BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Agassi hurt his back with the 107 sq. in. racquet.
The size of your racquet doesn't matter. You will injure your back using any size racquet.
RF97 way better than the PS97S
- Thread starter asifallasleep
- Start date
The size of your racquet doesn't matter. You will injure your back using any size racquet.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
I didn't overlook anything. Using poly in either the cross or mains is using poly, period. I don't use poly, period. It doesn't matter if it's in the mains or the crosses, it kills my arm.
And having poly in the crosses is what allows you to control such a huge head with an open string pattern. If you don't believe me, try playing with your RF97A strung with full soft multi at 48 lbs. Let's see how well you can control it. Much more comfy for your arm though. But the frame is still very stiff.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
They hurt their backs by playing tennis and running around on a tennis court, just like every other tennis player does, including Federer. Their racquets had nothing to do with it. You would know that if you actually played tennis.
unclenimrod
Rookie
So...on the one hand, BP is super correct. The 90 had nothing to do with fed's back problems. Fed has never said anything to that effect and it is a rumor that is as unscientific as it is tantalizing. Most of the posters in this forum don't seem to realize tennis was played before 2005...at a professional level...with 130+mph serves...with no MORE ill effects to players' backs. Stop thinking it. Just stop. Fed never even intimated that his head size was the problem w his back, and he isn't even that hard a server with a small head size to begin with. He has one of the more relaxed service motions on tour. That rumor is bull. Get over it.
That said...his record in big tourneys with the new RF97 has little to do with his record with his former racquet. He is playing a different style of tennis now and has a different set of difficulties. His career as it was ended when he made the switch. The results don't need to be compared because they are like comparing two different players' results, one in its infancy, another already past. Think of current roger as a journeyman...and former roger as a candidate for the greatest ever tennis player.
They are not the same. He is re-inventing himself like Madonna. Just enjoy the show.
asifallasleep
Hall of Fame
Somehow I think Roger and his team know what's best for Roger. That includes racquet choice, strategy, fitness regimen, etc. It's amazing what he is still able to do past his prime.
The notion that he simply needs to switch back to his 90 to automatically play years younger, win numerous more slams, dethrone Djokovic and become number 1 is preposterous. The 90 is not a fountain of youth.
Negatively comparing a younger in his prime Fed to the current, older, past his prime Fed is just silly.
The notion that he simply needs to switch back to his 90 to automatically play years younger, win numerous more slams, dethrone Djokovic and become number 1 is preposterous. The 90 is not a fountain of youth.
Negatively comparing a younger in his prime Fed to the current, older, past his prime Fed is just silly.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
And you're the one who keeps claiming that correlation means causation.
Just because Federer was serving with a Tour 90 when he first felt the pain in his back in 2013 (a recurring injury which he has had for many, many years prior to that) does not mean that either serving nor his Tour 90 was the CAUSE of his back pain. Just like just because Nadal first felt knee pain when hitting a forehand with his APD does not mean that either hitting forehands nor his APD was the CAUSE of his knee pain. We're talking about injuries that develop over many years of playing tennis. It is well documented that Federer had back problems for many years prior to 2013.
From 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7729083.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/te...raws-from-Paris-Masters-with-back-injury.html
2012: http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.c...into-rare-withdrawal-due-to-back-spasms/?_r=0
And after playing with the RF97A for almost a year in 2014:
http://www.barclaysatpworldtourfina...nis/finals-2014-sunday-final-djokovic-federer
LiquidWhip
Rookie
I'd say I'm finding more precision and control with the PS97S. For me (and in its customised form), it reminds me of an amplified 2012 PS95.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
To bring mine to 6 pts headlight I've added approximately approximately 15g of tungsten putty and mine comes in at 344g so signifcantly lower in weight than the RF97.
TennisHound
Legend
12.1 oz is not significantly lighter. I had my RF at 12.3 strung without the leather grip, and it was 6-7 Pts HL.
But if you like the modified PS97S better then that's what you should use. I just prefer the RF97. It's a little stiffer, but it's at a weight that I would end up modifying any racquet to, anyway.
But if you like the modified PS97S better then that's what you should use. I just prefer the RF97. It's a little stiffer, but it's at a weight that I would end up modifying any racquet to, anyway.
Last edited:
Sander001
Hall of Fame
There are different types of back injuries, the particular one I'm talking about happened serving.
n8dawg6
Legend
that's what she said
TennisHound
Legend
Good play, ha ha Ha ha ha !
coolschreiber
Hall of Fame
I didn't overlook anything. Using poly in either the cross or mains is using poly, period. I don't use poly, period. It doesn't matter if it's in the mains or the crosses, it kills my arm.
And having poly in the crosses is what allows you to control such a huge head with an open string pattern. If you don't believe me, try playing with your RF97A strung with full soft multi at 48 lbs. Let's see how well you can control it. Much more comfy for your arm though. But the frame is still very stiff.
Gut in mains works fine for me - comfort, power, control .. you name it. To each their own
.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
I’m pretty sure a 12.3oz RF97 isn’t the norm. My pair weigh 367g/12.9oz so that’s 0.8oz or 23g which is a very significant amount of weight in a tennis racquet.
Anton
Legend
He is talking about RF97 with synthetic grip swapped in.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
Yes, I know but his first sentence simply stated "12.1 oz is not significantly lighter" and his previous comment suggested that to make the PS97S HL would bring it into "RF97 weight territory".
What I was trying to convey was that a 6pts HL PS97S at 344g/12.1oz is not typical RF97 weight territory which is usually in north of 12.6oz and therefore 12.1oz is signifcantly lighter.
Anton
Legend
Of course RF97 is not 6pts HL...unless you swap in a synthetic grip.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
As I'm sure you're fully aware, swapping out the leather grip for a synthetic grip isn't the only way to get to 6pt HL on a RF97...
As someone who has added lead to their RF97, you'll know that you can also add a very small amount of weight in the hoop to get it 6pts HL very easily.
TennisHound
Legend
You're right. I'm talking no leather grip and 2 overgrips. 12.1 is significantly lighter than 12.9oz or 12.6-7 which is what mine was with leather grip. My "weight territory" is right around 12.3 to 12.5ish. Significantly lighter to me would be 11.5 to 11.7ish strung. However, is it possible to achieve the hl with the PS97S at these weights?
The point initially was that I didn't want to bother with tail weighting up to 12 oz just to get the racquet 7-8pts hl, when the RF is only slightly heavier and has this already built in. Taking the weight of the leather grip off has brought the weight down to an acceptable level (12.3oz with 2 overgrips and dampener) and kept the headlightness (6-7pts).
Last edited:
I also removed my leather grip on my RF 97. I am curious now how many points headlight it is, I will measure tonight. I do miss the more defined bevels of leather but I wanted to decrease weight some and this is the only way I could think of doing it. The only other way would be to go with thinner gauge strings but for durability reasons I don't want to do that.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
That's fair enough and totally understandable - though I'm quite suprised that removing the leather grip and using just two overgrips hasn't made your RF97 closer to equal balance (i.e. 2-4 pts HL).
I guess as you were alluding to earlier, if your modified RF97 works for you and you've found a set up you like it then you should stick with it.
TennisHound
Legend
They're pretty hl to begin with, so taking the leather off lowered it, but it worked better imo.
The 97S may be better weighted up than an RF, but HH racquets take a lot of weight to get HL, or to an acceptable HLness. It has taken a lot of weight to get my Steam 96 to 8 pts HL, and doesn't hit that much better (of course the racquet my not be the best).
The 97S may be better weighted up than an RF, but HH racquets take a lot of weight to get HL, or to an acceptable HLness. It has taken a lot of weight to get my Steam 96 to 8 pts HL, and doesn't hit that much better (of course the racquet my not be the best).
LiquidWhip
Rookie
That's why I like tungsten putty for tail weighting. As it's so dense you only need a small amount to significant increase the weight and shift the balance.
Anton
Legend
...but is the only way to get RF97 to be like your 6 point headlight 97s with 15g on the handle. Yea?
I'll put it to you another way, RF97 is not 6 points headlight, it is 9 points and to get there from 97s side you'll need to add more weight on the handle.
TennisHound
Legend
Interesting. I used blue tac and I used about 4' on both sides of the hairpin and a heavy grip. It was a pain.
TennisHound
Legend
With Wilson QC, its possible to get an RF with an even lighter weight or even highter HLness.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Well the same applies to the 97S so....
o0lunatik
Professional
Most definitely. I currently have three 97S' that I got two new and one used through diff sellers, and they are all out of specs in terms of balance. I have not taken all official measurements yet, but strung and a couple of overgrips, they weight in at 12.1 oz. I did measure balance and they are 2-3 points off from one another, which is a huge difference in how they swing for a more balanced racquet. I am debating on which route I should go in terms of matching them right now, for I do really like the head lighter one that feels very whippy for its specs. Anyhow, Wilson QC just sucks you know what.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
You're still missing the point so let me make myself clear.
My original point to the OP was never to highlight how to get the PS97s to 9 pts HL or to get the RF97 to 6pts HL
The point I was originally making, irrespective of what transpired later, was that as I stated above (and in my view) 344g was significantly lighter than 360+g and that 344g isn't typical RF97 territory.
TennisHound
Legend
...so a fully modified 97S at 8 pts HL and 12.1oz is significantly lighter and nowhere near, or even remotely close to RF territory, even if the RF is 12.3oz and 6pts HL. I'm sure LiquidWhip will like that.
I'm guessing the differences in QC would be significant even if they are.1 or .2oz difference.
Last edited:
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
You have to consider that while you have removed your RF's leather grip, the 97S still has its leather grip, so it is possible to make it lighter still.
LiquidWhip
Rookie
If you read things more carefully, the OP says by the time you get the PS97S to a HL balance suitable for him (at which point the preferential balance was not revealed), it would be RF weight territory (not the OP's own RF weight territory just RF territory) - which is typically in excess of 360g and significantly heavier than 344g.
Did I at any point out that the RF97 was 6pts HL or should be modified to be? No. And did I suggest to the OP that he should be aiming to get the PS97S to 6pts HL. Again, no.
All I was highlighting was that it was possible to get the PS97S to (in my view) an acceptable HL balance point and keep it at a weight significantly lower than a typical RF97. Understand?
Last edited:
Anton
Legend
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Well you can redistribute the weight and focus it near the end of the racquet, making it more HL at the same (or even a lesser) weight.Just in case you like that classic head heavy balance
Anton
Legend
All true but lets get real, most people will be looking for at least 4-5 point headlight and will be adding weight anyway.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Well yeah, but I can get a decent HL balance at under 12 oz with the 97S. That's impossible with the RF97.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
1. How do you know Federer's type of back injury was caused by serving? Are you his personal physician?
2. What does his racquet have to do with his back injury? Players hurt their backs playing tennis regardless of the size of their racquets.
3. Just because he was using the Tour 90 when he hurt his back does not mean that it was the Tour 90 that CAUSED his injury. But then you must believe that correlation always means causation.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
But without the poly in the crosses, I doubt you could control that beast.Gut in mains works fine for me - comfort, power, control .. you name it. To each their own
Sander001
Hall of Fame
His injury happened serving with his old racquet. He said so himself.1. How do you know Federer's type of back injury was caused by serving? Are you his personal physician?
2. What does his racquet have to do with his back injury? Players hurt their backs playing tennis regardless of the size of their racquets.
3. Just because he was using the Tour 90 when he hurt his back does not mean that it was the Tour 90 that CAUSED his injury. But then you must believe that correlation always means causation.
asifallasleep
Hall of Fame
I have to admit that I no longer miss my thin beam frames and that now the thickness of the RF97 feels perfect to me now. This also adds to my preference of the RF97 over the 97S. If the 97S had come out a year ago, I probably would have been playing with a modded version right now. I can finesse now with the RF97 the same way I could with my K90. It just took some time. I enjoy hitting with my K90 still, but it now feels thin, low powered and less forgiving when compared to my RF97.
v-verb
Hall of Fame
Poly in mine. Volkl Cyclone 19 mains (18kg) crossed with Mosquito Bite 18 (16kg). Perfect for me, arm friendly
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
No, he did not. He's had a chronic back problem for many, many years prior to 2013. His injury did NOT occur in 2013. He had already been injured a long time ago.
If you start feeling pain in your chest today, does that mean that the cheeseburger you ate for lunch today clogged your arteries? Or is your chronic cardiovascular condition caused by eating high-fat, high-cholesterol, unhealthy foods every day for your entire life?
Sander001
Hall of Fame
There is more than 1 type of back injuries. http://www.spine-health.com/conditi...es/sport-injuries-back-injuries-and-back-pain
The one Federer was talking about here happened during serving.
And thanks for the strawman about cheesburgers.
TennisHound
Legend
The OP didn't say that, but so what!! Wasn't it implied for us to have to take a test before we signed up on here? Ok I get it. Significantly lighter and not in the RF97 weight territory (long day at work).
Last edited:
Fxanimator1
Hall of Fame
I hurt my back washing my 107 lb. German Shepherd.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Federer has had a back problem for almost his entire career. It did not occur in 2013. And it had absolutely nothing to do with his racquet. No one else here agrees with you.
2012: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/jul/02/roger-federer-xavier-malisse-wimbledon
Sander001
Hall of Fame
"Honestly I'm not too worried," Federer quote. But the other back injury he suffered while serving did worry him. Thanks for proving my point.
