...while Roger is still at peak "what will he do next?"
The racquet companies could sell a lot more frames if the sport split into standards, mids and open, with open being the present gear.
I love to watch high level play with the current equipment- it's great and should be appreciated. But it is just a fact now that pro players cannot play with a headsize of 90, nobody can afford the handicap. It is also true that some body types are at a disadvantage when playing pro tennis compared to the past- there are some great shorter players but nobody the height of Laver can get to number 1, and probably there are players of who don't make the top 100 despite having equal talent to taller players that did. It's also noticeable that the only players still using 93 head size are tall- suggesting that a near-mid is more effective for a taller player. There is depth of talent of well trained players - enough that if there was a chance for a top 20 to make money playing in these other disciplines, some good ones would switch. The key to work towards would be to get them added to the Olympics. The progress of technology was such that the veins of compellingly watchable sport of people playing with wood racquets and with mids are far from exhausted. The amateur game may be more enjoyable played with mids or standards (as long as nobody walks on with a modern racquet they know how to use). In the pro game poly in combination with standards and mids was never/incompletely explored. I would also argue that, in particular, the women's game and doubles were better to watch before poly strings than now, even though the field may be deeper now.
Finally, juniors having tournaments to play in to develop these different games could help them develop better.
Roger Federer has the star power that he could make this happen, and the credibility having played with a mid himself. McEnroe has always wanted wood to come back, he would be on board. Fencing is a tiny sport in comparison to tennis- if it can manage three disciplines with pros specializing, then tennis surely can.
The racquet companies could sell a lot more frames if the sport split into standards, mids and open, with open being the present gear.
I love to watch high level play with the current equipment- it's great and should be appreciated. But it is just a fact now that pro players cannot play with a headsize of 90, nobody can afford the handicap. It is also true that some body types are at a disadvantage when playing pro tennis compared to the past- there are some great shorter players but nobody the height of Laver can get to number 1, and probably there are players of who don't make the top 100 despite having equal talent to taller players that did. It's also noticeable that the only players still using 93 head size are tall- suggesting that a near-mid is more effective for a taller player. There is depth of talent of well trained players - enough that if there was a chance for a top 20 to make money playing in these other disciplines, some good ones would switch. The key to work towards would be to get them added to the Olympics. The progress of technology was such that the veins of compellingly watchable sport of people playing with wood racquets and with mids are far from exhausted. The amateur game may be more enjoyable played with mids or standards (as long as nobody walks on with a modern racquet they know how to use). In the pro game poly in combination with standards and mids was never/incompletely explored. I would also argue that, in particular, the women's game and doubles were better to watch before poly strings than now, even though the field may be deeper now.
Finally, juniors having tournaments to play in to develop these different games could help them develop better.
Roger Federer has the star power that he could make this happen, and the credibility having played with a mid himself. McEnroe has always wanted wood to come back, he would be on board. Fencing is a tiny sport in comparison to tennis- if it can manage three disciplines with pros specializing, then tennis surely can.
