realplayer
Semi-Pro
So depending on the weather and opponent he changes his set-up that drastically. Do you really believe this? i don't
Specs: Nadal and Paes racquet specs
- Thread starter Greg Raven
- Start date
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Look at his website and then you email Roger himself and Priority 1 and tell them that they are liars OKLOL
realplayer
Semi-Pro
Ofcourse he changes his set-up but not that drastically. The difference of 330 and 375 is just too much. But if you know it so well show me where he says he changes his set-up that drastically. I could not find it and you won't find it either.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
No one is suggesting he changes his setup from 330 to 375. I suggested that his swingweight is 365-370 based on my extensive experience with racquet customization. It's possible that he uses 360 on grass, and 370 on clay, but probably the differences are more minor than that.
realplayer
Semi-Pro
BTW. In this German tennismagazin of december 2003. I know it's long time ago but i think it has some valuable information has the specifics of Federer's racket at that time.
The weight of his racket is 355 grams and the balance point is 31,7 cm. On clay his weight is 362g(32,1 cm) On grass 355 g(31,7) Hardcourt 358 g(31,9) and in Halle, A grass tournament in Germany his racket weighted 360 g and the balance point was 31,8 cm
As you see he changes his set-up but the changes are minor like any pro.
He played the same racket he uses now and the headsize is 580,5 cm.
The weight of his racket is 355 grams and the balance point is 31,7 cm. On clay his weight is 362g(32,1 cm) On grass 355 g(31,7) Hardcourt 358 g(31,9) and in Halle, A grass tournament in Germany his racket weighted 360 g and the balance point was 31,8 cm
As you see he changes his set-up but the changes are minor like any pro.
He played the same racket he uses now and the headsize is 580,5 cm.
Last edited:
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
These look to be legit unstrung specs. These numbers do indeed convert to swingweights in the 360-370 range, or possibly a little higher if his racquet is extremely polarized. They have to be unstrung, because otherwise adding lead to the hoop for clay would reduce spin rather than increase it.
In fact, this is the most legit-looking info on Fed's specs yet. Someone should create a new thread for this.
Last edited:
realplayer
Semi-Pro
Maybe i have some more interesting info for you about his tension. If Federer plays on clay with sunny weather he chooses the following tensions. The first racket he uses has 28,5 kilo strung in the mains and in the crosses 26 kg.
The second one has 26,5 in the mains and 24 crosses. Racket three, four and five have 27 kg in the mains and 24,5 crosses. Then he has racket 6 if he needs more control with a tension of 29,5(mains) and 27(crosses)
The second one has 26,5 in the mains and 24 crosses. Racket three, four and five have 27 kg in the mains and 24,5 crosses. Then he has racket 6 if he needs more control with a tension of 29,5(mains) and 27(crosses)
Jonnyf
Hall of Fame
see travlerajm, i just dont believe your SW on grass and clay. i would think its lower on clay because you need racquet-speed to counter the mega-topspin balls you encouter on clay and higher on grass because you need stability because the ball is zipping. the idea that its higher on clay because you have more time to swing it is kinda contradicting. you may have more time to swing on clay, but if your racquet is heavy, youre still going to need an earlier prepartion, hence no time gained. plus it will get you really tired and may not last long--which is crucial to clay court matches. i do think they change their tension more instead of the sw, like realplayer said.
ubel
Professional
Dude, you're my freaking savior. I lowered my tension by about 5 pounds and I've got so much more control and spin on the ball now. I didn't realize how tightly I was stringing my racquet until I lowered it.. I can actually feel the ball so much more now. Thanks a ton man.
Greg Raven
Semi-Pro
For anyone who's interested, I've posted a new page on one of my websites dealing with the two issues of changes in racquet measurements due to the addition of mass at the tip, and the differences in swingweight between properly and improperly mounted racquets. The details are here:
http://www.hdtennis.com/grs/adding_mass_at_tip.html
http://www.hdtennis.com/grs/adding_mass_at_tip.html
Mike Cottrill
Hall of Fame
What Machine
Greg,
What machine was used to string Nadal's raq at the PL open?
thanks
Mike
Greg,
What machine was used to string Nadal's raq at the PL open?
thanks
Mike
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Thanks for doing this exercise.
Your scale seems to be a little drifty, but if you use the difference in balance to determine how much mass was added, it comes to almost exactly 16g (your scale says it was 17.5g). In other words, the lead tape you used was exactly 1g per square inch like it is supposed to be.
I calculated the swingweight for each of your mass additions, and every time the average of your two "proper" measurements was within 1 kg-cm^2 of the calculated swingweight difference, except for the last one, which was within 2.
So your Prince machine seems to be extremely accurate!
However, I'm puzzled why the swingweight contributions of the added masses were not the same when you rotated 90 degrees. It makes sense that the baseline is higher. But shouldn't the increases be the same?
Greg Raven
Semi-Pro
Casey Maus' Babolat Star 4.
Greg Raven
Semi-Pro
You're welcome.
I've been attributing this to error stack, as I've seen similar "drift" when using other scales.
Excellent.
You'd certainly think so, huh? This is yet another reason to be cautious about picking up specs when you don't know where they've been. While I was doing the testing, a couple of times the racquet handle didn't seat exactly square in the holder, and the readings were 2 or more kg*cm2 off from the reading when the racquet was squarely mounted in the holder. The Prince PTC is accurate enough that these erroneous results stood out immediately, but I was doing multiple tests, which made it trivial to catch errors. If one was doing only one measurement of a bunch of racquets, an erroneous result due to mis-mounting might go unnoticed.
PurePrestige
Semi-Pro
Hey Greg,
I was just a little confused as to which mounting was the correct way. I assume that the Right Left was the proper mounting way? With the lower numbers?
I was just a little confused because it says in the article that the discrepancy was way off, which seemed to be by 18 kgcm2. Im assuming that it was reading 18kgcm2 higher the wrong way. Just wanted to clarify.
I was just a little confused as to which mounting was the correct way. I assume that the Right Left was the proper mounting way? With the lower numbers?
I was just a little confused because it says in the article that the discrepancy was way off, which seemed to be by 18 kgcm2. Im assuming that it was reading 18kgcm2 higher the wrong way. Just wanted to clarify.
grizzly4life
Professional
what's the date on the federer spec's? i notice the original poster mentioned paes and nadal from pacific life open, but nothing about when fed was.
Greg Raven
Semi-Pro
As mentioned in an earlier post in this discussion, the proper mounting is with the racquet pivoting as if it was hitting a ground stroke.
Greg Raven
Semi-Pro
I believe it was on or around July 9, 2006.
Redflea
Hall of Fame
Simple question was asked a few times, haven't seen it answered...
Anyone know why Nadal (or anyone) would request crosses strung bottom-up? What's the benefit to doing that over top-down? Racquet-specific issue, or ?
Thanks...
Fun thread, except for some of the petty testosterone-based sniping...
Anyone know why Nadal (or anyone) would request crosses strung bottom-up? What's the benefit to doing that over top-down? Racquet-specific issue, or ?
Thanks...
Fun thread, except for some of the petty testosterone-based sniping...
