's racket is actually a generation 1 Pure Drive painted over.




Ratings aren't determined by how good your groundstrokes look. He could have other massive deficiencies that the video doesn't show (mental toughness, endurance, shot selection, serve, returns, etc). Did he actually say he was a 4.0 though? (Maybe he's sandbagging.)
Actually Fed is using a sponge bob frame, weighted to his specs. Sponge Bob designed it with him specifically in mind. Fed also got a special letter from spongy.
The paint job uses a secret unique spongy paint... so advanced you can use it underwater....
 

xFullCourtTenniSx

Hall of Fame
No. Absolutely not. I'd teach certain parts of his technique, but no, trying to teach someone his full stroke would be a less than stellar approach.


Actually Fed is using a sponge bob frame, weighted to his specs. Sponge Bob designed it with him specifically in mind. Fed also got a special letter from spongy.
The paint job uses a secret unique spongy paint... so advanced you can use it underwater....
LOL Oh God! I don't think I can top this. But did you know, Roger was genetically engineered by Toni Nadal to crush everyone but Rafa? Now this may seem crazy at first, but let me provide you the facts. Were it not for Federer, Nadal would look like another clay court specialist, only good on clay, gets crushed everywhere else by the likes of Blake and Soderling. But then this guy comes and crushes the likes of Blake and Soderling FOR him, so he never has to meet them deep in the draw. Not only that, being the GOAT but being unable to beat one ass-picking dirtballer makes the GOAT status seem questionable. This dirtballer makes the GOAT his personal b*tch on any surface but indoor carpet. Maybe he's better than the GOAT, maybe he's not just a typical clay court specialist and we can ignore the fact that 9 of his 14 majors are at Roland Garros. Toni even taught Rafa the secret Fed self destruct sequence to make Roger blow up on the court mentally and stop playing well. That sequence is now Rafa's standard ritual. Everything from how he places his water bottles, to cleaning the line, to picking his ass, and serving and hitting forehands to Fed's backhand. Fed was only meant to be the GOAT for one reason, so Toni's nephew could destroy him, making Toni look like one of the greatest coaches in tennis. Before anyone asks how Toni did this, he is a certified ninja and geneticist. He snuck into momma-Fed's room and modified Roger while he was still in the early stages of development. It's even in Rafa's biography. It's just hidden. You need to read between the lines, crack the cipher code, watch Inception, beat Ninja Gaiden at highest difficulty, and tell Google to "do a barrel roll". Only then will you learn of Toni's secret plan to rule the world through the Rafael Nadal Tennis Academy.

 

CopolyX

Hall of Fame
LOL Oh God! I don't think I can top this. But did you know, Roger was genetically engineered by Toni Nadal to crush everyone but Rafa? Now this may seem crazy at first, but let me provide you the facts. Were it not for Federer, Nadal would look like another clay court specialist, only good on clay, gets crushed everywhere else by the likes of Blake and Soderling. But then this guy comes and crushes the likes of Blake and Soderling FOR him, so he never has to meet them deep in the draw. Not only that, being the GOAT but being unable to beat one ass-picking dirtballer makes the GOAT status seem questionable. This dirtballer makes the GOAT his personal b*tch on any surface but indoor carpet. Maybe he's better than the GOAT, maybe he's not just a typical clay court specialist and we can ignore the fact that 9 of his 14 majors are at Roland Garros. Toni even taught Rafa the secret Fed self destruct sequence to make Roger blow up on the court mentally and stop playing well. That sequence is now Rafa's standard ritual. Everything from how he places his water bottles, to cleaning the line, to picking his ass, and serving and hitting forehands to Fed's backhand. Fed was only meant to be the GOAT for one reason, so Toni's nephew could destroy him, making Toni look like one of the greatest coaches in tennis. Before anyone asks how Toni did this, he is a certified ninja and geneticist. He snuck into momma-Fed's room and modified Roger while he was still in the early stages of development. It's even in Rafa's biography. It's just hidden. You need to read between the lines, crack the cipher code, watch Inception, beat Ninja Gaiden at highest difficulty, and tell Google to "do a barrel roll". Only then will you learn of Toni's secret plan to rule the world through the Rafael Nadal Tennis Academy.

LOL Oh God! I don't think I can top this. But did you know, Roger was genetically engineered by Toni Nadal to crush everyone but Rafa? Now this may seem crazy at first, but let me provide you the facts. Were it not for Federer, Nadal would look like another clay court specialist, only good on clay, gets crushed everywhere else by the likes of Blake and Soderling. But then this guy comes and crushes the likes of Blake and Soderling FOR him, so he never has to meet them deep in the draw. Not only that, being the GOAT but being unable to beat one ass-picking dirtballer makes the GOAT status seem questionable. This dirtballer makes the GOAT his personal b*tch on any surface but indoor carpet. Maybe he's better than the GOAT, maybe he's not just a typical clay court specialist and we can ignore the fact that 9 of his 14 majors are at Roland Garros. Toni even taught Rafa the secret Fed self destruct sequence to make Roger blow up on the court mentally and stop playing well. That sequence is now Rafa's standard ritual. Everything from how he places his water bottles, to cleaning the line, to picking his ass, and serving and hitting forehands to Fed's backhand. Fed was only meant to be the GOAT for one reason, so Toni's nephew could destroy him, making Toni look like one of the greatest coaches in tennis. Before anyone asks how Toni did this, he is a certified ninja and geneticist. He snuck into momma-Fed's room and modified Roger while he was still in the early stages of development. It's even in Rafa's biography. It's just hidden. You need to read between the lines, crack the cipher code, watch Inception, beat Ninja Gaiden at highest difficulty, and tell Google to "do a barrel roll". Only then will you learn of Toni's secret plan to rule the world through the Rafael Nadal Tennis Academy.

 

Faris

Professional
lol wow! People getting ahead of themselves here. It is especially amusing when 4.0 to 5.0s (at best) tries to suggest his swing is better than a player rated #3 in the world. Take that BS elsewhere man. You can say you dont like long takebacks, whatever, but dont start implying yours is better than Raonics. Thats idiotic at best. And Im NO fan of Raonic at all...
Wait are you saying that your forehand technique is better than Raonic?
I believe he is implying that...
Ok, so...no. Like...no. Not at all. He definitely is a top player because of how effective his forehand is and there's absolutely nothing wrong with his forehand. Sure the grip is extreme, but at the end of the day the takeback is not nearly as important as hitting zone, impact point, etc... Quite frankly I'd much rather teach Milos' takeback than yours.
This!!
 

macattack

Professional
Wait are you saying that your forehand technique is better than Raonic?
I took @Anton to mean that for your average club player his swing is more likely to be effective than one like Raonic's. I could be wrong, of course.


I actually like a long, loopy take back, though. Years ago I kind of re-modeled my forehand off Gonzo, because I found it more comfortable to take that long stroke. My forehand is much more of a weapon now than it was before. But that's just personal preference, I think.


NB: I am in no way implying that I can hit like Gonzo.
 
Last edited:

Anton

Legend
Please feel free to break down all the technical issues you see here. I'll wait.
Umm the rediculous and unnecessary high take back that is slow and hard to balance compared to quick, compact take back that Fed and Nadal use
 

haqq777

Legend
I took @Anton to mean that for your average club player his swing is more likely to be effective than one like Raonic's. I could be wrong, of course.


I actually like a long, loopy take back, though. Years ago I kind of re-modeled my forehand off Gonzo, because I found it more comfortable to take that long stroke. My forehand is much more of a weapon now than it was before. But that's just personal preference, I think.


NB: I am in no way implying that I can hit like Gonzo.
Gonzo had a beast of a forehand too. Absolutely crushed it. Saw him live once and was in awe. I still think he hit harder than even Delpo and that is saying something. Both players - by the way - with high and long takebacks.

Gonzo's (screen grab from your vid):


Delpo's:


As for the debate on take back, both of the above forehands are pretty effective forehands and can be called weapons. Both high and long take backs. Not sure what the problem is here.

Umm the rediculous and unnecessary high take back that is slow and hard to balance compared to quick, compact take back that Fed and Nadal use
Barometer for measuring a solid forehand is not how similar it is to Federer or Nadal. It is the success of the shot itself. You could make a case that Fedal are more successful but that is more due to their overall game than their respective forehands alone.

And if you are referring to club players emulating these long take back style forehands, nothing wrong in that either. Some of the club level players I have seen and played with have long and high takebacks and they can smack the hell out a ball and use their forehand as a weapon effectively. My $0.02.
 
Last edited:
How about Federer's take back, would you teach that? :rolleyes:
The high take back Raonic has is not deficient at all. It's clearly working at the highest level. Teaching exact copies of pros strokes is never a recipe for success. Everyone needs to find the technique that works for them. No ones forehand has perfect technique, including yours.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Take it from somebody who coaches, the take back isn't really an/the issue. It's more of an unconscious thing if anything. What does matter is the acceleration point, so where the racquet actually starts accelerating.
 

Anton

Legend
Gonzo had a beast of a forehand too. Absolutely crushed it. Saw him live once and was in awe. I still think he hit harder than even Delpo and that is saying something. Both players - by the way - with high and long takebacks.

Gonzo's (screen grab from your vid):


Delpo's:


As for the debate on take back, both of the above forehands are pretty effective forehands and can be called weapons. Both high and long take backs. Not sure what the problem is here.



Barometer for measuring a solid forehand is not how similar it is to Federer or Nadal. It is the success of the shot itself. You could make a case that Fedal are more successful but that is more due to their overall game than their respective forehands alone.

And if you are referring to club players emulating these long take back style forehands, nothing wrong in that either. Some of the club level players I have seen and played with have long and high takebacks and they can smack the hell out a ball and use their forehand as a weapon effectively. My $0.02.
Fedal is considered to have to best forehands of all time. Very specifically. Their game in many ways gets structured around dictating games with that stroke.
 

haqq777

Legend
Fedal is considered to have to best forehands of all time. Very specifically. Their game in many ways gets structured around dictating games with that stroke.
Very subjective. Do I think they have great forehands? Off course. But you are over looking Federer and Nadal's entire game including net play, backhands, volleys and a plethora of other strokes, and suggesting their game is 'structured' around one stroke - the forehand - which is absolutely not the case. They would not have achieved what they have if they just relied on their forehands alone. I call this argument as grasping for straws.

Have also yet to hear how you think world number 3 ranked player has a flawed technique or why it would be better for him to keep it compact. Instead all we have here is a shoddy argument at best claiming high take back is ridiculous, unnecessary, slow and hard to balance - all without much to show for. I will leave it at that.
 
Last edited:

Faris

Professional
Very subjective. Do I think they have great forehands? Off course. But you are over looking Federer and Nadal's entire game including net play, backhands, volleys and a plethora of other strokes, and suggesting their game is 'structured' around one stroke - the forehand - which is absolutely not the case. They would not have achieved what they have if they just relied on their forehands alone. I call this argument as grasping for straws.

Have also yet to hear how you think world number 3 ranked player has a flawed technique or why it would be better for him to keep it compact. Instead all we have here is a shoddy argument at best claiming high take back is ridiculous, unnecessary, slow and hard to balance - all without much to show for. I will leave it at that.
Scroll up and read all his comments on this thread..Dude thinks his forehand technique is better than Raonic's, lol. A joke. I would just let him be in his own world.
 

Anton

Legend
Very subjective. Do I think they have great forehands? Off course. But you are over looking Federer and Nadal's entire game including net play, backhands, volleys and a plethora of other strokes, and suggesting their game is 'structured' around one stroke - the forehand - which is absolutely not the case. They would not have achieved what they have if they just relied on their forehands alone. I call this argument as grasping for straws.

Have also yet to hear how you think world number 3 ranked player has a flawed technique or why it would be better for him to keep it compact. Instead all we have here is a shoddy argument at best claiming high take back is ridiculous, unnecessary, slow and hard to balance - all without much to show for. I will leave it at that.
How? Have you seen his legs and serve?

Best forehands in the game to show for effectiveness of compact take back. It makes theoretical sense, it looks right and it is well proven in competition. That's why today it is tough to find any upcoming juniors that DON'T hit that way.
 

haqq777

Legend
How? Have you seen his legs and serve?

I have the best forehands in the game to show for effectiveness of compact take back.

It makes theoretical sense, it looks right and it is well proven in competition. That's why today it is tough to find any upcoming juniors that DON'T hit that way.
1. What do you mean by if I have looked at his legs? As for serve, last I checked Raonic had a decently effective serve. Either way, serve alone does not take you to the top. If that was the case no one would be able to take top spots from Dr. Ivo or Isner. But guess what, they are not even ranked in the top 20. Two of the biggest servers out there. It is not any one stroke. It is the overall game. Coming back to forehands, Delpo also has a high/long take back. Gonzo had one too. Same for James Blake who hit pretty big. Aggasi, Sampras as well among many other pros. All very effective and well-revered. Your theory that long or high take back is somehow bad does not hold water. The mere fact that Raonic is ranked number 3 in the world should be enough of an answer for you. You can dislike his forehand all you want for aesthetic purposes (I don't think it looks pretty either) but you are not fooling anyone by calling his forehand any less effective. He knows how to make it into an effective weapon. And that is what matters more than the stroke looking pretty.

2. Read what I wrote above one more time. Federer and Nadal have not been effective because of their forehands alone. Their games have other facets/strokes as well which made them what they are. Fedal have awesome forehands but there are many more contenders for better forehands as well. I think Delpos is better and more potent a weapon than both Federer or Nadal. Some would make a case for Gonzo or Blake as well. Verdasco hits a pretty big and all out FH too when he is on. So do a bunch of other people. What you presented as 'show for effectiveness of a compact swing' is actually more of an overall game than forehand alone. Nadal's foot speed at his peak was second to none. His ability to retrieve everything was mind boggling. Federer was/is like a magician with sublime touch and feel and movement. Stop presenting as if these two were/are just all forehand.

3. You clearly have not played tennis at the college or open level. If you had, you would know there are plenty - I repeat plenty - of people out there with long/high take backs who can smack the ball around and use their forehand as a weapon. You are also overlooking the fact that youngsters try to emulate their favorite players as well and Fedal are pretty damn popular. You might have seen more juniors with Fedal like strokes for that reason as well and not necessarily because compact strokes are more effective than longer ones.
 
Last edited:

Anton

Legend
^I've played tennis on college level....its where I started this sport :) And yes, there are all kinds of of ugly strokes at all levels except the very top because you can win there just on great movement and consistency.

Raonic does not have "decently effective serve", that is clear downplaying. His serve is generally considered third best in the world right now, behind only Ivo and Isner. He does this with a shorter body on very strong legs, which gives him much greater baseliner potential than center of gravity challenged Ivo and Isner.

Del Potro does not have a forehand like Raonic. The lengh of his take back is pretty much in-between Raonic and Federer and unlike double-bend Raonic uses Delpo hits on straight arm contact like Fedal.

 

haqq777

Legend
^I've played tennis on college level....its where I started this sport :) And yes, there are all kinds of of ugly strokes at all levels except the very top because you can win there just on great movement and consistency.
Great. So you then have seen all kinds of strokes if you have played college tennis (I'm a former Div II player myself). Raonic's forehand is certainly not an outliar. In fact, he is world number 3 and at almost the top of the sport, if you may. I like to think his forehand contributed a little bit? :)

Raonic does not have "decently effective serve", that is clear downplaying. His serve is generally considered third best in the world right now, behind only Ivo and Isner. He does this with a shorter body on very strong legs, which gives him much greater baseliner potential than center of gravity challenged Ivo and Isner.
Decently effective serve was me being a little sarcastic because what I took from your comment, you were implying he came to where he is at using his serve. I think we all know how well Raonic serves (the fact that I mentioned Isner and Ivo should have given that away). Only takes a minute to Google and see too. The point however I have been making in the last 3-4 posts is that no one gets to the upper echelon of the sport by just one attribute; it is a combination of things. And how well and effectively one executes them. You really think world number 3 got to that spot by a flawed forehand and subpar technique?

Del Potro does not have a forehand like Raonic. The lengh of his take back is pretty much in-between Raonic and Federer and unlike double-bend Raonic uses Delpo hits on straight arm contact like Fedal.
We are not talking about straight arm or arm bend forehand. We are talking about take-back and back swing here. Delpotro has a long and high back swing (making a long loop behind his shoulder before ball contact) and I think that is what you have an issue with when it comes to Raonic, is it not? Look at 00:25 onwards your video you posted. Delpotro's forehand is not compact from any stretch of imagination. Much more similar to Raonic than Federer, if we are being honest.


^^ Watch at 3:12 and then 3:19 onwards when Delpo is near the camera. Look at his take back and back swing.


^^ For slo-mo this is a much angle for you to see his forehand.
 
Last edited:

robbo1970

Hall of Fame
Raonic has certainly improved during 2016.

His movement has got better (that said, I always thought it was pretty poor before, so it couldn't have got worse really).

For his size, I think he should dominate the net more. He's a big guy with a large wing span and should make himself harder to pass and also needs to improve his volleying. Watching some of games over the weekend, his volleying was awful for a pro.

I think he will threaten this year, but winning a major is a different matter.
 
Top