Poll : Controlling powerful racquets vs. Generating power with low-powered racquets

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

Right then, so stop citing studies and explain to me how I'm wrong in saying that BreakPoint is responsible for perpetuating myths and misconceptions about mids, mipluses, and who should be playing with them.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Want more examples of how your theory (that mids are for finesse players and the midpluses are for finesse players) is wrong?

Becker (mid) vs. Kucera (mid-plus)
Sampras (mid) vs. Sanguinetti (mid-plus)

That's just off the top of my head. But there are examples that prove that your theory is wrong.

Additionally, I still find it ironic that you are accusing others of making absolutist statements about how should be using mids and mid-pluses when you yourself are saying that mids are for finesse players and the mid-pluses are for power players.

I speak in generalities. I'm not saying, finesse= mids and power=midplus. It's what who the racquet suits. As seen in many racquet descriptions on TW, you see almost all mids say long, fast swings and low power. Someone who has a short violent swing couldn't access the benefits of the racquet as attested by countless posts and feedback.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

Haha, what's your defintion of finesse and power now. You're saying people cannot have both. The most glaring is Sampras. Sure he had lots of power, but he also had one of the most fluid and effortless serves. When I say finesse I mean form. Have you seen Federer's serve, that's finesse. What about his forehand, finesse. Powerful too, but it'd be stupid to say that you couldn't have both.

Alright, let's remember that you made the disctinction about finesse players and power players. You never said that either type of player could play the other type of style. So now you're going back on your distinction. This is after you have distanced yourself from the study you cited. You are backtracking quickly. And then, in explaining things in your nice way, you're referring to me as being stupid. Nice!

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Right then, so stop citing studies and explain to me how I'm wrong in saying that BreakPoint is responsible for perpetuating myths and misconceptions about mids, mipluses, and who should be playing with them.

Off the top of your head give me one myth or misconception that he has said? And no I'm not going to go back and look thru a ridiculous amount of posts.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Alright, let's remember that you made the disctinction about finesse players and power players. You never said that either type of player could play the other type of style. So now you're going back on your distinction. This is after you have distanced yourself from the study you cited. You are backtracking quickly. And then, in explaining things in your nice way, you're referring to me as being stupid. Nice!

hahah dude, when it comes down to it, you play with what feels best. If you like midplus, then fine. If PointBreak says that mids could improve someones game, he isn't lying. They are harder to work with and thus you get more out of them with the more work you put into them. They have less room for error. Have less power and so the person needs to work to supply their own. They are the ultimate in control so you can just swing away.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

I speak in generalities. I'm not saying, finesse= mids and power=midplus. It's what who the racquet suits.

Is that so?

... and I'm certainly not attacking people for using midplus racquets. I can see the appeal in their specifications. I guess it all depends on what type of player you want to be, finesse or power?

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Is that so?

So you're saying there is something wrong with advising a player asking questions about mid and midpluses that if you have a certain type of play, you should tend to a certain type of racquet? When you attempt to refute BreakPoints claims, you start talking about pros, which you cannot possibly put in the same situation as most of the players that come onto the forums.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

hahah dude, when it comes down to it, you play with what feels best. If you like midplus, then fine. If PointBreak says that mids could improve someones game, he isn't lying. They are harder to work with and thus you get more out of them with the more work you put into them. They have less room for error. Have less power and so the person needs to work to supply their own. They are the ultimate in control so you can just swing away.

Now how exactly does "swinging away" lead to the development of technically correct and consistent stroke patterns? And I'll remind you that I never accused BreakPoint of lying. I stated that he perpetuates myths and misconceptions about the capabilities of mids and midpluses and which players are best suited to using mids and midpluses.

 

[jonolau]

hahah dude, when it comes down to it, you play with what feels best. If you like midplus, then fine. If PointBreak says that mids could improve someones game, he isn't lying. They are harder to work with and thus you get more out of them with the more work you put into them. They have less room for error. Have less power and so the person needs to work to supply their own. They are the ultimate in control so you can just swing away.

This is what Breakpoint said in another post, "Well, I did take college physics 25 years ago and I haven't worked as a mechanical enginner in 20 years, so what do I know?

Is he then dishing out subjective advice based on styles of yore which may not have much relevance to the advancement of today's game?

 

[Head_Rocketman]

This is what Breakpoint said in another post, "Well, I did take college physics 25 years ago and I haven't worked as a mechanical enginner in 20 years, so what do I know?

Is he then dishing out subjective advice based on styles of yore which may not have much relevance to the advancement of today's game?

Maybe, but then again that's the type of humor he has. "Today's game" refers to baseline play. Where everyone just wants to sit at the baseline and swing at balls, waiting for their opponent to make a mistake.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

So you're saying there is something wrong with advising a player asking questions about mid and midpluses that if you have a certain type of play, you should tend to a certain type of racquet?

Yes because your theory about which types of players tend towards mids and which tend towards midpluses is wrong.

They are the ultimate in control so you can just swing away.

You just stated that mids are great because they allow you to swing away. Is that your definition of finesse? There's no reason why others should believe you when you explain which players should tend towards mids and which players tend toward midpluses. You don't even agree with most of what you've been saying lately!

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Yes because your theory about which types of players tend towards mids and which tend towards midpluses are wrong.



You just stated that mids are great because they allow you to swing away. Is that your definition of finesse? There's no reason why others should believe you when you explain which players should tend towards mids and which players tend toward midpluses. You don't even agree with most of what you've been saying lately!

Swinging away is just a phrase that's used a lot on the forums. Meaning you can hit as hard as you can with less fear of overplaying the ball, taking into account good form of course. Because mids are control oriented and have less power.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

So swinging away with good form is finesse. And finesse players use mids. So what is power? Hardly swinging with poor form. Is that how Sampras generated such powerful serves?

Don't you see? Your distinctions are flat out wrong and nonsensical! You're perpetuating myths and misconceptions now!

 

[jonolau]

Maybe, but then again that's the type of humor he has. "Today's game" refers to baseline play. Where everyone just wants to sit at the baseline and swing at balls, waiting for their opponent to make a mistake.

I don't find that humourous at all especially when dishing out advice and recommendations to people. Don't you find it rather reckless and irresponsible?

Out of curiousity, where did you get the definition that "Today's game" refers to baseline play?

 

[Head_Rocketman]

So swinging away with good form is finesse. And finesse players use mids. So what is power? Hardly swinging with poor form. Is that how Sampras generated such powerful serves?

Don't you see? Your distinctions are flat out wrong and nonsensical! You're perpetuating myths and misconceptions now!

It's all about technique. You know those ratings on head racquets? L1,L2,L3... They refer to form. Which basically means what type of swing you have. Some have loopy ones that accompany big take backs, Federer. Some have quick swings referred to as medium swings. Just because you don't know the workings of a racquet and types of playing styles, don't start getting mad because you don't understand. Do some research before you say people make false claims when you really don't have any claims in the first place.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

I don't find that humourous at all especially when dishing out advice and recommendations to people. Don't you find it rather reckless and irresponsible?

Out of curiousity, where did you get the definition that "Today's game" refers to baseline play?

haha James Blake, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer, John McEnroe, the good people of TW forums, to name a few

 

[jonolau]

Tying it back to my earlier statement which you have not caught onto, isn't Breakpoint then dishing out subjective advice to people whom he has not observed playing, based on theories and mechanics which he does not have a clear memory of?

 

[Head_Rocketman]

With all your new questions coming up it looks to me like the reason it's so hard explaining some things to you guys is because you don't know a lot of what has been discussed before in the forums. For me to tell you everything threads and posts have shown would take way too long. I really couldn't believe you didn't know what people meant by "today's game." I though that was common knowledge. Not trying to calling you guys ignorant, but I think I'll stop arguing now, seems to be futile, and a waste of my time in that regard.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

It's all about technique. You know those ratings on head racquets? L1,L2,L3... They refer to form. Which basically means what type of swing you have. Some have loopy ones that accompany big take backs, Federer. Some have quick swings referred to as medium swings. Just because you don't know the workings of a racquet and types of playing styles, don't start getting mad because you don't understand. Do some research before you say people make false claims when you really don't have any claims in the first place.

How exactly does this fit into your theory again? I happen to advocate the development of good technique as well, by the way. I'm just dubious of your claim that mids are a good choice for beginners because they allow you to develop better technique:

If PointBreak says that mids could improve someones game, he isn't lying. They are harder to work with and thus you get more out of them with the more work you put into them.

You're already wrong that mids are for finesse players (your theory).

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Tying it back to my earlier statement which you have not caught onto, isn't Breakpoint then dishing out subjective advice to people whom he has not observed playing, based on theories and mechanics which he does not have a clear memory of?

He's pointing out what type of racquets fit certain styles. It's up to the person to choose what's best for them. But you can't deny, as it even says on the racquets themselves and the TW product descriptions. That a person with a "long, looping swing" is not going to benefit with a mid if it fits his play style. He doesn't go around just stating mid mid mid to everyone. Whenever he does suggest the benefits of mids, it's not for everyone.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

haha James Blake, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer, John McEnroe, the good people of TW forums, to name a few

So midplus racquets are for players playing "today's game" which is apparently a baseline game? Forget for a moment that Federer and Sampras use a midsize which goes against your argument. Keep in mind the fact that you object to referencing pros when discussing which racquets recreational players use--yet you go ahead and allude to pro players as well. The thing to note is that your completely inconsistent and have no coherent view point. Instead you muddle things. You peddle myths. I flat out do not find you credible and think that your racquet suggestions should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

 

[jonolau]

He's pointing out what type of racquets fit certain styles. It's up to the person to choose what's best for them. But you can't deny, as it even says on the racquets themselves and the TW product descriptions. That a person with a "long, looping swing" is not going to benefit with a mid if it fits his play style. He doesn't go around just stating mid mid mid to everyone. Whenever he does suggest the benefits of mids, it's not for everyone.

That's not what he has done in some of his previous posts. I would suggest that you go through all of Breakpoint's posts before you go on defending him.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

He's pointing out what type of racquets fit certain styles. It's up to the person to choose what's best for them. But you can't deny, as it even says on the racquets themselves and the TW product descriptions. That a person with a "long, looping swing" is not going to benefit with a mid if it fits his play style. He doesn't go around just stating mid mid mid to everyone. Whenever he does suggest the benefits of mids, it's not for everyone.

So the note about long, loopy swing styles counts but the part about being a 5.0+ doesn't.

More inconsistency from you I fear.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

So midplus racquets are for players playing "today's game" which is apparently a baseline game? Forget for a moment that Federer and Sampras use a midsize which goes against your argument. Keep in mind the fact that you object to referencing pros when discussing which racquets recreational players use--yet you go ahead and allude to pro players as well. The thing to note is that your completely inconsistent and have no coherent view point. Instead you muddle things. You peddle myths. I flat out do not find you credible and think that your racquet suggestions should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

You may be one of the most argumentative people I have ever met on the forums All I can say is WOW. He asked me where it is found that "today's game" is about baseline play. I told him that many pros and forum people have had discussion on it. Just because someone plays with a midsize, sucha s Sampras or Federer, doesn't mean they don't know what is going on around them. I'm sorry to say but all you do is try to turn whatever someone says by putting it in different logics and situations to fit what you're trying to say, which unfortunately is, nothing. There is a big difference from people who simply play a sport, to people who play and know the workings of it.

Don't take anyones advice that is fine. But then why go to a place where questions are constantly being asked and certain things already established? If you are so skeptical, it is because you don't know what a lot of others do, and you wish to disagree because it doesn't make sense to you. And then you go on to say that the claims are myths and misconceptions. That's fine.

 

[DoubleHanded&LovinIt]

You're right. You never stated that midplus racquets are for "today's game" which you define as baseline play. That is my mistake. I'm sorry.

But I stand by everything else I've stated. Could you please respond to my previous post? Thanks.

 

[BreakPoint]

This is what Breakpoint said in another post, "Well, I did take college physics 25 years ago and I haven't worked as a mechanical enginner in 20 years, so what do I know?

Is he then dishing out subjective advice based on styles of yore which may not have much relevance to the advancement of today's game?

Uh, so now one has to have gotten an A in college physics and earned a degree in mechanical engineering to be able to play tennis and choose a tennis racquet? So I guess 99.9% of the tennis playing population should quit playing tennis right now as they're obviously playing incorrectly and are using the wrong racquet - including jonolau! And 100% of the pros on the tour should quit right now as they are also obviously using the wrong equipment and don't have a clue what they are doing on the court.

BTW, I'd bet the closest jonolau has ever come to a physics class is when he rode his bike past that college campus on his way to work

Oh, yeah, and the laws of physics have obviously changed over the past 25 years. Haven't you heard that F is no longer equal to ma, but is now equal to abcdefg?

BTW2, only someone in love would quote the words of their object of affection in their own sig.

 

[BreakPoint]

Tying it back to my earlier statement which you have not caught onto, isn't Breakpoint then dishing out subjective advice to people whom he has not observed playing, based on theories and mechanics which he does not have a clear memory of?

And you and NBMJ have observed all 12,500 members of this board play?

And what does physics and engineering have to do with enjoying the feel of your racquet? Federer and Safin must have PhD's in mechanical engineering then. Do either you or NBMJ have degree in engineering or physics? Not even close. So according to your assertion, why should we believe a word either of you say about tennis?

 

[jonolau]

Uh, so now one has to have gotten an A in college physics and earned a degree in mechanical engineering to be able to play tennis and choose a tennis racquet?

That was a claim which you had made.

Oh, yeah, and the laws of physics have obviously changed over the past 25 years. Haven't you heard that F is no longer equal to ma, but is now equal to abcdefg?

The laws of physics haven't changed, but your memory has.

 

[BreakPoint]

That was a claim which you had made.

Bull! Someone said I didn't have a technical background and that I didn't know any physics. I was simply refuting that claim.

BTW, if you read that thread, we were discussing twisting of a racquet's head on impact, NOT how to play tennis nor which racquet suits one's game the best.

The laws of physics haven't changed, but your memory has.

Yeah, but I'd bet I still know 1000 times more physics than you do. And again, if one needed a mastery of physics to play tennis, 99.999% of of all tennis players should quit the game, and there would be only about 100 tennis players left on the planet - and you wouldn't be one of them.

 

[Brad Smith]

I know no one other than those arguing for the sake of arguing is still reading this thread but I'll go ahead and throw in my two cents. I prefer mids strung with powerful strings at low tensions as this gives me controllable and consistent power and is easier on the arm. I prefer to get the power I need (since I'm certainly not a pro) from the strings and not the frame.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

I know no one other than those arguing for the sake of arguing is still reading this thread but I'll go ahead and throw in my two cents. I prefer mids strung with powerful strings at low tensions as this gives me controllable and consistent power and is easier on the arm. I prefer to get the power I need (since I'm certainly not a pro) from the strings and not the frame.

...and what type of swing style do you have?

 

[jonolau]

Bull! Someone said I didn't have a technical background and that I didn't know any physics. I was simply refuting that claim.

BTW, if you read that thread, we were discussing twisting of a racquet's head on impact, NOT how to play tennis nor which racquet suits one's game the best.

Yeah, but I'd bet I still know 1000 times more physics than you do. And again, if one needed a mastery of physics to play tennis, 99.999% of of all tennis players should quit the game, and there would be only about 100 tennis players left on the planet - and you wouldn't be one of them.

It just so happens that you're the one claiming to have a background in mechanical engineering from an ivy league university (a great accomplishment), an A in physics from college (very applaudable) and entering into discussions about the physics behind tennis, but end up admitting that your knowledge is more than 20 years old and is forgotten.

 

[Brad Smith]

...and what type of swing style do you have?

Why do you ask? Are you being genuine or are you trying to draw me into this pointless war of words?

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Why do you ask? Are you being genuine or are you trying to draw me into this pointless war of words?

Haha no, If you actually go back far enough, you'll see it's not me nor BreakPoint that are trying to be argumentative. We're just trying to reasonably explain stuff to people who just want to argue.

I'm suspecting that you will say that you have a long and loopy swing, yes?

...and that's no as in no i'm not trying to draw you into the certaintly pointless arguing of DoubleHanded and jonolau and yes I'm being genuine.

 

[Brad Smith]

An argument by definition requires at least two participants. It would be interesting to see what would happen if one side simply stopped posting.

As to your question, I do have "old-school" long and loopy strokes with Eastern grips. I wouldn't recommend playing with a mid these days without similar strokes, and in the past when I've experimented with a SW forehand I enjoyed using the PT 280 much more than my regular PC 600.

 

[Head_Rocketman]

Double post... never done that before haha that's weird how it happens

 

[Head_Rocketman]

An argument by definition requires at least two participants. It would be interesting to see what would happen if one side simply stopped posting.

I know what you're getting at haha and yes I did think about stopping my posts cuz the other guys were just being so ridiculous. But it was too tempting to refute all their nonsense.

Anyway your description is a perfect example of what BreakPoint and I were trying to say.