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

Pmasterfunk

Semi-Pro
In golf the woodies are made of wood until 100 years ago instead of graphite and high grade metal now and really no one regrets that one bit. Lol lol lol..Its all high tech when the stakes are high. And what about skiing! Have you ever someone hear complain that they should go back to pure wooden skis they had before World war2?
Though not going back to wood ski, the FIS did put extra restrictions on ski lengths and dimensions a few years back and pros complained.

Bode Miller slams new ski rules
 

racquetreligion

Hall of Fame
To have human artisans employed by big companies to make wooden racquets is so scary for these scumbags
that it will never happen as they cant make the profits they do now using mechanized mass production
 

WYK

Professional
and these are the top guys.
imagine looking at a battle between #138 vs #219 at some tournament, or #40 vs #90
I don't have to. I was there, and enjoyed every moment.
It's refreshing seeing attacking tennis VS defensive tennis. There's a lot more tension and anticipation in the game. The points are so explosive. Quite a difference between this and the rallying game we have now.

If you watch while McEnroe and Borg are preparing to serve, when they bounce the ball on the court, it barely has enough bounce to come back in to their hands compared to modern courts. Just hardly any bounce. And WImbledon plays very dead and skiddy. Completely different game.

One thing you may notice if you watch the entire tie break is how many of the balls that hit the net cord. It is a rarity nowadays in the game, but back then it was common because most players hit the ball very close to the net, often skirting it, and this at full power. Even up until maybe Jim Courier days we saw this. The amount of control they had back then for not using poly was stunning. And some of those serves are still massive. And that racquet Borg is using is strung at about 80# of tension with gut, and weighted to nearly 16 ounces. And all this with a 72 sq in racquet head.
 
Last edited:

blablavla

Professional
If you watch while McEnroe and Borg are preparing to serve, when they bounce the ball on the court, it barely has enough bounce to come back in to their hands compared to modern courts. Just hardly any bounce. And WImbledon plays very dead and skiddy. Completely different game.
How is this connected to the wooden racket?

I would like as well to see clash of styles, attack vs defense, S&V, baseline attacks, etc.
But I think it has to do more with court surface speed, poly strings and racket stiffness.
 

John

Rookie
1) it will drive today’s racquet price from already inflated $250 to over 1k because wood is more expensive.
2) all polyester string, manufacturing facility, research people all become outdated ; disaster for wasted research fee and drove a large family to street.
3) more sheep will be killed.
4) all string machine need to be adjusted or back to vanilla model.
5) some people may loose hair to figure out new paint for rfxx with all black paint on wood.

alternatively, we can ask next gen final to use wood only racquets. Minimize effect to a single week and see how it goes.
 

WYK

Professional
How is this connected to the wooden racket?

I would like as well to see clash of styles, attack vs defense, S&V, baseline attacks, etc.
But I think it has to do more with court surface speed, poly strings and racket stiffness.
It has everything to do with wooden racquets as a topic. Like most other sports, it wasn't simply one thing that changed to bring it in to the modern era. When wooden racquets were the norm, it was a different game, different surfaces, different balls(even a different color - it's not washed out in the video, it's a white ball), nearly everyting was different. Wooden racquets were merely a part of it all. I have a Prince Woodie, and aside from the weight, one could use it to play a modern game if they wished. I use it to warm up with before doubles.

Pros do not, and never did, need a stiff racquet to produce power. Though the typical 59-64RA they use now is admitedly far stiffer than the 35-40 of days past. Having said it, pros always hit hard with skill and technique. It's sort of like golf or baseball - if you want to hit or throw very hard and fast, you have to be loose and use technique. In fact, after learning how to properly pitch baseballs in HS, I nearly instantly became a better server. Learning to coil the upper body and load up the arm, launch with the legs, and pronate the arm and snap the wrist. It is nearly identical to throwing a ball.



Some of the fastest serves ever in the ATP were off of wooden racquets. A wooden club wielded well gets the job done. Ask any baseball player.

What graphite allowed were larger head sizes that didn't break or flex too much. This allowed more arcing swings with more margin for error.

Gut, however, DID help with speed. I miss serving with my full gut POG mid - nothing had that feeling. It's now strung with Wilson Revolve :(

Poly allows more control, and with it comes more spin and the ability to hit out more.

Most people, even young ones, understand the surfaces are slower now than they once were. What many of us do not realise is the ball has changed as well. If you have an old tennis ball, one of the first things you notice is the size difference. New balls are larger. Some dramatically so. The rules state they must be a certain size, but I have even seen new Slazenger balls markedly smaller than Wilson USO balls. So they are also tailoring this aspect. Much of this appears to be the fluff affecting the size as well. But, I digress. In the old days, a smaller ball for the same(ish) weight, but with less fluffy outer coating is going to have better ballistic properties. Less wind resistance, and less volume for the same mass translates to the ball retaining more velocity down range - making it much more difficult to chase down even if it did bounce the same. Basically, it seems most major sports facilities have taken the old 'heavy duty' balls(that didn't also have HD rubber, just the thicker felt) and started using them across all surfaces.

Add in poly, then slow down the court AND slow down the ball, and it is an entirely different game than it once was regardless of racquet type.

However, I will agree that if you made pros use wooden 85 sq in racquets, even using todays tech sans synthetics but allowing poly, it would turn in to something more akin to the old game over night. But allowing everyone to use a Prince Woodie wouldn't change much.
 

tonylg

Professional
I will agree that if you made pros use wooden 85 sq in racquets, even using todays tech sans synthetics but allowing poly, it would turn in to something more akin to the old game over night. But allowing everyone to use a Prince Woodie wouldn't change much.
Even an 85 square inch graphite racquet, with sensible limits on string stiffness would yield a massive improvement to the game.
 

Dartagnan64

Legend
A better comparison would be to compare tennis to golf. The USGA and R&A decided to cap a driver's head size at 460cc. The governing bodies of tennis could do the same thing (as mentioned in the post right above mine). I'm thinking 95 sq inches max (as this was considered a midplus in the 80s).

On another note, OP I'm curious how old you are. The only people I hear that complain or have concerns about today's game (and this also goes for golf and basketball to name other sports) are the older generation. Everyone you named that has a problem with today's game is over 50. Sports must evolve since people evolve. The human race is taller and more athletic naturally than we were 30, 40, and 50 years ago. As we evolve so should the sports we play. The old farts that wish we went back to wood should either give up the game or start a wood-only pro league.
The reason only the older generation is complaining is because they are the only ones watching tennis these days and see both the decline in popularity amongst youth and the alteration in how the game is played as an issue.

Young people don't watch and don't care.

Tennis must evolve but it must evolve to a sport where creativity, athleticism and finesse are rewarded as much as power. Golf has worked to reign in the emphasis on power just as tennis must also. Balance is key. Tennis is a little unbalanced right now.

I'd just reduce frame size allowances to 90 Sq inches for non-seniors events and allow 100 sq inch for seniors play (55+). And max beam width to 20 mm. Keep graphite and polyester.
 

mxmx

Professional
dumb idea. The should look at other means to place some limitations. The new rackets only do "so much"...Higher net...shorter courts...No second serve etc may be better alternatives.
I have to admit. My own ideas here were bad ideas...
 

mxmx

Professional
New rule changes are not the answer aside from perhaps limitations on strings.

- The lack of competition and depth of the tennis field and at schools is the problem.

- Bring back carpet. Screw what top players protested against.
 

ron schaap

Professional
The reason only the older generation is complaining is because they are the only ones watching tennis these days and see both the decline in popularity amongst youth and the alteration in how the game is played as an issue.

Young people don't watch and don't care.

Tennis must evolve but it must evolve to a sport where creativity, athleticism and finesse are rewarded as much as power. Golf has worked to reign in the emphasis on power just as tennis must also. Balance is key. Tennis is a little unbalanced right now.

I'd just reduce frame size allowances to 90 Sq inches for non-seniors events and allow 100 sq inch for seniors play (55+). And max beam width to 20 mm. Keep graphite and polyester.
when Agassi, the Williamses and Seles were winning a lot of tournaments with their stiff oversized sticks, no American complained until recent years when i cant remember an American that won a grandslam. loli lol. The only idea to higher nets is interesting and slower balls. But hey that sport is called BADMINTON and very popular in Asia but not in other continents. So we dont have to invent the wheel twice!
 

tonylg

Professional
I'm Australian and I thought it was appalling when Cash and then Rafter started using 90 square inch Princes.

Given the poorer hand skills of current pros, 90 is a fair enough limit.
 

ron schaap

Professional
I'm Australian and I thought it was appalling when Cash and then Rafter started using 90 square inch Princes.

Given the poorer hand skills of current pros, 90 is a fair enough limit.
So why didnt you complain already 30 years ago when they won all their tournaments with their big Prince racquets? Or the famous Woodies double couple who would be a lot less famous without their big sticks!
And what about your country most famous tennis player Margaret Court who won a lot grandslams in the 60's with her easier to handle metal with open heart racquet, when all her opponents were wielding super heavy lower powered flexible racquets?
Now that was an unfair advantage no one talks about!! :mad::happydevil:
 

tonylg

Professional
Why didn't I complain on the internet 30 years ago?

I already said I thought it was appalling.

Combine huge racquets with poly strings and you have the equivalent of training wheels.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
I say eliminate racquets altogether.

Players can hit the ball using their hands - just like in the good old days.

Think of all the money that will be saved. No need for racquets. No need for strings. No need for grips, overgrips, dampeners, lead tape, etc. etc.

The Environment will thank you.
 

ron schaap

Professional
I say eliminate racquets altogether.

Players can hit the ball using their hands - just like in the good old days.

Think of all the money that will be saved. No need for racquets. No need for strings. No need for grips, overgrips, dampeners, lead tape, etc. etc.

The Environment will thank you.
;-);-) You r right. There is already or should i say still a sport where they hit a small ball with their hands. Its called " kaatsen" in Netherlands. So lets abandon tennis altogether. The youth wont regret it because they only play video games or make selphys for their social media when they dont watch stupid vlogs and amateur vids on their mobiles.
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
The youth wont regret it because they only play video games or make selphys for their social media when they dont watch stupid vlogs and amateur vids on their mobiles.
They would take to such a sport by storm. They can still hold their phone in one hand while hitting the balls with their other hand. WIn-Win !!!
 

racquetreligion

Hall of Fame
eg.
Nads wielding a 100 APD would not have a chance at 90sq but Djokovic & Fed, Tsitsipas and Zverev would have no issues.
Fed would have won 10 wimbys with that change alone. Balls are too slow and fluff up badly, ATP and LTA are just nasty.

160-165 cm 99 in limit
165-180 cm 97 in limit
180-185 cm 95 in limit
190-195 cm 93 in limit
195 plus cm 90 in limit

That will guarantee towering servebots towards basketball
 
Top