The Pros are going to have to start playing with wooden racquets again

newpball

Legend
There was nothing, NOTHING that felt as good as a Dunlop Maxply Fort strung with uncoated natural gut at 58.
Lol
I played with that racket and string combination.

Compared to a modern racket it is total crap.

I do not believe for one second, assuming you actually still play tennis, you currently play with this racket.

Oh, here we go:

Wilson Six.One 95 16X18 Prince Syn Gut Poly Blend @ 55

What a joke!
 

mxmx

Professional
It ticks me off...

I don't think people realise that the rackets only do so much. It infuriates me when McEnroe says players of today has these great rackets with power, unlike in his day when it was wood. Uhrm...probably the biggest reason we have more power in the game, is due to technique and more modern footwork and modern grips.

EDIT:
And it would be safe today that if people had to make modern wooden rackets, that it would have just as much power as normal rackets, if not more (due to the weight). They can make wooden rackets with the same headsizes of today, as well as the same "rigid angled shape" (anti flex) instead of the "flat shape" (flex) of the past. It will not solve things going back to wooden rackets.

- faster courts
- slower balls?
- higher net
- new court dimensions
- only second serve?
 
Last edited:

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
Lol
I played with that racket and string combination.

Compared to a modern racket it is total crap.

I do not believe for one second, assuming you actually still play tennis, you currently play with this racket.

Oh, here we go:

Wilson Six.One 95 16X18 Prince Syn Gut Poly Blend @ 55

What a joke!
Wow...jumping ugly and getting personal so soon?

Please REREAD my post as it clearly indicates past tense. Let me help you:

There WAS nothing.... WAS means in the past, not current.

It may have been total crap to you, but everyone has there own opinion and I voiced mine.

You proved the old adage is right, there are more horse's arseses in the world than there are horses.
 
Last edited:

onehandbh

Legend
It ticks me off...

I don't think people realise that the rackets only do so much. It infuriates me when McEnroe says players of today has these great rackets with power, unlike in his day when it was wood. Uhrm...probably the biggest reason we have more power in the game, is due to technique and more modern footwork and modern grips.
Do you think the current racquets do not offer much advantage?
Do you think a 12 oz wood racquet has the same power and spin as a
12 oz Babolat Pure Drive?

I accidentally had poly put in my Jack Kramer wood racquet.
I'd say it was a bit wimpier than a PD w/poly...

Try this test:
Play a friend that you normally split sets with or that can beat you but barely.
Play one match with a wood racquet and one with your regular racquet.
Let us know what the scores are.
 

spaceman_spiff

Hall of Fame
Are you serious? So you don't think ultra stiff modern racquets with RA's in the 70's cause any more injuries than ultra flexy wood racquets with RA's in the 30's? And you don't think ultra stiff poly strings cause any more injuries than ultra resilient natural gut?

But I agree that running around the baseline endlessly can also cause more injuries.


And what kind of racquets were they using. Yup, graphite. Tennis was much more popular when almost everyone was using wood racquets, like Borg, McEnroe, Vilas, Gerulaitis, etc.

People also enjoy watching attacking tennis and volley winners.
Well, given that the OP was about injuries amongst the pros, and most of their reported injuries are back and leg problems, I'd say the equipment is less of an issue than the physical strain caused by the movement around the court and stretching for defensive shots over and over. Now, if pros were constantly pulling out of tournaments because of tennis elbow or other issues caused by greater shock from stiffer frames and strings, then I might agree with you. But, they don't.

As for your second point, it's already been shown that players from the '90's could serve just as hard with a wood racket (see the Phillippousis test). If you make everyone switch to wood, serve speed would decline by only a tiny bit and placement might actually improve slightly, making serves just as effective if not slightly more so. But the effectiveness of returns would drop dramatically. And since the main problem was that spectators were bored of points lasting 3 shots or less every time, switching to wood and decreasing the effectiveness of returns would only make the problem worse.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Well, given that the OP was about injuries amongst the pros, and most of their reported injuries are back and leg problems, I'd say the equipment is less of an issue than the physical strain caused by the movement around the court and stretching for defensive shots over and over.
If that's what you think then you haven't been paying attention.

Now, if pros were constantly pulling out of tournaments because of tennis elbow or other issues caused by greater shock from stiffer frames and strings, then I might agree with you. But, they don't.
And they are. I think you need to pay attention to more than just the Top 10 players (even though the Top 10 have also had a variety of wrist, elbow, and shoulder problems).

As for your second point, it's already been shown that players from the '90's could serve just as hard with a wood racket (see the Phillippousis test). If you make everyone switch to wood, serve speed would decline by only a tiny bit and placement might actually improve slightly, making serves just as effective if not slightly more so. But the effectiveness of returns would drop dramatically.
And that would be a good thing. (BTW, first serve speed would drop off because it's hard to swing such a heavy racquet so fast for long periods and they also had to take something off of the first serve because it was hard to spin in a second serve with a small and heavy racquet with a super dense 18x20 string pattern.)

And since the main problem was that spectators were bored of points lasting 3 shots or less every time, switching to wood and decreasing the effectiveness of returns would only make the problem worse.
Quite the contrary. Both Borg and McEnroe served and volleyed in the 1980 Wimbledon final and spectators enjoyed that match immensely.
 

murrfan1

New User
Breakpoint, are you being serious?

Nadal - Knee
Murray - Back
Federer - Back
Berdych - Back
Djokovic - Ankle
Ferrer - Toe
Del Potro - Knee
Wawrinka - Thigh

This is just off the top of my head, and all are inside the last year. You couldn't be more wrong.
 

BlueB

Legend
Breakpoint, are you being serious?

Nadal - Knee
Murray - Back
Federer - Back
Berdych - Back
Djokovic - Ankle
Ferrer - Toe
Del Potro - Knee
Wawrinka - Thigh

This is just off the top of my head, and all are inside the last year. You couldn't be more wrong.
I pretty much agree with you. However, to be fair, Djokovic and Delpo had shoulder and wrist injuries, respectively, in the past.
One could also argue that unlike the elbow injuries, that mostly come from light and stiff frames, shoulder comes from too heavy racquet and wrist arguably from too heavy racquet.
My wrist injury, that put me out of the game for 25 years, came from heavy wooden frames. It gets back to me very quickly when I go much over 12oz.
 

spaceman_spiff

Hall of Fame
And that would be a good thing. (BTW, first serve speed would drop off because it's hard to swing such a heavy racquet so fast for long periods and they also had to take something off of the first serve because it was hard to spin in a second serve with a small and heavy racquet with a super dense 18x20 string pattern.)


Quite the contrary. Both Borg and McEnroe served and volleyed in the 1980 Wimbledon final and spectators enjoyed that match immensely.
For someone like Roddick, whose serve required a lot of energy, a switch to wood might have had a significant effect. But Djokovic, Murray, Federer, and even Nadal have fairly fluent motions that they could reproduce over the course of a match without a significant drop in later sets. And if you look in the past, guys like Sampras, Becker, Stich, Ivanisevic, and Krajicek had serves that would not have been significantly affected by a switch to wood, and that includes their second serves (which were often just another first serve).

Oh, and your example of an exciting S&V match involves two guys who are under 6' tall and have less muscle mass than most of the guys on tour today. Players today are taller and more muscular, so even with the exact same equipment, they'd still hit significantly harder over a longer period of time.
 
Last edited:

jussumman

Professional
There's other variables in tennis that would make for more varying playing styles, (namely not making the surfaces the same speeds). They don't need to revert to wooden racquets (I've never played with one myself).
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
And they are. I think you need to pay attention to more than just the Top 10 players .....
Breakpoint, are you being serious?

Nadal - Knee
Murray - Back
Federer - Back
Berdych - Back
Djokovic - Ankle
Ferrer - Toe
Del Potro - Knee
Wawrinka - Thigh

This is just off the top of my head, and all are inside the last year. You couldn't be more wrong.
Um...how many of those players on your list are OUTSIDE of the Top 10?

Krajicek - Elbow
Sampras- Elbow
Agassi - Wrist
Haas - Shoulder
Gasquet - Elbow
Roddick - Shoulder
Del Potro - Wrist
Darcis - Shoulder
Fish - Shoulder

Top 2000 players - hundreds with a variety of arm/wrist/shoulder issues, most of whom you've never heard of. If the #436 player in the world pulls out of a challenger or futures event because of a elbow injury, would you ever know about it?
 

JAY1

Semi-Pro
Please Read Again? This Is Only For Pros!

The smaller racquet head of wood forces the player to concentrate harder to hit the sweet spot. This isn’t a DISADVANTAGE cured by the advent of mid and oversized racquets, but is a necessary test of a player’s ability to maintain unbroken concentration against rising external pressures. That’s essential to the discipline of the sport of tennis. Even a defining characteristic.

Adding unearned power, and making it easier to hit the ball by changing the materials and structural size of the racquet, cheats the players and audiences of the challenges presented by the sport of tennis as a discipline. It gives the illusion of improvement when the change in performance is more due to shifts in equipment, rather than enhanced skill levels.

Professional Baseball does not allow players to use aluminum bats or to use cork in their wooden bats, because - while it increases power - the American Professional Baseball Association saw rightly that everyone was hitting home-runs and that making it “easier” on everybody to gain “success” was actually hurting the sport. Because it was like cheating.
 

Imago

Hall of Fame
The smaller racquet head of wood forces the player to concentrate harder to hit the sweet spot. This isn’t a DISADVANTAGE cured by the advent of mid and oversized racquets, but is a necessary test of a player’s ability to maintain unbroken concentration against rising external pressures. That’s essential to the discipline of the sport of tennis. Even a defining characteristic.
I see it now. Yoga = samadhi, samadhi is citta-ekagrata, and this continuously onepointed mind is achieved by playing with woodies. The riddle of Yoga-darsana is resolved.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
The smaller racquet head of wood forces the player to concentrate harder to hit the sweet spot. This isn’t a DISADVANTAGE cured by the advent of mid and oversized racquets, but is a necessary test of a player’s ability to maintain unbroken concentration against rising external pressures. That’s essential to the discipline of the sport of tennis. Even a defining characteristic.

Adding unearned power, and making it easier to hit the ball by changing the materials and structural size of the racquet, cheats the players and audiences of the challenges presented by the sport of tennis as a discipline. It gives the illusion of improvement when the change in performance is more due to shifts in equipment, rather than enhanced skill levels.

Professional Baseball does not allow players to use aluminum bats or to use cork in their wooden bats, because - while it increases power - the American Professional Baseball Association saw rightly that everyone was hitting home-runs and that making it “easier” on everybody to gain “success” was actually hurting the sport. Because it was like cheating.
All you can do in baseball with a metal bat is to hit it further. In tennis, there are opportunities for more spin and pace, and more comfort in the shot. It is more complex than baseball.

The other dimension to this debate is that technology is essentially saturated now. Pros are not playing with size greater than 100 sq inch, or weights lower than 12 oz, and polys are basically at a saturation point. There does not seem to be any way to enhance performance. So some sort of equilibrium has been reached.
 

mmk

Hall of Fame
Breakpoint, are you being serious?

Nadal - Knee
Murray - Back
Federer - Back
Berdych - Back
Djokovic - Ankle
Ferrer - Toe
Del Potro - Knee
Wawrinka - Thigh

This is just off the top of my head, and all are inside the last year. You couldn't be more wrong.
Federer's back problem is something he has had since he was a teenager, it is the reason he didn't have to perform compulsory service in Switzerland (yes, they have a military). Granted, it was worse this year, but he is getting older.
 

JAY1

Semi-Pro
Why should today's pros have it SO much easier than pros from the past?!
We can't compare the pros of 2003 and 2013 with the pros of 1953, 63, 73 & 83.
This pretty much destroys the incredible legacy tennis once had.
Tennis is divided into two era's Pre 1990 and Post 1990.
It is virtually impossible to compare any aspect of the two eras.
They are two different games.
This is tragic!! Can everyone not see that?
In Baseball it is very easy to compare any aspect of baseball in the 1960's to 50 years later, this is amazing! The same with cricket.
Tennis has destroyed it for us to compare Laver to Federer, Borg to Nadal and Connors to Djokovic.
Everyone has their favourite player now and in the past, but the current day tennis fan is much more superficial now and not as knowledgable as tennis fans from years ago.
You only have to compare the posters on Talk Tennis with General Pro Discussion and Former Pro Talk. It's like comparing 5 year olds with intelligent and informative tennis experts.
 

BlueB

Legend
Today's pros don't have it easier. They play against a level field, just like the old woody guys did. Just like Suresh said, tech has leveled itself to optimal level (for this point in time). You would never be able to compare generations anyways - today's guys are much fitter and real pros. Before you had pre-open era, which is a greater spoiler then the avdent of new materials.

And again, if we started getting picky about gear, should the sprinters go back from tartan to clay, to no starting blocks, or maybe to no shoes so we can compare them to the original Greek Olympians?
Get the America's Cup crews out of those cheater flying catamarans, back to the wooden gaf-rigged schooners?
Or any of the examples I gave before?

You cn not really reverse the tech. Things get different over the course of time. Easier, better (maybe?), more efficient... You can compare the people (not only tennis players) only by the achievemnts in their own generation. All the rest is just specullation...
 

JAY1

Semi-Pro
Today's pros don't have it easier. They play against a level field, just like the old woody guys did. Just like Suresh said, tech has leveled itself to optimal level (for this point in time). You would never be able to compare generations anyways - today's guys are much fitter and real pros. Before you had pre-open era, which is a greater spoiler then the avdent of new materials.

And again, if we started getting picky about gear, should the sprinters go back from tartan to clay, to no starting blocks, or maybe to no shoes so we can compare them to the original Greek Olympians?
Get the America's Cup crews out of those cheater flying catamarans, back to the wooden gaf-rigged schooners?
Or any of the examples I gave before?

You cn not really reverse the tech. Things get different over the course of time. Easier, better (maybe?), more efficient... You can compare the people (not only tennis players) only by the achievemnts in their own generation. All the rest is just specullation...
May I ask you, what level of tennis did/do you play?
 

robbo1970

Hall of Fame
Whilst I don't think it would ever happen, evolution is inevitable, I do think it would be great to see some brand new wooden rackets getting produced. However, for the mere mortals among us, with the mass production of modern frames for all levels of play that get produced these days, I cannot envisage any newly made wooden racket being cheap to buy.
 
Whilst I don't think it would ever happen, evolution is inevitable, I do think it would be great to see some brand new wooden rackets getting produced. However, for the mere mortals among us, with the mass production of modern frames for all levels of play that get produced these days, I cannot envisage any newly made wooden racket being cheap to buy.
Cheap is not the driving factor here, manufacturing and quality should come first, look at cricket, baseball and the worlds biggest racquet sport by a long way badminton all have restrictions on production.

We were paying the same for wooden racquets 100+ GBP in the early 80's as made in China racquets today.
 

robbo1970

Hall of Fame
This is kind of my point. The good quality rackets are going to be very expensive. If ever something like that did take off, I dread to think what the low end rackets chucked out by our old muckers at Sports Direct would be like :)
 

babyhagrid

Rookie
This is kind of my point. The good quality rackets are going to be very expensive. If ever something like that did take off, I dread to think what the low end rackets chucked out by our old muckers at Sports Direct would be like :)
Exactly, SD would end up selling them in their Wimbledon/South Fields shop too. the one that used to be P W P.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
As in baseball, there are calls for the pros to start playing with wooden racquets again. Recently a lot of esteemed ex tennis pros and tennis experts have called for a return to wooden racquets.
Tennis is the one sport where it is impossible to compare today's pros with pros from the past, as the equipment is so very different. Everyone will agree this is very sad.
But should the pros return to wooden racquets, how would it effect the racquet companies, how would it effect us mere mortals--would we want to play with the same wooden racquets as our heroes would be using or would we continue to use our space age sticks.
From a pro tennis point of view it would make men's pro tennis a lot more exciting and interesting as the pros would have to develop unique playing styles as opposed to most of them playing the same way, as now.
They would have to master the equipment before they would try and master their opponents.
What do we all think?
Sorry, but the genie is already out.
 

mxmx

Professional
Do you think the current racquets do not offer much advantage?
Do you think a 12 oz wood racquet has the same power and spin as a
12 oz Babolat Pure Drive?

I accidentally had poly put in my Jack Kramer wood racquet.
I'd say it was a bit wimpier than a PD w/poly...

Try this test:
Play a friend that you normally split sets with or that can beat you but barely.
Play one match with a wood racquet and one with your regular racquet.
Let us know what the scores are.

No...I'm saying the rackets McEnroe played with were decent enough and that saying people of the modern era has rackets so much better, is just an excuse of some sort....

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w50/vsbabolat/Mac1987a.jpg

I am also saying that with modern woodwork techniques, one would be able to create stiffer and lighter wooden rackets than those in the past.

Did McEnroe complain about the racket Sampras played with? His racket is popular even to this day. Some old school rackets would do well with the modern game - not saying that it has to be wood as such.
 
Last edited:

mxmx

Professional
All you can do in baseball with a metal bat is to hit it further. In tennis, there are opportunities for more spin and pace, and more comfort in the shot. It is more complex than baseball.

The other dimension to this debate is that technology is essentially saturated now. Pros are not playing with size greater than 100 sq inch, or weights lower than 12 oz, and polys are basically at a saturation point. There does not seem to be any way to enhance performance. So some sort of equilibrium has been reached.
You are kind of making one of the points I was trying to make...agree 100%
 

winstonlim8

Professional
Wooden racquets should never come back. They have to cut down more trees to make them, don't they?

Seriously, I love wooden racquets. Never got TE or GE from using them and the feel was just lovely.

But conservation issues aside, I can foresee people losing interest jn tennis if anybody tried to make the heads smaller because that would make it harder for kids to learn the game. In this age of instant gratification, can anyone actually see the average 8 or 9-year-old actually sticking to tennis long enough to learn to hit the ball properly if they made the heads smaller?

Don't forget that the original reason for making racquets with bigger heads was to allow the inventor, who was a schlump at tennis, to hit the ball more easily.
 
Last edited:
Seeing today's pro using woodies will certainly draw interests in an exhibition. I remember Hingis did something like that (a promo at Wimbie?), very classy. I wish there is a video of that event.
PS. add bare foot and hippies dress to the new wooden racket rules if the players are hotties.



is it wrong that i find this extremely hot.

id love to see exhibitions of the current pros using wooden racquets it would be awesome.

is there a youtube clip or something of this exhibition match?
 

TennisCJC

Legend
You don't have to go all the way back to wood. Simply limit head size to 90", beam width to 20 mm, stiffness to 66 or less, and exclude use of poly or co-poly strings. Gut and nylon syn gut, or nylon multifilaments would be the only strings allowed. This would take away a lot of the crazy spin and defense we see now and give some reward back to the attacking player.
 

TimeSpiral

Professional
You don't have to go all the way back to wood. Simply limit head size to 90", beam width to 20 mm, stiffness to 66 or less, and exclude use of poly or co-poly strings. Gut and nylon syn gut, or nylon multifilaments would be the only strings allowed. This would take away a lot of the crazy spin and defense we see now and give some reward back to the attacking player.
You will always have people that resist progress, referring to it as naturally destructive, and suggest that we return to the ways of old (in general, this is the conservative vs. progressive/liberal minded people).

Incidentally, it seems to be moving in a direction more like table tennis where spin dominates. But something interesting happens at the highest level of ping pong. Even though ultra-spin oriented play dominates, you can win with defensive play. The spin and pace eventually reach a critical mass where attacking becomes extremely vicious (the angles combined with pace). What I find fascinating is that as the pace and the spin of the game ramped to ridiculous levels (guys standing six-eight feet off the table!) the serve went in the opposite direction. Drop serves with befuddling spins dominate the highest levels of play.

I often wondered if someone will figure out a dominating combination of pace and drop serves in tennis out of necessity. Will the return of serve eventually become so good that giving the returner any pace is considered a mistake?

Just some fleeting thoughts ...
 
well mcenroe, martina, boris all switched to graphite more than 20 years ago. it's a little late now, not going to happen.

maybe they could make a maximum stiffness rule or ban poly strings. they also could limit head size to 95 or so but I think once you get past 90 more head size doesn't make all that big of a difference.
All sensible changes (limit frame size, width, stiffness, outlaw poly strings, etc.) that should be a slam dunk for the professional tennis hierarchy to accomplish and you'd still see the top players come out ahead, all else being equal (perhaps not Nadal or Serena Williams).
The biggest bonus would be return of the volleyers and all court players. When the most talented player ever (Roger Federer) has simply declared you can't play
anymore in the forecourt because of poly strings and high powered frames then something is very wrong.
And maybe it's easier for the pro tennis game to go the way of the dodo bird but frankly watching all the faceless baseline clones bashing each other is a bore
and you have an entire generation of tennis players and viewers who don't even know that they are missing and that's sad and dangerous.
 

Christian Olsson

Professional
I started playing in the early eighties and my first racquet was a woodie. I´d never go back. I could see some good limitations like limiting RA and poly strings etc but leave the racquets alone in my opinion, I would never go back to my old Radical from my new Völkl even. Well, maybe for a few hits. I think the important thing is to make tennis accessible for everyone willig to have a go. Incuding stop being a snob about the sport. Take a friend with you to the club and introduce him / her to tennis. Talk to others, that´s how we get more people playing. Nowadays there´s so much competing like playstation, facebook whatever and with obesity and bad food on the rise, more people need to get off their arses and actually do something physical. And tennis is both the best fun ever, my health has improved immensly, Ive lost 35 lbs.

So no, no restrictions..
 

Zoolander

Hall of Fame
My first racquet was a woodie. Wood is a TERRIBLE material to make racquets out of. I'm all for limiting headsize and banning shaped polys etc but please dont go back to wood. Todays pros get too much help from their racquets, but yesterdays pros didnt get enough from wood. Too many limitations.
 

Christian Olsson

Professional
My first racquet was a woodie. Wood is a TERRIBLE material to make racquets out of. I'm all for limiting headsize and banning shaped polys etc but please dont go back to wood. Todays pros get too much help from their racquets, but yesterdays pros didnt get enough from wood. Too many limitations.
Yeah, I agree. Although I can´t shake the terrible feeling I´ve got wood in my Völkl... cellulose fibers is wood derivatived last time I checked...
 
Wood is an unrealistic solution to a real problem and it's unnecessary. Get rid of poly strings, first and foremost, and also put size and power governors on
all pro racquets and, viola! Pro tennis becomes interesting again rather than a monochromatic exercise in boredom.
 

yonexRx32

Semi-Pro
Wood is an unrealistic solution to a real problem and it's unnecessary. Get rid of poly strings, first and foremost, and also put size and power governors on
all pro racquets and, viola! Pro tennis becomes interesting again rather than a monochromatic exercise in boredom.
Monitoring string composition is unrealistic at best. Power governors? ..Not sure what that is. Simplest way to address the problem is restricting head size. Example 85 sq in, or even 80 sq in. They're professional, after all. They should be able to find the ball. Since the head is now so much smaller, balls won't be flying 150 mph anymore...
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
Monitoring string composition is unrealistic at best. Power governors? ..Not sure what that is. Simplest way to address the problem is restricting head size. Example 85 sq in, or even 80 sq in. They're professional, after all. They should be able to find the ball. Since the head is now so much smaller, balls won't be flying 150 mph anymore...
Mixed emotions: why do you say some mandate on strings is unworkable. All they have to do is come up with a device like golf's Iron Byron that equipment is tested with. Come up with some baseline for maximum amount of spin allowed. Would have to determine how far to down gauge it - 25%, 30%, 50%?

I think those head sizes are too small. People don't pay to watch UE/mishit fests. And really unnecessary: if you make the change to the strings, the players have no choice but to dial back their shots to keep the balls in.

Change one variable - strings - and review after 2 years....
 

yonexRx32

Semi-Pro
Mixed emotions: why do you say some mandate on strings is unworkable. All they have to do is come up with a device like golf's Iron Byron that equipment is tested with. Come up with some baseline for maximum amount of spin allowed. Would have to determine how far to down gauge it - 25%, 30%, 50%?

I think those head sizes are too small. People don't pay to watch UE/mishit fests. And really unnecessary: if you make the change to the strings, the players have no choice but to dial back their shots to keep the balls in.

Change one variable - strings - and review after 2 years....

The reality is that no measure will be taken until a significant drop in audience/money flow is observed. Money on the ATP tour has quadrupled since 2000, so there is no evidence that anything needs to change.
 
Monitoring string composition is unrealistic at best. Power governors? ..Not sure what that is. Simplest way to address the problem is restricting head size. Example 85 sq in, or even 80 sq in. They're professional, after all. They should be able to find the ball. Since the head is now so much smaller, balls won't be flying 150 mph anymore...
I would think monitoring stings composition would be the easiest thing in the world. You show the tournament officials the strings you use and any frame with a poly based string would be not allowed. Simple.
 

yonexRx32

Semi-Pro
I would think monitoring stings composition would be the easiest thing in the world. You show the tournament officials the strings you use and any frame with a poly based string would be not allowed. Simple.
How about co-poly? Can you recognize, just by sight, poly vs coated microfiber? How about a string with exactly the same power and spin as poly, but isn't poly?..
 

Al Czervik

Hall of Fame
Mixed emotions: why do you say some mandate on strings is unworkable. All they have to do is come up with a device like golf's Iron Byron that equipment is tested with. Come up with some baseline for maximum amount of spin allowed. Would have to determine how far to down gauge it - 25%, 30%, 50%?

I think those head sizes are too small. People don't pay to watch UE/mishit fests. And really unnecessary: if you make the change to the strings, the players have no choice but to dial back their shots to keep the balls in.

Change one variable - strings - and review after 2 years....
I would love to see poly banned or limited, but that would result in players using the closest thing they could right up to the edge. I think this would be a nightmare to regulate.
 
Top