~~~~~ The 90 Sq. In. Club ~~~~~

M

mraznman

Guest
Just switching to a ncode nsix one tour from kblade tour/ntour/speedport red.
 

jsomrak

Rookie
90 sq in club

i was using ag 200 for many months, now i am with yonex rds 001 and playing better. when i was a kid i used the 85 sq inch pro staff. you just can't beat the head light feel. I string with bb ace and pacific gut at 58. at the club i have not found another player with less than 95 sq inch head. Is it true that we are out of style?
 

Takenobu

Rookie
Can I join too?

Hi - I began playing tennis last year around July-October. Almost immediately after I began (with a Dunlop/Wilson 100+ inch) I ordered an n6.1 90 and after that the K6.1 90. I've been playing with the K6.1 90 ever since and i've never regretted it.

I'm wondering when I should play with the n6.1...

I don't feel that it was a bad choice to start with a 90 inch and a little over average heavy racket, and I firmly believe it has helped me in a good way.
 

tennis939

Rookie
i serve my best with a n90 cept....n90 is a little too stiff for me.

can anyone give me a recommendation of a flexible 90's?
i kinda want to try the k90, an fisher racquet(i dont think fisher has a 90's frame but w.e), and a yonex

thanks!
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
i serve my best with a n90 cept....n90 is a little too stiff for me.

can anyone give me a recommendation of a flexible 90's?
i kinda want to try the k90, an fisher racquet(i dont think fisher has a 90's frame but w.e), and a yonex

thanks!

If you want ultra-flexible, there's the Redondo but you'll probably need a little lead if you want good power on the serve. You can feel the flex in the Redondo if you're coming from something stiffer (which is just about everything else).

I've never used the ncode so I can't compare it to the k90.
 

supermario343

Hall of Fame
Just curious how many of you came from 95-100 sq. inch racquets prior to using the K90 and how long did it take you to adjust?

I came from a 95...and now i love the k90. I would say it took me no longer than 2 weeks tops. I am a 5.0 player and it came easy to me i guess? idk...but it feels so good
 

geesechops

Semi-Pro
I kept going smaller and smaller because my one-hander felt better and better, ended up with the PS 6.0 85 and loved it until I eventually started playing 4.0 and up players consistently and needed to go to the K90 last year for the spin and larger sweet spot, now I'm getting the Asian version because I'm playing even higher players and need a tad bit more maneuverability, especially in doubles. Thought I might try out my old NSix-One 95 the other day and my form on the forehand and serve when to hell quick!!! 90 sq in.. for life!!

I think using the PS 6.0 85 for about 2 years was the best thing I could have done at the 3.0 level because it helped (forced!!) me develop technically sound strokes, but don't get me wrong I still used it because I would win more with that stick than any other I had tried at the time. It's a win win folks.
 

Salsa_Lover

Rookie
what geesechops says here is very true

I have 2 K90 and 2 PS85 and many others 95s I got from the bay ( Classic 6.1 HPS 6.0, K95, n95, HPS Tour 95 ).

The K90 is the best overall for competitive play.

But I discovered the PS85 and is a bliss to play with, I play with it whenever I am practicing or on a hitting session.

It helps you ( forces you ) to build better technique, footwork, swing and followup.

It is true that when I play a match I need a bit more power and forgiveness.

But the PS85 is the learning/improving tool by excellence.

I don't get why so many people and istructors have the beginners start with OS light rackets. It should be the opposite. Start with a demanding racket, build right technique with it and then move to another you feel better for competing.
 

Bubba

Professional
what geesechops says here is very true

I have 2 K90 and 2 PS85 and many others 95s I got from the bay ( Classic 6.1 HPS 6.0, K95, n95, HPS Tour 95 ).

The K90 is the best overall for competitive play.

But I discovered the PS85 and is a bliss to play with, I play with it whenever I am practicing or on a hitting session.

It helps you ( forces you ) to build better technique, footwork, swing and followup.

It is true that when I play a match I need a bit more power and forgiveness.

But the PS85 is the learning/improving tool by excellence.

I don't get why so many people and istructors have the beginners start with OS light rackets. It should be the opposite. Start with a demanding racket, build right technique with it and then move to another you feel better for competing.

I agree. I do exactly the same... was just using my 85's this past weekend. One note - The NCode Tour 90 is about 10g lighter in SW than the K90, so it might be a viable option for some that get a bit tired. That said, the K90 has better feel... awesome stick.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
I agree. I do exactly the same... was just using my 85's this past weekend. One note - The NCode Tour 90 is about 10g lighter in SW than the K90, so it might be a viable option for some that get a bit tired. That said, the K90 has better feel... awesome stick.
Nope, in reality, the nCode 90 swings much heavier than the K90. Just try them side-by-side and you'll see.
 

daro_89

New User
I play with this, so I guess I can join?

dsc01492cb9.jpg
 

ryangoring

Professional
New to the club.
I use 3 Wilson Ncode 90 in 4 1/2 currently strung with Gosen 18L OG Micro Sheep.....hope fully i have that right!!??
 

albino smurf

Professional
K90 for three days now. This racquet feels like a perfect match. Took about two minutes to get used to. Can't wait to really fine tune over the coming weeks.
 

benne

Semi-Pro
been using the k90 for about 2/3 months now i only have one frame... but I ALSO USE THE ORIGINAL HEAD RADICAL TRISYS 260 which is amazing. 18x20 string pattern, I'm not perfectly sure on the year it's from but I'd say 93-94 give or take 2... I've had 2 since I was 4-5 depending on the year it was made/given to me. :p love this racquet. The one I rarely use has the original stringjob in it.
 
I have been flirting with the ncode 90 but I keep going back to my APD 100 square inch.

I first thought all you guys were right that it was my technique that was lacking.....but then I see almost every pro using a larger size head as well. Ever wonder why?
 

deme08

Professional
I have been flirting with the ncode 90 but I keep going back to my APD 100 square inch.

I first thought all you guys were right that it was my technique that was lacking.....but then I see almost every pro using a larger size head as well. Ever wonder why?

Are you trying to troll on this thread so you can get it deleted just like all your 100 sq.in club threads?

Don't bite people. Just ignore him.
 

projects

New User
head graphite edge TXE 89, head LM pristige Mid 93, Wilson K90, all synthetic gut 17.

My love is Head TXE, but it gave me tennis elbow and now it has little bit damage on frame. I'm switching between LM P MiD and K90, diff feeling but fine, K90 is more close to TXE 89 or prostaff, just stiffer, 17 gauge string and 2lb lower tension make it better. LM P MID 93 is more power, but if you get use too, it'll be good one..
 
head graphite edge TXE 89, head LM pristige Mid 93, Wilson K90, all synthetic gut 17.

My love is Head TXE, but it gave me tennis elbow and now it has little bit damage on frame. I'm switching between LM P MiD and K90, diff feeling but fine, K90 is more close to TXE 89 or prostaff, just stiffer, 17 gauge string and 2lb lower tension make it better. LM P MID 93 is more power, but if you get use too, it'll be good one..

So then you feel the 93 is the way to go?
 

josef

Rookie
I always thought it was ridiculous to try to play with anything smaller than a 95... until i hit with a K90 the other day. Wow. I'm in.. I just got a Dunlop AG100 and I can't wait to get out and hit with it.. It is SO much fun to play with the K90 (specifically volleys, serves, and touch shots) but my arm was a little sore after 3 sets.. I hope the Dunlop is as fun as the K90.. I feel like I am actually playing tennis now instead of just banging away at the baseline. :)
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
IMO, the AG100 is MORE fun than the K90. Demoing a K90 was like slugging or clubbing the ball; trying an AG100 was carving the ball into little pieces.

Here's an analogy: the K90 is like a broadsword, and the AG100 is a sabre.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
I have been flirting with the ncode 90 but I keep going back to my APD 100 square inch.

I first thought all you guys were right that it was my technique that was lacking.....but then I see almost every pro using a larger size head as well. Ever wonder why?
No, I have never wondered why. They are pros, I'm not. They depend on playing tennis to make a living. I do not. I play tennis for the enjoyment, they do not. It's their job.

There are also very few pros still left that possess the necessary technique to use a small headed racquet. Just look at Nadal, he wouldn't be where he is today if used his same technique but with Federer's racquet.
 

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
Pat Cash said:
on then #1 Leyton Hewitt
If you give him a smaller-headed wooden racket, he'd be an average player

Pete Sampras said:
I am where I am because I grew up with wood. I think kids ought to play with wood rackets until age fourteen or so. It's the only way to master strokes. The graphite, the power, that comes later.

Ilie Nastase said:
All the skill is going out of the game. Players like Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg could do wonderful things with a wood racket. Now it's boom, boom, boom.

Jimmy Connors said:
I've worked too long and too hard to get the kind of aggressive style that I have, and I'd like to keep it. As for those new over-sized rackets, they're for women, old people, and sissies.

Michael Stich who upset Boris Becker in the terribly dull 1991 Wimbledon final said:
High-powered rackets are destroying tennis and making it really boring. When you saw McEnroe and Connors play at Wimbledon, that was real tennis. With the wide-bodies, it will get worse. If it was up to me, I would go back to the old wooden rackets and play real tennis.

Martina Navratilova in 2003 en route to Grand Slam title #57 at the Australian Open said:
The materials are so ridiculous now, it's too easy. I would rather see them go back to smaller rackets and take away the sweet spots. Something needs to be done. The game's too easy with these rackets. You see pictures in the locker-room of Ken Rosewall and Roy Emerson, Margaret Court - all the great Australians and the rackets they were playing with. The sweet spot was tiny.

and finally a real authority on tennis.....

John Barrett said:
Something needs to be done. The power has destroyed the essence of the sport. It is no longer necessary to hit the ball properly because you can just whale away with loads of topspin, knowing the ball will stay in court.


There are a couple of reasons that I purchased the AG100. But mainly, to be honest, it's because playing with the AG100 let's me do two things; use gut and more importantly have a lot of fun.
 
Last edited:

tenniscali

New User
hey bp,

what is/are your primary racquets now? reading through the threads seems like you have tons of racquets, but are a midsize user. what is/are your string setups?

tc
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
hey bp,

what is/are your primary racquets now? reading through the threads seems like you have tons of racquets, but are a midsize user. what is/are your string setups?

tc
My primary racquet is the Asian K90, although I also play with the AG100 quite a bit. I also use the Donnay Pro One Int'l MP a lot and also the Asian nCode 90, as well as the PS 6.0 95 and Vantage 90.

I mostly use cheap synthetic gut and sometimes a multi in my racquets. Poly is too harsh for my arm and gut is too expensive.
 
No, I have never wondered why. They are pros, I'm not. They depend on playing tennis to make a living. I do not. I play tennis for the enjoyment, they do not. It's their job.

There are also very few pros still left that possess the necessary technique to use a small headed racquet. Just look at Nadal, he wouldn't be where he is today if used his same technique but with Federer's racquet.

Well you do have a point. If you are looking just for enjoyment for the "purity" of the strokes then I understand. I on the other hand play for both enjoyment and winning.....and I really do enjoy winning. So thats why I use a 100 square inch racquet.

But I cant comment on nadals game or any Pros game ...they are so many levels above me that I dont have the balls. Maybe the balls on your court are big enough to comment on Nadals talents....but definitely not mine.

In any event I would rather win a 100 square inch like Nadal did than lose with a 90 inch like Federer did.

But I understand where you are comong from.....its more aout enjoyment for you than winning. I think thats kind of cool.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
There are also very few pros still left that possess the necessary technique to use a small headed racquet. Just look at Nadal, he wouldn't be where he is today if used his same technique but with Federer's racquet.

Imagine. . . a world in which Rafa Nadal uses a Dunlop Maxply. . .



AND MISSHITS EVERY SINGLE SHOT.
 
Last edited:

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
There is an amazing disconnect in this conversation. Everyone is talking about Federer needing 'help' with his game and in the same breath how much better the current crop of pros are than the generation who played with wood.

Well, I've been watching a ton of old matches of late, matches from 69 - 81. I just finished watching McEnroe defeat Borg in 4 at the 81 US Open. Guess what. Those guys played amazing tennis with 66 square inch frames. They didn't 'shank you very much' very often.

So, if Federer is as good as everyone says he is, why would he need a bigger racket? For that matter, Nads really doesn't need a 100. I'm sure with a PS 85 within the weight/balance he likes, Nads would be doing exactly what he's doing now. The proof is in the pudding as a variety of pros have come and gone using the PS 85.

IMO, Fed uses what he feels most comfortable with. Does he need to change frames? Only Fed can answer that. If he asked me, I would tell him not to change a thing. I think that the fans in particular have gotten spoiled. You don't see a guy come along and dominate like Federer has these last 5-6 years, it just doesn't happen that often.

And now, he's lost 2 finals. And now, he's gone almost an entire season without winning a Grand Slam. And now, he's proven that he's human. He'll probably go his entire career without winning a French Open. So what?

If anything, it appears that 26 is the age at which mortals begin to falter in Grand Slams. There aren't many who can continue to win past that age. I think Federer is one who can. I think Federer, believe it or not, is having an off year, yes I'd go so far as to say a slump. Even though, 95% of the pros on tour would call 2 Grand Slam finals a great year, for Federer it's a slump.

In the final analysis, if his career ended today, he'd be one of the top 5 players to have ever picked up a racket. BUT! He's not GOAT. That, is called perspective. And for those of you who don't have perspective, go ahead and start talking about how Nads is GOAT and will win 42 Grand Slams...
 
Top