NTRP vs. racquet choices

[joohan]

Hello all,

I've been wondering about one thing ever since I've started to read this forums. I see a lot of members discussing racquets and all kind of stuff ad nauseam while their NTRP rating is, say, 2.5 which is by definition:

"This player is learning to judge where the ball is going when receiving the ball, although movement and recovery are not in sync. Can sustain a rally of slow pace with other players of similar ability and is beginning to develop strokes. This player is becoming more familiar with the basic positions for singles and doubles. This player is ready to play social matches, leagues and low-level tournaments.

Potential limitations: grip weaknesses; not attempting full swing on serve; inconsistent toss on serve; limited transitions to net."

Frankly, I find it a bit shocking and borderline hilarious that 2.5 - 3.5 players discuss every tiny bit of gear, even custom made racquets with almost seductive confidence/self assurance.

...

More to the point:

Who evaluates players with NTRP ratings ? Is that a club thing or what ? How accurate are NTRP rating descriptions because if a 2.5 player "can sustain a rally of slow pace with other players of similar ability and is beginning to develop strokes" discusses various frames on lots of threads, it changes credibility of this forum considerably.

Other thing - a lot of people here are 5.0 (edit: or at least say they are...) almost without any previous tennis background(meaning they've picked up tennis at college or so...) while a lot of former college/junior players (edit: playing from early childhood) rate at 4.0 - 4.5.

Strictly according to the definition, I should be 5.0 - 5.5 after some 5 years of playing tennis.

...

Might be considered as a spam in "racquet section" so here is my question:

What types of racquets are generally used at the lower echelons of NTRP rating (up to 3.5) ?

 

[n8dawg6]

100 sq in, 300 g/10.6 oz, 310-320 SW racquets.

 

[topspn]

Gosh, you bring up so much stuff. A 2.5-3.5 player can say whatever he wants about their racquet experience. You as a more advanced player need to take that into account and understand it is said from their perspective of a more limited playing ability. NTRP ratings could be self rated, coach/pro rated or computer rated from match records (most meaningful probably if pretty active in USTA matches).

Anyone who says they are 4.5 or higher and who have not started as kids (perhaps a bit of a hiatus even for a few years) probably is not that level no matter what they think of their game. It is rare for someone who learns the game in their 30s or 40s to ever get to a 4.5 level. Players who don't have a deep background tend to overrate themselves while good players who started early in tennis tend to have a more realistic sense of where their current game is.

3.5 NTRP most racquets are generally tweener category i.e. pure drive, aero pro although in all honesty many division one players use them too.

 

[joohan]

Gosh, you bring up so much stuff. A 2.5-3.5 player can say whatever he wants about their racquet experience. You as a more advanced player need to take that into account and understand it is said from their perspective of a more limited playing ability. NTRP ratings could be self rated, coach/pro rated or computer rated from match records (most meaningful probably if pretty active in USTA matches).

Anyone who says they are 4.5 or higher and who have not started as kids (perhaps a bit of a hiatus even for a few years) probably is not that level no matter what they think of their game. It is rare for someone who learns the game in their 30s or 40s to ever get to a 4.5 level. Players who don't have a deep background tend to overrate themselves while good players who started early in tennis tend to have a more realistic sense of where their current game is.

3.5 NTRP most racquets are generally tweener category i.e. pure drive, aero pro although in all honesty many division one players use them too.

Thanks. As I don't have any tennis background and I'm not familiar with the NTRP rating system and its implementation in real-life environment, its only logical I'm looking at it from strictly definitional point of view. You made it much clearer. Thanks.

I was also wondering about how accurate those descriptions are. Funny thing - there is NOT A WORD about stroke/overall technique as such. Of course you have much better chance of having "dependable strokes, including directional control, depth and the ability to alter distance of shots on both forehand and backhand sides during moderately paced play, plus the ability to use lobs, overheads, approach shots, and volleys with more success..." with good foundations/technique but its not impossible , as per definition, to achieve particular level without it. Fascinating.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

FWIW I find the racquet obsession weird and am not too sure how productive it is in terms of developing one's game. But that's why I don't post much in the racquet section. Just think of it as something similar to people's fascination with fancy cars, watches, jewelry, mobile phones, etc. I am not saying it's something people shouldn't invest time in to make their decision. But...I have seen my coaches hit great shots with ultra light racquets. I mean even sub-Babolat Drive level, these are battered beaten up retail racquets. So until you develop a steady game, it's not a priority imo. But hey, geek over racquets to your heart's content as it's a free world.

 

[topspn]

Thanks. As I don't have any tennis background and I'm not familiar with the NTRP rating system and its implementation in real-life environment, its only logical I'm looking at it from strictly definitional point of view. You made it much clearer. Thanks.

I was also wondering about how accurate those descriptions are. Funny thing - there is NOT A WORD about stroke/overall technique as such. Of course you have much better chance of having "dependable strokes, including directional control, depth and the ability to alter distance of shots on both forehand and backhand sides during moderately paced play, plus the ability to use lobs, overheads, approach shots, and volleys with more success..." with good foundations/technique but its not impossible , as per definition, to achieve particular level without it. Fascinating.

Well, you are arriving at conclusions that many who play USTA already know. NTRP ratings is not an exact science by any stretch. They are guidelines and even then not the most thorough. So towards your point there are many skill sets in the game to become an effective player. Just to give you an idea, probably the best measure for players is their ability to effectively compete at 4.5 level or higher in USTA tournaments and leagues. Internal club leagues don't mean much sometimes with many players who sign up for higher leagues although their game is not developed for it.

 

[weelie]

Gear over practice is a phenomenon not restricted to this forum or sport. Internet is full of specifications and reviews. As a kid in the 80s, I knew there were metal, wood and grafite composite racquet of two sizes. I got the racket strung with what the store had at varying tensions. I knew nothing about stiffness ratings, measuring swingweights, etc and likely missed 90% of the new rackets coming to market or at least read no reviews of them. It was like tennis mag once a month...if you were lucky!

 

[joohan]

Gear over practice is a phenomenon not restricted to this forum or sport. Internet is full of specifications and reviews. As a kid in the 80s, I knew there were metal, wood and grafite composite racquet of two sizes. I got the racket strung with what the store had at varying tensions. I knew nothing about stiffness ratings, measuring swingweights, etc and likely missed 90% of the new rackets coming to market or at least read no reviews of them. It was like tennis mag once a month...if you were lucky!

I hear you. I played football throughout my childhood/adolescence and a pinnacle of gear we were looking up to was kangaroo leather cleats. I mean, I like reading TT forum. Its like window-shopping for my brain and it saves me a lot of money.

 

[Muppet]

I have a hard time rating myself. I haven't played in a league or tournament, but I started playing socially in 1986. I live in New England and I can't afford to play between October and April. Without the sport as a constant in my life, I haven't been particularly dedicated to it. But I've kept up with the sport's knowledge and when I've played I have implemented new techniques into my game.

So here I sit at 3.0. I have a relative depth of knowledge about the sport that doesn't match my skill level. When I'm not nursing a nigling injury, I usually play once a week. Half of what the NTRP rating says has me at 4.0 while the other half places me at 3.0. And I have a suspicion that the austere attitude of my region judges pretty tough on the scale.

Anyways, I have a lot to learn and a lot to share. Talk Tennis gives me a place to do both. But I tend to think being at a low level does fuel my interest in "new information." Compensation maybe? It doesn't make the advice I share any less legitimate.

 

[joohan]

I have a hard time rating myself. I haven't played in a league or tournament, but I started playing socially in 1986. I live in New England and I can't afford to play between October and April. Without the sport as a constant in my life, I haven't been particularly dedicated to it. But I've kept up with the sport's knowledge and when I've played I have implemented new techniques into my game.

So here I sit at 3.0. I have a relative depth of knowledge about the sport that doesn't match my skill level. When I'm not nursing a nigling injury, I usually play once a week. Half of what the NTRP rating says has me at 4.0 while the other half places me at 3.0. And I have a suspicion that the austere attitude of my region judges pretty tough on the scale.

Anyways, I have a lot to learn and a lot to share. Talk Tennis gives me a place to do both. But I tend to think being at a low level does fuel my interest in "new information." Compensation maybe? It doesn't make the advice I share any less legitimate.

Its not about legitimacy of anyones advice, I get that. I'm only fascinated by the fact that a lot of lower level players have such extended experiences with various frames, or so it would seem, while they would be better off concentrating on other things than gear. But I get that too...I guess. I play tennis for fun and my "rating" is irrelevant to me, I just like to get better. I respect other peoples hobbies, I was just puzzled and curious.

 

[joohan]

Well, you are arriving at conclusions that many who play USTA already know. NTRP ratings is not an exact science by any stretch. They are guidelines and even then not the most thorough. So towards your point there are many skill sets in the game to become an effective player. Just to give you an idea, probably the best measure for players is their ability to effectively compete at 4.5 level or higher in USTA tournaments and leagues. Internal club leagues don't mean much sometimes with many players who sign up for higher leagues although their game is not developed for it.

I understand. I experienced it during my university tennis lessons when I was facing "properly trained from early age" players and caused them a lot of troubles with my unorthodox game and tactical awareness (its amazing what slices, lops and drop shots can do...). I played against a national junior no.2 a couple of times and realized what an abyss lies between what tennis player he is even in his decline and what tennis player I can ever be...reality check par excellence.

 

[JohnBPittsburgh]

I play in leagues, and for fun. I don't claim to be master of the courts, but my racquetaholism stemmed from, the want to see how different racquets played and their effect, if any, on my playing experience. I took an unorthodox route, but I work hard for the money I spend, and feel that, unless I am asking for donations, I can buy 1,000 racquets and set them on fire if I wish. I have given away several frames that I didn't like to create more people to play with and they are extremely happy I do so. I read these forums, and have learned a great deal, and there has been some questionable advice as well, but it's up to me, to decipher it, and who it is coming from.
The way I do it, is this. I go out and buy racquets and strings, and see for myself (I could demo, but I like collecting racquets anyway, so I don't). That way, I know what I like, and don't like. If you ask for a racquet recommendation, you will get 50 answers from 50 people. It's the nature of how different people are, skill/ability/technique/fitness/ and preferences. I try to be transparent, and I cannot offer advice on court position or how to improve someone's forehand. But I can share how a racquet played for me, and what I like. It has been working beautifully for me, and I finally feel I know what specs I like/work with my game.
At no point in time, have I ever bought a frame, because a pro uses it (I don't really watch tennis like that), or because I thought it would be a magic wand, and destroy anything and everything on the other side of the net. It was curiosity, and I actually found enjoyment trying out frames and strings. I have sold off 3/4's of my collection, and in the end, I probably made money while going racquet crazy.
Now, it is actually a side job for me, as I sell Prince frames (no secret) to people I play with. I also string racquets for people, many of whom, can obliterate me on court (4.0's and up), but they show me how to improve my game, and I consider them to be pretty good friends. I went from playing tennis once or twice a week, to being on court 5-8 hours a day. My game has improved, and I can admit, that when I finally stick with one frame, it will improve faster. I do not suggest anyone go the route I have chosen. But I think all things happen in life for a reason, and I have enjoyed the journey. I joined a 3.5 league and made it to first place, and entered the tournament at the end (I lost, but it was an awesome experience). I got invited into a 4.0-4.5 league, and have been learning a lot (while getting killed) but everyone I have played with is really cool, and after the match they offer me some advice, and usually ask me to string their frames I would love to say I am a 4.0, but I am 3.5. I try to offer good and honest feedback, and if someone wants me to go into more detail I try the best I can. I have said it before, I do not NEED a custom racquet, but it sure feels awesome playing with them. Life is short, I do not know how much time I have left on Earth, and I didn't want to die, not knowing the awesome feeling of hitting with an Angell!! (It is amazing, at least in my 3.5 world!) Why do people buy Lexus, BMW, and Jaguar, when they could all drive Hyundai's and Kia's? I guess that's what they choose to spend their money on. I prefer to spend my extra money on racquets and strings (well I did, I am actually done buying frames for a little bit) and I am good with that. Have a great evening!

I apologize for the long story, but I wanted to explain my situation, so people can take any advice given, how ever they want. My rating is important, but not nearly as important, as having fun, getting in shape, and playing the best sport in the world!!!

 

[SpinDr.]

NTRP ratings are about who you beat in league and tournament play. I have powerful, elegant strokes and can rally with anyone. 4.5 and 5.0 guys hit with me, think I used to play college ball and ask if I want to join their 9.5 combo team. Once match play starts, I wither to a strong 4.0. I sometimes get beat by 4.0 hackers who grind and hit junk. I play Pro Staff 90s. Forgive me, father, for I have sinned.

 

[topspn]

I play in leagues, and for fun. I don't claim to be master of the courts, but my racquetaholism stemmed from, the want to see how different racquets played and their effect, if any, on my playing experience. I took an unorthodox route, but I work hard for the money I spend, and feel that, unless I am asking for donations, I can buy 1,000 racquets and set them on fire if I wish. I have given away several frames that I didn't like to create more people to play with and they are extremely happy I do so. I read these forums, and have learned a great deal, and there has been some questionable advice as well, but it's up to me, to decipher it, and who it is coming from.
The way I do it, is this. I go out and buy racquets and strings, and see for myself (I could demo, but I like collecting racquets anyway, so I don't). That way, I know what I like, and don't like. If you ask for a racquet recommendation, you will get 50 answers from 50 people. It's the nature of how different people are, skill/ability/technique/fitness/ and preferences. I try to be transparent, and I cannot offer advice on court position or how to improve someone's forehand. But I can share how a racquet played for me, and what I like. It has been working beautifully for me, and I finally feel I know what specs I like/work with my game.
At no point in time, have I ever bought a frame, because a pro uses it (I don't really watch tennis like that), or because I thought it would be a magic wand, and destroy anything and everything on the other side of the net. It was curiosity, and I actually found enjoyment trying out frames and strings. I have sold off 3/4's of my collection, and in the end, I probably made money while going racquet crazy.
Now, it is actually a side job for me, as I sell Prince frames (no secret) to people I play with. I also string racquets for people, many of whom, can obliterate me on court (4.0's and up), but they show me how to improve my game, and I consider them to be pretty good friends. I went from playing tennis once or twice a week, to being on court 5-8 hours a day. My game has improved, and I can admit, that when I finally stick with one frame, it will improve faster. I do not suggest anyone go the route I have chosen. But I think all things happen in life for a reason, and I have enjoyed the journey. I joined a 3.5 league and made it to first place, and entered the tournament at the end (I lost, but it was an awesome experience). I got invited into a 4.0-4.5 league, and have been learning a lot (while getting killed) but everyone I have played with is really cool, and after the match they offer me some advice, and usually ask me to string their frames I would love to say I am a 4.0, but I am 3.5. I try to offer good and honest feedback, and if someone wants me to go into more detail I try the best I can. I have said it before, I do not NEED a custom racquet, but it sure feels awesome playing with them. Life is short, I do not know how much time I have left on Earth, and I didn't want to die, not knowing the awesome feeling of hitting with an Angell!! (It is amazing, at least in my 3.5 world!) Why do people buy Lexus, BMW, and Jaguar, when they could all drive Hyundai's and Kia's? I guess that's what they choose to spend their money on. I prefer to spend my extra money on racquets and strings (well I did, I am actually done buying frames for a little bit) and I am good with that. Have a great evening!

I apologize for the long story, but I wanted to explain my situation, so people can take any advice given, how ever they want. My rating is important, but not nearly as important, as having fun, getting in shape, and playing the best sport in the world!!!

Looool..I like your explanation and if you get a TC97 330g, 12HL and you don't like it, I'll bravely volunteer for you to donate the racquet to me hhhhh...just sayin

 

[Ramon]

NTRP rating has no bearing on someone's knowledge of tennis equipment. Even when I was a teenage kid learning how to play tennis, I could tell what different racquets and strings were doing to my game. People with 3.0 ratings who've played for a long time and take an interest in tennis equipment often have some good insight. Physical limitations have no correlation to intellect and how much time someone takes to study the subject. We've had semi-pro players on this forum asking very basic questions about equipment. I'm not knocking them for not taking an interest in knowing about equipment. It's just not a top priority for them, and obviously, physical talent and training is more important for your game than optimizing your equipment choices.

 

[joohan]

I play in leagues, and for fun. I don't claim to be master of the courts, but my racquetaholism stemmed from, the want to see how different racquets played and their effect, if any, on my playing experience. I took an unorthodox route, but I work hard for the money I spend, and feel that, unless I am asking for donations, I can buy 1,000 racquets and set them on fire if I wish. I have given away several frames that I didn't like to create more people to play with and they are extremely happy I do so. I read these forums, and have learned a great deal, and there has been some questionable advice as well, but it's up to me, to decipher it, and who it is coming from.
The way I do it, is this. I go out and buy racquets and strings, and see for myself (I could demo, but I like collecting racquets anyway, so I don't). That way, I know what I like, and don't like. If you ask for a racquet recommendation, you will get 50 answers from 50 people. It's the nature of how different people are, skill/ability/technique/fitness/ and preferences. I try to be transparent, and I cannot offer advice on court position or how to improve someone's forehand. But I can share how a racquet played for me, and what I like. It has been working beautifully for me, and I finally feel I know what specs I like/work with my game.
At no point in time, have I ever bought a frame, because a pro uses it (I don't really watch tennis like that), or because I thought it would be a magic wand, and destroy anything and everything on the other side of the net. It was curiosity, and I actually found enjoyment trying out frames and strings. I have sold off 3/4's of my collection, and in the end, I probably made money while going racquet crazy.
Now, it is actually a side job for me, as I sell Prince frames (no secret) to people I play with. I also string racquets for people, many of whom, can obliterate me on court (4.0's and up), but they show me how to improve my game, and I consider them to be pretty good friends. I went from playing tennis once or twice a week, to being on court 5-8 hours a day. My game has improved, and I can admit, that when I finally stick with one frame, it will improve faster. I do not suggest anyone go the route I have chosen. But I think all things happen in life for a reason, and I have enjoyed the journey. I joined a 3.5 league and made it to first place, and entered the tournament at the end (I lost, but it was an awesome experience). I got invited into a 4.0-4.5 league, and have been learning a lot (while getting killed) but everyone I have played with is really cool, and after the match they offer me some advice, and usually ask me to string their frames I would love to say I am a 4.0, but I am 3.5. I try to offer good and honest feedback, and if someone wants me to go into more detail I try the best I can. I have said it before, I do not NEED a custom racquet, but it sure feels awesome playing with them. Life is short, I do not know how much time I have left on Earth, and I didn't want to die, not knowing the awesome feeling of hitting with an Angell!! (It is amazing, at least in my 3.5 world!) Why do people buy Lexus, BMW, and Jaguar, when they could all drive Hyundai's and Kia's? I guess that's what they choose to spend their money on. I prefer to spend my extra money on racquets and strings (well I did, I am actually done buying frames for a little bit) and I am good with that. Have a great evening!

I apologize for the long story, but I wanted to explain my situation, so people can take any advice given, how ever they want. My rating is important, but not nearly as important, as having fun, getting in shape, and playing the best sport in the world!!!

Thank you for an honest reply. I can identify perfectly as I've done things I'm not proud of and lost people I will miss for the rest of my life but it has been a fascinating journey so far...that's for the "routes we choose".

I appreciate any input, info, advice I can get and I can revise it critically so, no hard feelings. I did not mean to create any fuss and my original question - although it may not look like it - was mainly about the NTRP rating system. It has turned into a cathartic thread a bit...but I like it very much

 

[joohan]

NTRP rating has no bearing on someone's knowledge of tennis equipment. Even when I was a teenage kid learning how to play tennis, I could tell what different racquets and strings were doing to my game. People with 3.0 ratings who've played for a long time and take an interest in tennis equipment often have some good insight. Physical limitations have no correlation to intellect and how much time someone takes to study the subject. We've had semi-pro players on this forum asking very basic questions about equipment. I'm not knocking them for not taking an interest in knowing about equipment. It's just not a top priority for them, and obviously, physical talent and training is more important for your game than optimizing your equipment choices.

True but how can you get a valid review of, say, Gibson Les Paul Custom 1974 when the one reviewing it has (or should have, according to NTRP) problems playing a simple chords smoothly...however weird this comparison may sound.

I know. The best ones often do not give a cr@p about what wood is a guitar made of and what electronics are inside. All they care for is how it sounds and how it feels when played. That's why I'm not laughing off technical knowledge of intermediate tennis players. They, in general, care and know most about tennis gear and are worth listening to.

My original concern, I repeat, was: if a NTRP 2.5 "is learning to judge where the ball is going when receiving the ball, although movement and recovery are not in sync. Can sustain a rally of slow pace with other players of similar ability and is beginning to develop strokes...", its hard to imagine he is able to properly evaluate a tennis racquet. That's why I was asking about the validity and significance of the rating itself.

Edit:

According to the NTRP description, I was a 2.5 when I picked up a tennis racquet for the first time.

 

[n8dawg6]

a true 2.5 is terrible, at least in my neck of the woods. OTOH, I've seen sandbaggers not play spring league and/or throw matches to get themselves bumped down to 3.5 or even 3.0 just so they can win at will (i dont understand it). also have guys who can hang with 4.5's gaming the system and self-rating 2.5 so they can play 5.0/5.5 and 6.0/6.5 doubles. i dont put much stock in the NTRP ratings, never know what im gonna encounter on the other side.

 

[Winners or Errors]

The fact of the matter is that 4.5 is quite competitive and, in areas where there is no real 5.0 league, often stacked with 5.0+ players in the teams. I have played 4.5 tennis for the past 7 years, having returned to tennis as an adult after a hiatus of about 15 years, and am generally competitive. I have developed, over a life-time of playing tennis, opinions about what I like in a racquet.

I agree with the original poster that someone with a 2.5 rating who just began the game probably doesn't have much experience or valuable insights to add to my own knowledge of racquets, but they're rarely the ones blathering on about racquets and just tend to stick to typical honeymoon comments about how the racquet "changed their life." Mostly, the 2.5-3.5 players I see on this board are curious and asking questions of more experienced players.

I tend to never get rid of racquets, because sometimes I yearn for the feel of a racquet I played five years ago and it's nice to just take them out of the garage and string them up, having learned the hard way that getting rid of racquets means you can never play with them again.

Bottom line, it's a board for guys who like to discuss gear. As my tastes in gear are pretty specific, I tend to stick to things that are more old school, heavier, more headlight. I am contemplating picking up a Slazenger V-24, a Lendl GTX Pro/White Star Pro Masters, or maybe a Kramer Pro Staff / Dunlop Maxply McEnroe (the old, wood ones) to have fun with because I enjoy the feel.

Generally, we all need to lighten up and realize this is just for fun.

 

[graycrait]

Even though I have played tennis since the very early 1960's and high school in the early 70's, I never had long term effective lessons. I did have the luxury of growing up 20 meters from 3 public tennis courts. But in snow country this allowed about 7 months of play. Then through the decades I was an off again, on again player, often sacrificing tennis to playing and/or coaching other sports or simply working too much. About 10 years ago I started playing regularly several times a week. No lessons, just playing with like minded seniors or anyone who would hit with me. Then about 4 years ago I started weekly lessons, both individual and group.

Remember, 4.5 at age 60 is likely different than 4.5 at 20.

I still remember fondly watching on TV the likes of Rod Laver, Pancho Gonzales, Cliff Richey, Ken Rosewall, etc., then running out to the asphalt courts to pretend - with bad rackets, old fuzzless balls and and bad shoes.

Nowadays my problem with racket selection has been lack of equipment experts locally. Most good local players I know have been playing with the same racket and string choice for the last decade or so, some much longer than that. Also the lack of a local place from which to demo rackets other than mail order contributes to my confusion and experimentation. The guys in the 4.5+ league (all ages) commented last year that my improvement hit a period where I just gained by leaps and bounds. Right now I am working on a couple of things one of the local European D1 players showed me last summer. I figure it will take another 1/2 yr or so to work these issues out. I am suspending league play during this time. Frankly, I could care less about rankings. I just enjoy getting better incrementally, even at nearly 61 years old.

With that long winded background here is my recent racket choices.

In my climb up the skill ladder the last 10 years I would classify my racket selection in several main groups. 1st: Buy anything that I could get cheap. 2nd: The oversize period sprinkled with stiff 98 rackets with poly. 3rd: 6.1 95 Wilson period, but trying out many other rackets. 4th and current: Volkl. Maybe there is a 5th category: Back in the late 60s most of us played with Jack Kramer Autographs, Davis, Bancroft and a small smattering of other rackets. These rackets had 65" heads and weighed much more than current players rackets. Most all of us used blue or gold spiral nylon strings because that is what the local sporting goods store had on hand. Oh, yeah, a year or two ago I demoed the Big Bubba racket just for the fun of it. I played with it for maybe 20 minutes and sent it back to TW.

 

[Chadillac]

Ntrp has become relative to your competition, in the past you were rated by a pro, now your rated against 3.5's (on avg). Different area's also play a role, a 5.0 in the mid west is different than one in fl, tx or cali.

You have to remember alot of lower lvl players are new to the game, they want instant gratification and buy into the latest and greatest. Other lower lvls have phy problems and the new stuff helps them.

Im hitting with poly mains again and my elbow doesnt even notice Btw, im 7.5, Fed feeds me balls from the hopper when i ask him to play

 

[Dolgopolov85]

True but how can you get a valid review of, say, Gibson Les Paul Custom 1974 when the one reviewing it has (or should have, according to NTRP) problems playing a simple chords smoothly...however weird this comparison may sound.

You cannot, you are right. The artisan has to be good enough to get the most out of his tool. But then...and hey I am not such a good player anyway, but I'll say I have no problems taking balls out of the air to hit good slice volleys with a Pure Drive and those who haven't figured out how to do it with THAT racquet will naysay me. As I said earlier, my coach can hit just about every shot in the book with as basic a racquet as it gets.

In a way, while the net has opened up access to wide and diverse sources of information, it has also confused the discussion, in that it gets very difficult to know whose views to trust. Which is why when I had to buy a racquet I just asked a friend who has been playing the game for a long time and as per my description of my game, he recommended the racquet I now use (even though my initial thought process was to go for something from Head). As it happened, somebody in my playing group had just bought a PD and I got the chance to hit with it a little and liked it. Decision made, simple. This is the old school way and is probably still the most uncomplicated and effective way to go about it. Too many opinions get confusing. Just ask one or two people whose views you trust, hit with the racquet and make up your mind. If everybody did that, though, that would spell the death of the racquet forum, lol.

 

[unclenimrod]

You cannot, you are right. The artisan has to be good enough to get the most out of his tool. But then...and hey I am not such a good player anyway, but I'll say I have no problems taking balls out of the air to hit good slice volleys with a Pure Drive and those who haven't figured out how to do it with THAT racquet will naysay me. As I said earlier, my coach can hit just about every shot in the book with as basic a racquet as it gets.

In a way, while the net has opened up access to wide and diverse sources of information, it has also confused the discussion, in that it gets very difficult to know whose views to trust. Which is why when I had to buy a racquet I just asked a friend who has been playing the game for a long time and as per my description of my game, he recommended the racquet I now use (even though my initial thought process was to go for something from Head). As it happened, somebody in my playing group had just bought a PD and I got the chance to hit with it a little and liked it. Decision made, simple. This is the old school way and is probably still the most uncomplicated and effective way to go about it. Too many opinions get confusing. Just ask one or two people whose views you trust, hit with the racquet and make up your mind. If everybody did that, though, that would spell the death of the racquet forum, lol.

Not to mention the death of the smaller racquet companies. I am absolutely in favor of less than complicated decision making. I myself own more racquets than I need though so I go wholly against that principle. I do think the practice of "asking a couple friends I trust" is a bit of a limiting principle, however. You learn only what people like you know...

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I don't disagree with that. So the idea is to expand that circle, network with more players in the local circuit, players who might be very different from you. So, if tomorrow I wanted to experiment with say something from Wilson, I would ask somebody else and not that friend I referred to who had bad experiences with Wilson racquets. I keep an eye on the racquet different folks in my club/academy by whatever name called use so if I see somebody using something different from the usual Babolats/Head Graphenes I might try to chat them up about it. Admittedly I haven't so far, Babolat is the most popular brand here and I am reluctant to buy something without a trial (we don't have the concept of a free demo here). But still, in the future somebody might just turn up with a totally different racquet and I might try to find out what is his/her opinion about it. But from reading sundry recommendations online, it gets very difficult to understand what might work for you.

 

[The_Racketeer]

I'm a self-rated 3.5 and play in 3.5 leagues. True, I won't notice the nuances of various strings, a supposedly erratic stringbed that I chalk up to my own inconsistency, the rpms on my forehand, adjusting for stiffer strings. Blah blah...but what I can do is evaluate how the specs of various racquets feel in my hand and affect my strokes/game. And though I'm a 3.5 I take full strokes and focus on proper technique, so I play much better with an 11.5oz thin beam flexy racquet. I've demoed and can tell you how the racquets feel and affect my game, which is helpful for other similar 3.5s out there to read.
I don't need a custom racquet, but I have one. Because I tested racquets and came to understand exactly what I need for my current level.
As I improved and got in better tennis shape my racquet needs changed. Last Spring I used a tweener Warrior 100 and it was perfect for me. As I cleaned up my technique I moved through racquets to match my game. That's why I've got many racquets.

 

[JohnBPittsburgh]

I am very glad that through our conversations, I was able to answer some of your questions Racketeer. As an added bonus, you found a frame that you really enjoy (it definitely helped that you had a good idea of what you were looking for, and there was other people on this board willing to offer their experience as well). I also spoke with Backhanded compliment, and could immediately tell, he is way more experienced, and plays at a higher level than I do. I would also guess, that within a few messages, he could infer that I play at a lower level, and I am glad that he knew what questions to ask. That seems like a victory for TT as a community.

I have read several old threads and been able to glean a lot of knowledge from others experience. I don't recall ever having a conversation with JackB1, or Power Player, but I have enjoyed reading their posts, and many others as well. I like to think, there is something you can learn from everyone, and first hand experience is fantastic, but not the only way to learn. This board has a collection of players from a lot of different countries, cultures, skill levels, ages, budgets, and fitness levels. I am extremely grateful that it exists, and I can assure you, I wouldn't be anywhere near as far as I am, in tennis (especially as a stringer) without it. The bottom line is this. You cannot buy a better tennis game. It has to be earned, on the court and off. That is the only way to improve your skill, dedicate your time and energy into improving as a tennis player and get in better shape. Have a great day!! I am going to go hit balls at a wall.

 

[weelie]

True but how can you get a valid review of, say, Gibson Les Paul Custom 1974 when the one reviewing it has (or should have, according to NTRP) problems playing a simple chords smoothly...however weird this comparison may sound.

I know. The best ones often do not give a cr@p about what wood is a guitar made of and what electronics are inside. All they care for is how it sounds and how it feels when played.

Yes, the electric guitar analogy certainly hits the mark. Of course kids nowadays will be better at emulating the guitar tone on the records, and some will avtually be great at emulating the playing, with all the tools, videos, tabulatures and what not. Then there are the million others that have just spent too much time on forums and playing guitar in a video game...

Similarly, no doubt knowing or at least reading helps. There are so many resources you can use. But in the end, the hours you practice is what counts, the rest is just fluff. For me, the happiness comes from getting better at playing. I do try out rackets, strings a bit here and there. But in the end, i should just stick with the good one I already have, because in the search of "the best", I will lose some good time on the road to becoming the best I can.

 

[joohan]

Yes, the electric guitar analogy certainly hits the mark. Of course kids nowadays will be better at emulating the guitar tone on the records, and some will avtually be great at emulating the playing, with all the tools, videos, tabulatures and what not. Then there are the million others that have just spent too much time on forums and playing guitar in a video game...

Similarly, no doubt knowing or at least reading helps. There are so many resources you can use. But in the end, the hours you practice is what counts, the rest is just fluff. For me, the happiness comes from getting better at playing. I do try out rackets, strings a bit here and there. But in the end, i should just stick with the good one I already have, because in the search of "the best", I will lose some good time on the road to becoming the best I can.

That's how I feel it, too. If the idea is to have fun then its important to respect individual ways of achieving it. If its getting better what makes you happy, your place is at the tennis court. If its just the gear talk, whatever floats your boat. Same goes for anything between...

Music is not a race and, in essence, and you are playing with someone rather than against him. I think same should go for any amateur sport, however competitive and intense it might get. Pros usually take it easier than competitive amateurs...at times.

 

[JohnBPittsburgh]

Lol, I actually play guitar (well I haven't been recently, I have been too busy with tennis) Surprisingly, I got a decent guitar, a decent amp, and effects pedal, and I don't care at all about gear!! I don't know what it is about tennis, I just think there are some beautiful racquets. But, I have significantly downsized, and now that I know my specs, and strings, all I have to do now, is play!

 

[JohnBPittsburgh]

Lol, I actually play guitar (well I haven't been recently, I have been too busy with tennis) Surprisingly, I got a decent guitar, a decent amp, and effects pedal, and I don't care at all about gear!! I don't know what it is about tennis, I just think there are some beautiful racquets. But, I have significantly downsized, and now that I know my specs, and strings, all I have to do now, is play!

 

[The_Racketeer]

I disagree with the guitar analogy. Give a hack a Les Paul and a Marshall stack and his rudimentary power chords are going to sound like a sonic V12 engine. Even if you can't play like Joe Satriani it doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to do whatever you can to improve your sound. Likewise, even a 3.5 should be allowed to find what works best for his/her game without scrutiny.

 

[roundiesee]

I think having a low NTRP ranking doesn't necessarily mean that one can't discuss the merits of any one tennis frame, and the pros and cons of customizing rackets.
A few of my friends aren't exactly that good on the courts (I have beaten some in friendly matches), but they would beat me hands down on racket knowledge,

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

I disagree with the guitar analogy. Give a hack a Les Paul and a Marshall stack and his rudimentary power chords are going to sound like a sonic V12 engine. Even if you can't play like Joe Satriani it doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to do whatever you can to improve your sound. Likewise, even a 3.5 should be allowed to find what works best for his/her game without scrutiny.

This is all very true... when I first picked up guitar I could immediately play van halen's eruption solo after a few tries (Im a trained violinist and a lot of techniques translated) but was annoyed with the thin tone of my silly lil peavy practice amp and distortion pedal... I was playing the notes but the sound left a lot to be desired (I couldnt play complicated chords, just double stops though but yeah I could shred almost instantly). The point is... playing all the notes doesnt mean anything if it doesnt sound good.

Same with tennis, you can endlessly obsess about gear but winning points is important... winning points elegantly by constructing them and not as a fluke hit but with repeatable strokes is kinda the same thing as having tone. Not everyone plays virtuoso tennis some win with a very meat and potatoes game but they do win.

 

[weelie]

I disagree with the guitar analogy. Give a hack a Les Paul and a Marshall stack and his rudimentary power chords are going to sound like a sonic V12 engine.

To me the point is that a guitar player needs practice, instead of the latest fashionable gear... everybody is looking for some short cut. Same works for tennis. There are a million people out there who will not buy this or that guitar because it has not the correct wood species, or a guitar amp because it has not the correct tubes in it... but would the pass the blind test? I think nowadays you can get very inexpensive guitar gear that actually sounds GREAT, like a $200 electric guitar and $200 amp. But of course guitar players nowadays "need" 5 guitars and at least 3 amps. I think most tennis players could buy the couple years old new stock racket for $50 and be set for years to come. Like, try 3 different rackets of some top brand, choose the one that feels good to you, then play it for 1000 hours and then get a new one if you feel. In guitars, get a Squier Stratocaster and a good simple amp and maybe a $100 multifx unit and that's all you need, you don't need to upgrade next year. It's all marketing, I think.

I think having a low NTRP ranking doesn't necessarily mean that one can't discuss the merits of any one tennis frame, and the pros and cons of customizing rackets.

To each his own. But for me, time spent in front of a mirror studying your stroke is time better spent than flicking through the TW catalog for a new racket that would have the optimal swing weight and stiffness combo. Less of thinking of if small grip would actually give more of this or that, more of time on court or in front of a wall, making the ball move.

I have always been better at theory, university education and all that, but simple things like painting a wall seems way too complex for me. So I tend to value doing instead of theory, or I think knowing equals ability to do and theory is just cheating. It is easy to say you need to pronate, but instead of catchwords, I would rather have somebody actually show it to me. Is the best boxer the one who always has the best gloves?

But, of course, I am here, I am not on the court. My excuse is that I don't have the time to play every hour of every day, nor can my arm take it. So today, I am having a break. Hoping that evn an online ramble on tennis makes me a better player...

YMMV, no offense meant to anybody.

 

[robbo1970]

I think we are in an environment with so much choice that it naturally breeds confusion, dilemma and debate.

This is not just about tennis equipment, but everything in general.

You then get forums such as this and it adds to the confusion, dilemma and debate. You see where I am going with this.

What seems to be the case a lot, is that some of higher ranked or stronger players actually worry less about their racquets than some of the more intermediate players. Maybe it's that situation of "I wonder if....". If I tried these strings, would I get better control, if I tried these strings would I get better power, if I tried this racquet would I get better.....and so on.

There are so many choices with racquets, strings, even grips these days, that it's very easy to try everything and never really know what is best. In truth, none of them are magic, they all rely on someone to swing the racquet.

However, it is a lot of fun and often very interesting to get involved in discussions about these various components and find out what other players use, like or dislike and their reasons. Such discussions are not based on rankings or tennis ability, it's just a hobby.

I will often hypothosise about racquets, but will it ultimately change what I use on the court, probably not.

 

[Christian Olsson]

Don't really know my ntrp but I've been playing since age of 8 seriously up to 20's so according to other players, sound mechanics and some powerful game at times. Full power capabilities with flat bombs just clearing the net landing a few feet inside baseline at rallies is no problem. Got some minor issues with volleys still but working on that one. Backhands were fixed with the aid of @Ozellman and Niclas S. So that is no problem anymore. My problem is my very heavy 339 SW radical tour with no power. Since my restart this summer I've dedicated to testing and evaluating lots of racquets and strings. I know tons of what I now know I need to know to get a racquet that can let me play my game. I should have done this a long time ago. But I agree with beginners obsessing with gear. First is always working on the game. Gear can only let your technique do what you've practiced. Gear doesn't in itself make you a better player. But bad gear can hinder ones game.

 

[joohan]

This is all very true... when I first picked up guitar I could immediately play van halen's eruption solo after a few tries (Im a trained violinist and a lot of techniques translated) but was annoyed with the thin tone of my silly lil peavy practice amp and distortion pedal... I was playing the notes but the sound left a lot to be desired (I couldnt play complicated chords, just double stops though but yeah I could shred almost instantly). The point is... playing all the notes doesnt mean anything if it doesnt sound good.

Same with tennis, you can endlessly obsess about gear but winning points is important... winning points elegantly by constructing them and not as a fluke hit but with repeatable strokes is kinda the same thing as having tone. Not everyone plays virtuoso tennis some win with a very meat and potatoes game but they do win.

Well...you're not a musical beginner, far from it, actually. It was the same for me when I picked up the racquet for the first time. I was constantly amazing people who did not believe me I had never played tennis before...and most of them were people who never really trained/played a sport seriously/competitively. Once I've told my university tennis coaches that I've played football(soccer) at the highest level from age of 5 and that I've played many sports - handball, volleyball, table tennis etc. competitively for my schools - they just waved their hands and told me I should be much better at tennis then Bummer

You can't impress me by saying you could pick up the guitar and "play" just as well as I can't impress anyone by saying I can pick up a bass guitar, sit behind a drum set or even behind a piano and play something given my musical background. Skills are transferable. That being said, our perception of music instruments is far removed from those with no musical background and even they can "hear" differences...at least in terms "I like this one better". Each and every opinion matters...or not. Its up to the receiver to pick whatever he finds useful from it.

As I've stated many times in this particular thread - I'm not making fun of anyone and I'm not "breaking a stick"(a saying in my country) over the TT forum. There were a few questions I needed answering and whatever the tone and intention I wrote my original post in, I got much, much more than that.

 

[torpantennis]

My gut feeling is that different kinds of racquets and strings make me, a mere 3.0-3.5, to alter my swing and technique. For example, if the racquet is too light I'll transform into armswinger sooner or later. Then if the strings give too high launch angle I'll use wristy brush up in trying to get spin on that high launching ball to get it drop back in. And if a low launch angle racquet is of too low weight I'll leave most all balls short. And whenever I add weight in the butt of the racquet I tend to hold the racquet looser.

After figuring out all these PERSONAL things on different racquets and strings, and how they tend to alter my playing, I've come to the conclusion: A racquet which naturally makes me throw the racquet to the ball like it should is heavy enough, has extra weight in the butt, strings give low launch angle but still no deadstiff full poly.

That's my PERSONAL feelings. And the reason why different racquets/strings play differently is because I play differently with them!

 

[The_Racketeer]

My gut feeling is that different kinds of racquets and strings make me, a mere 3.0-3.5, to alter my swing and technique. For example, if the racquet is too light I'll transform into armswinger sooner or later. Then if the strings give too high launch angle I'll use wristy brush up in trying to get spin on that high launching ball to get it drop back in. And if a low launch angle racquet is of too low weight I'll leave most all balls short. And whenever I add weight in the butt of the racquet I tend to hold the racquet looser.

After figuring out all these PERSONAL things on different racquets and strings, and how they tend to alter my playing, I've come to the conclusion: A racquet which naturally makes me throw the racquet to the ball like it should is heavy enough, has extra weight in the butt, strings give low launch angle but still no deadstiff full poly.

That's my PERSONAL feelings. And the reason why different racquets/strings play differently is because I play differently with them!

This is a good point. Beginners and intermediates will be much quicker to have their form breakdown for lack of concentration, muscle memory, technique, practice, etc. The wrong gear can cause that to happen faster. Give a beginner a racquet that's too heavy or low powered or even high powered and you'll see a breakdown of technique in an ignorant attempt to play with the wrong racquet.

My first real racquet was a Head I.Radical. Lots of people here would probably love to play with one, but it was really not right for me. My technique sucked and I wound up with wrist pain constantly. I changed racquets to something lighter, more mneuverable, more open patterned, and higher powered and, without any extra instruction, played better and without pain.

Now I'm not saying gear is a replace my for practice. Indeed, the most important thing is instruction and time spent on the court. But I refuse to hear that a 3.0-3.5 can't benefit from a little racketholism and that they can't recognize the difference between various racquets.

 

[mhkeuns]

I pretty much got rid of all my sticks (close to 20 frames, which was lowered from around 50 frames total) and have decided to just go with two completely different frames for now; the Pro Staff 85 (2 Chicago & 1 St. Vincent) and the APD (*both plus and the Roland Garros versions).

Loved having many different player's and tweeter frames from all racket manufacturers from Asics to Yonex, but except for a few, many frames did not get enough court time. I just had too many in my collection and thought it was a good idea to clean out my closet full of barely used frames.

I see the similiar pattern of collecting rackets from all levels from the beginners to the advanced players. Some are collecting because they liked the way certain frames looked. Others collect in search of the Holy-Grail. Whatever the reason maybe, they are all tennis enthusiasts, and many are gear-heads. Collecting frames is just one of the aspects that makes tennis more fun for some. Nothing wrong with that at all. My thing is do whatever you feel comfortable to get more fun out of tennis, even if that mean buying racket you may not need or necessarily help your game.

I have decided to part ways with some of my favorite frames, like the Pure Strike Tour, because I have been enjoying more touch and feel game with the Pro Staff 85's, instead of baseline bashing using the modern player's frames. I kept the APD's because I needed a back up frame that was very forgiving for the days I am just off.

I don't think wanting new and the latest gear, even if the player is 3.5 or below, is anything to question. It's all about being into the sports and getting the most enjoyment out of the game. Whatever helps to achieve more "fun", even if it means of buying more frames, that is all on the person, and no one has the right to criticize that.

 

[pfrischmann]

Lol, I actually play guitar (well I haven't been recently, I have been too busy with tennis) Surprisingly, I got a decent guitar, a decent amp, and effects pedal, and I don't care at all about gear!! I don't know what it is about tennis, I just think there are some beautiful racquets. But, I have significantly downsized, and now that I know my specs, and strings, all I have to do now, is play!

My $.02. In a former life, I was a professional guitar player. Went to a prestigious music school, was a studio musician etc.. There are guys like Buzz Feiten and Steve Vai who know every nuance of their gear and are gearaholics. Then there are those like Lukather or Beck who don't even know what strings they use. All could play circles around most people with an out of tune, one string ukulele.

Gearitis and NTRP level are not necessarily related. It's more about the personality of the person. I'm a 45 year old 4.0. That rank was earned through USTA match play. I have been playing for 5 years. Most say I'm approaching a high 4.0. I hit regularly with 4.5 and 5.0 players and hold my own. I don't win a lot but I don't lose by much either. I am progressing, for sure. I work very hard at my game. I want to understand all of it.

There is no replacement for practice but that also means practicing intelligently. To me that means understanding how your strokes, fitness, strategy and yes, gear play into your game. Like music, the end result will be expressing yourself. I feel you can tell a lot about a persons personality by how they play.

FWIW.

 

[joohan]

But I refuse to hear that a 3.0-3.5 can't benefit from a little racketholism and that they can't recognize the difference between various racquets.

"NTRP LEVEL: 3.0

This player is fairly consistent when hitting medium-paced shots, but is not comfortable with all strokes and lacks execution when trying for directional control, depth, pace or altering distance of shots. Most common doubles formation is one up, one back.

Potential limitations: consistency when applying or handling pace; difficulty handling shots “outside of their strike zone”; can be uncomfortable at the net."

I'm not and was not saying he can't or should not try racquets or share his experiences or that the experiences lack value. I was a bit shocked by the contrast of a NTRP description and experiences/its presentation by players/contributors who fall into that NTRP description. It's more of an "eye opening" moment for me regarding the amount of time I've already spent here...

Its like listening to somebody go on and on about a guitar(s) and then finding out he can "barely play a song". After the initial "shock", when you recall what he was saying, you can come to a conclusion he had a point after all and there is a lot you can use from his advice after all...

 

[joohan]

My $.02. In a former life, I was a professional guitar player. Went to a prestigious music school, was a studio musician etc.. There are guys like Buzz Feiten and Steve Vai who know every nuance of their gear and are gearaholics. Then there are those like Lukather or Beck who don't even know what strings they use. All could play circles around most people with an out of tune, one string ukulele.

Gearitis and NTRP level are not necessarily related. It's more about the personality of the person. I'm a 45 year old 4.0. That rank was earned through USTA match play. I have been playing for 5 years. Most say I'm approaching a high 4.0. I hit regularly with 4.5 and 5.0 players and hold my own. I don't win a lot but I don't lose by much either. I am progressing, for sure. I work very hard at my game. I want to understand all of it.

There is no replacement for practice but that also means practicing intelligently. To me that means understanding how your strokes, fitness, strategy and yes, gear play into your game. Like music, the end result will be expressing yourself. I feel you can tell a lot about a persons personality by how they play.

FWIW.

Its been discussed already that, in general, "middle class" players are the biggest gearaholics. Beginners usually don't know what they want/need and need a lot of trial and error to figure it out while advanced players usually know exactly what they want and usually discuss gear that is within their desired range. I bet Steve would gladly discuss humbuckers with anyone but prefers the ones with the sound he craves and loves in the end...and as I've already said - I accept that even a 2.5 player may know exactly what he wants and needs out of his gear.

 

[rokaldo]

In my personal opinion even half of the people reviewing rackets for TW are not good enough to be able to provide a relevant review of most rackets they are reviewing.

 

[Christian Olsson]

Hahaha! All that talk about guitars... My day job is building bass guitars at Unicornbass much like Angell does for tennis aficionados. And yes. Sooner or later it's going to be a Angell 97...

 

[topspn]

My two cents, this isn't about validity of anything as a lot of these reviews are personal anyway. Obviously, anyone no matter their tennis level can have and express opinions on racquets they play with. I think it is just a matter of when they express their views based on their level i.e. racquet to heavy for me, 95 head too demanding for me, etc. Other players who perhaps have abilities to better utilize these attributes need to keep it into account when reading. So just recognition that someone is writing from their perspective and their abilities. And it is all good and fun! People can have an interest in improving on the court and having an interest in equipment as well.

 

[joohan]

Hahaha! All that talk about guitars... My day job is building bass guitars at Unicornbass much like Angell does for tennis aficionados. And yes. Sooner or later it's going to be a Angell 97...

Tennis and guitars are quite similar. Many parameters that can be changed and refined to ones exact preference and, whether someone likes it or not, they really bear great significance as far as overall performance and feel goes however petty and minuscule they might seem to others.

 

[graycrait]

Interesting thread. Now want to visit some biathlete websites. I dunno but I bet they are "gearhead" athletes, but with training and technique I'm betting the top competitors can likely beat the other 95% with fairly pedestrian equipment if they had to.

 

[Christian Olsson]

Tennis and guitars are quite similar. Many parameters that can be changed and refined to ones exact preference and, whether someone likes it or not, they really bear great significance as far as overall performance and feel goes however petty and minuscule they might seem to others.

Oh yes. A everything from neck stiffness, string spacing, custom wound pickups, specially designed preamps, body composition, hybrid graphite construction etc.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

My $.02. In a former life, I was a professional guitar player. Went to a prestigious music school, was a studio musician etc.. There are guys like Buzz Feiten and Steve Vai who know every nuance of their gear and are gearaholics. Then there are those like Lukather or Beck who don't even know what strings they use. All could play circles around most people with an out of tune, one string ukulele.

Gearitis and NTRP level are not necessarily related. It's more about the personality of the person. I'm a 45 year old 4.0. That rank was earned through USTA match play. I have been playing for 5 years. Most say I'm approaching a high 4.0. I hit regularly with 4.5 and 5.0 players and hold my own. I don't win a lot but I don't lose by much either. I am progressing, for sure. I work very hard at my game. I want to understand all of it.

There is no replacement for practice but that also means practicing intelligently. To me that means understanding how your strokes, fitness, strategy and yes, gear play into your game. Like music, the end result will be expressing yourself. I feel you can tell a lot about a persons personality by how they play.

FWIW.

But I guess somebody like Vai or Lukather is a whole other level. I mean, that's Federer/Nadal level, these guys are the best in the business. They do it for a living. Whether or not Lukather actually took interest in his equipment, he would not be remiss to if he did. For recreational tennis players, the question is more about what you hope to achieve. IMO it takes some time and some development of strokes before you begin to understand what kind of racquet needs you really have. I know it did for me and quite possibly I am still in the middle of my journey. I wouldn't completely negate the importance of racquets. A gent who normally bullies me when we do baseline rallies (hitting, you could call it) happened to one day play with some junior racquet (his son's) because he didn't have his APD with him for some reason. I found myself able to stay with him and sometimes even overpower him because now I had an equipment advantage over him and I guess he was not as good as my coach who doesn't seem to need good equipment to beat us. So, it does have a role but the question is how easy or how difficult is it really to zero in on a racquet.

There is nothing wrong in collecting racquets and wanting to play all sorts of them as a hobby. But the belief that that level of obsession with the equipment would help a rec player's game may perhaps be misplaced. I want to keep things polite and would not like to name names but in my short time as a member of this forum, I have seen some people obsess over racquets at a level that seems disproportionate to their self professed level of play. There's nothing wrong with trying out a few racquets but those who are still learning their shots and yet to be able to hit them with any reliability at pace should settle down for sometime and stick with one piece until they make significant progress. IMHO (and maybe I am wrong about that) too much fussing over racquets at that stage can only be a distraction from the real important task of learning and practicing your shots meaningfully.