Racquet Snobs, O/S Racquets, and this Board

[AngeloDS]

One thing I did see a friend told me about was the mens doubles finals. My friend Chad (old doubles partner in HS) called me up and was like turn it on ESPN 2. Haha, I did see Paes using a Pure Drive and had beautiful volleys and reaction volleys.

I'm good at volleying but reaction volleying like that is pure genius. I have to put myself in a good position to volley. I'm not an excellent reaction volleyer. I can reaction volley but I lose more points than win heh. Darn those college reaction volley drills.

 

[tennisplayer]

Keep in mind though that pros customize their racquets to the point where it feels nothing like the original, or the one it looks like. Who knows how much weight Roddick and Paes have added to their racquets. For the amount of tennis they play, and the speeds they have to counter, I cannot believe that a tweener (10 to 11.5 Oz?) will cut it.

 

[vin]

Keep in mind though that pros customize their racquets to the point where it feels nothing like the original, or the one it looks like. Who knows how much weight Roddick and Paes have added to their racquets. For the amount of tennis they play, and the speeds they have to counter, I cannot believe that a tweener (10 to 11.5 Oz?) will cut it.

Three's a thread in the Pro Gear forum supposedly from the stringers of the French Open that lists the unstrung weight and balance of a bunch of pro's rackets.

Wayne Arthurs' unstrung Pure Drive weighed in at 307 grams. With the typical 15g that strings add, it would be 322g or just under 11.4 oz.

Besides, the reference to pro's was based on the comment that tweeners have too much power for an all around game. Added weight is just going to make that worse, so if there are pro doubles players using tweeners, it makes that idea even more unlikely.

 

[BreakPoint]

Nonsense! I'm playing doubles this winter with three other guys who, like me, are 5.0+. (One is a "rated 5.5" but I've beaten him every time we've played singles. I don't think that makes me a 5.5. I think his rating is off a bit.)

But all of us are very solid net players. We have very many thrilling all-4-at-net points. Three of us play MPs; one uses an OS. And more guys in the top ranks of Colorado tennis play OS frames than Mids. (In fact, I can only think of three top Open Tourney guys in our state who play with Mids.) I'd say the mix within our Open Players is:
25% OS
65% MP
10% Mid

[Disclaimer: Due to our thinner air (altitude) the predominant styles of play are Attack the Net and S&V. Our players tend to be more adept at net than most of your flatlanders ... out of necessity.]

- KK

Yes, but may I venture to guess that all of you four guys probably learned to play tennis with wood racquets or at least smaller headed racquets than what you're currently using? If so, then you guys already have the proper fundamentals and mechanics and that's why you can still play doubles so well with your new modern racquets. It's the same reason why McEnroe can still play top pro level tennis today with his 98 sq. in. MP racquet. The precision and accuracy of having to hit a much smaller sweetspot over the years with his wood racquet have been ingrained into his mechanics, so now, it's much easier for him to continue using those mechanics but with the luxury of more margin of error, more maneuverability, and more power that his bigger, lighter, more powerful modern racquet affords him.

If you four guys (or McEnroe, for that matter) had learned the game using a Pure Drive, I doubt you guys would be playing doubles at the same high level that you do today. For one thing, you probably never would have learned how to volley properly and likely wouldn't have the touch, control, and fineese that's a necessary part of doubles.

I think Roddick is a prime example as he can't seem to volley to save his life! I think it's also one reason why Federer is so dominating over Roddick. Federer learned the game using a demanding player's racquet, while Roddick did not. Now that difference has become obvious, Federer has a complete game while Roddick never developed one because he was never forced to. So who's the superior player now?

 

[AngeloDS]

Didn't Roddick used to play with a POG I believe?

Roddick can't volley well because he doesn't know when to come in. Federer makes it look easy because he sets up his shots and then comes in . Federer's volleys are easier than Roddicks for that reason.

Roddick however has nice volleys if he's setup but a lot of time he never sets them up and stands too far behind to close in that well.

 

[BreakPoint]

If a grown man can't even accept the evolution of his sport, then maybe he too should look for another sport to try.

So should McEnroe be looking for another sport to try? He wants to go back to wood racquets after all.

It's not just about being able to simply swing a racket. You have to be able to swing it well enough to meet the demands of your swing type. Since you seem to be stuck in your own realm of old school tennis, which is fine, it seems that you can't fully relate to the additional demands of some of the more modern swing types.

Anyone who has a spinny game is not going to be able to handle the same racket that they'd be able to if they played a more traditional game. I'm sure you already know that, so I guess you just resent it and want to undermine that type of game. Maybe you're getting sick of being spun off the court. :mrgreen:

McEnroe with his "traditional style" and "old school tennis" is still beating the pants off of youngsters with their "modern swing types" and "spinny games". Which, I guess, goes to show that just because your opponent is hitting the ball one way does not mean that you have to hit the ball that way also.

Again, everyone should just use the racquet that they like the best. Please read my sig below!

 

[BreakPoint]

Didn't Roddick used to play with a POG I believe?

Not sure, but have you ever tried to volley with a POG? I couldn't volley with that thing at all!

And I guess some of the most well-known and best volleyers and serve-and-volleyers in the history of tennis used the POG? I mean guys like Agassi, Chang, Spadea, Coria, Nalbandian, Ferrero, Costa.....should I continue? LOL.

 

[BreakPoint]

Then why do you see doubles players like Arthurs and Paes using Pure Drives? I'm sure there are plenty more examples, but I don't pay much attention to the doubles side of the tour.

Remember that they did not learn to play tennis with the Pure Drive. They already learned how to volley and had the proper mechanics ingrained into their mind and bodies long before they started using a Pure Drive. That's why they are able to effectively use a Pure Drive today. In fact, I think both Arthurs and Paes only switched to the PD in recent years. I remember watching the both of them not too long ago when they were both using a different racquet, although I don't recall what those racquets were.

 

[rfprse]

This is of course, accurate, and Pancho misunderstands what exactly it is about "beginners" frames that make them beginners' frames. It has nothing to do with weight, as the difference between a granny stick and Ivan Lendl's old bat is small enough that it wouldn't render an infant incapable of hefting it.

What a beginner's racquet is designed to do, and what a player's racquet absolutely ISN'T, is to bunt the ball in a general direction, and have the resulting flight of the ball go more or less in that direction, with a little bit of pace.

That's a beginner's trait, because that's about the only style of play that will allow a true beginner to get the ball in play in a reasonable fashion. Point and shoot, no fundamental mechanical understanding necessary. When a ball, even a fairly fast one comes at you, you can sort of hold the racquet out and direct the rebound where you hope it'll go. Try that with an 03 Tour, and you've got a lot of balls wangling off the court and into the fence, or dribbling into the net.

"Ultra Light Weight" is a marketing gimmick, nothing more. Beginner's frames weren't super light as recently as the Wilson Profile era. Heavy, stiff, powerful frames are actually far better suited to the "bunt and hope" game, which basically requires the racquet to do its best impression of a wall. But Head started the whole titanium thing, and on a whim, screamed, LIGHTER AND MORE POWERFUL!!! REVOLUTIONARY!!! And the suckers of the world bought in, because they had no idea about physics. They're still buying in today.

So anyway, nobody who refuses to acknowledge the idea that a POG (or other players frame) might be too heavy for a beginner is suffering from any lack of knowledge. In fact suggesting that lightness is an important factor (or a desirable trait) at all at that level showcases a certain ignorance of both marketing history and physical laws.

That said, there are plenty of good reasons to advise CERTAIN raw beginners away from a players frame, and plenty of good reasons for more advanced players to choose relatively lighter (or heavier) or relatively stiffer (or more flexible) or relatively bigger (or smaller) frames. Once you are adept enough to understand your own game, your reasons for choosing a particular frame composition can be a little more rational and important.

Despite all that, though, I still say everybody should just shut up and use the POG.

Hey, great post! Except for the last word in the last sentence, I couldn't agree more.

 

[Camilio Pascual]

Any total beginners out there? Don't just blindly go for a POG just because somone here says it's good .... demo it first and try it out for yourself.

Exactly!
I play with the POGOStick and think it's a great racquet. Definitely not every one's cup of tea. Just as I lack the technique and skills to play well with any racquet that is named "Hammer", "Thunder", "Lightning", or "Hyper".

What is being overlooked here is the wide variance of potential skill level that exists in beginners.
Show me a skilled, teenaged baseball (and similarly skilled sports) player and I'll show you somebody who should be seriously starting out with a racquet such as the Head Radical, POG OS/Mid, or Wilson 6.1.
Yes, the vast majority of beginners should not be messin' with the likes of a POG.
But, let us not be racquet snobs and claim that NONE of them should play with one.