Who exactly benefits from closed pattern racquets?

[Shroud]

14X18? 14X10? What kind of sorcery is this?

Well it was 14x9 till Blue B hipped me to the 14x10 option. Just skip every other cross in a POG.

I think I am super talented to go from 63lbs and 14x18 to 15lbs and 14x10...

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=481217&highlight=arm+friendly

 

[JackB1]

Thanks. Can't wait to try it out. I am hoping for something that resembles in spin & power but more forgiving on the arm and shoulder.

That's exactly what the F100 is. Keep us posted!

 

[realplayer]

I agree 100%, that the spin difference is minor. I have been playing with the Pure Strike 18x20 the past few days and noticed a lot of these things.
The trajectory difference to me is the biggest factor. I am able to hit flatter line drive shots that get through the court faster, but I am also missing more...long and into the net.

I also notice most of the guys that responded here in favor of 18x20's are more advanced players. I don't think anyone in the 3.5-4.0 range really requires that fine control. Consistency is king and will win every time at my level and I think an open pattern gives me more flexibility all around. I can hit flat or loopy with it and I seem to be accurate enough with it.

Don't agree with your conclusion. I'm a 4.0 player and I need the 18x20 pattern which gives me more control. And I need all the control that I can get. Actually I think it is the other way around. More advanced players benefit from the open pattern as they have much faster swingspeeds(spin) which is necessary to control the ball.
There is a reason why pro players are switching more and more to open pattern rackets.
The fact you are missing shots with the strike is more likely because: different strings in your pure strike, different tension, weight, swingweight, balance, stiffness...etc...etc....

 

[Hi I'm Ray]

I like 18x20 patterns a lot - more control and I tend to hit with more spin from a closed pattern racket. Although that is just in general and it really depends on the racket, there are times when I find a particular 16 x 18/19/20 that provides more control than a comparable 18x20.

Flattening out a shot is no problem with an open pattern racket so I wouldn't really be looking to a closed pattern to achieve this.

 

[anubis]

Remember that one of the all-time greats, Andre Agassi, used 20 x 22 string patterns.

Also, Federer, even though he uses 16 x 19, uses a 90 si frame, which makes a 16 x 19 rather dense, actually. Compare a 100 si to 90 si frame, 16 x 19 string pattern will much more dense in the smaller frame.

Folks who use the venerable pt57a in a 16 x 19 drill pattern also have a rather dense string pattern as well, as the si is not quite 98, but closer to 95 or 96.

Back in the day, it was pretty much impossible to have an "open" string pattern with a frame size of less than 90 si. So all those 88, 85 and 80 si frames, regardless of their string patterns, because they were so small, the string patterns were really considered "dense".

IMO, it wasn't until the advent of really huge frames (100 si or bigger) where "open" string patterns really came into play.

 

[Shroud]

Remember that one of the all-time greats, Andre Agassi, used 20 x 22 string patterns.

Also, Federer, even though he uses 16 x 19, uses a 90 si frame, which makes a 16 x 19 rather dense, actually. Compare a 100 si to 90 si frame, 16 x 19 string pattern will much more dense in the smaller frame.

Folks who use the venerable pt57a in a 16 x 19 drill pattern also have a rather dense string pattern as well, as the si is not quite 98, but closer to 95 or 96.

Back in the day, it was pretty much impossible to have an "open" string pattern with a frame size of less than 90 si. So all those 88, 85 and 80 si frames, regardless of their string patterns, because they were so small, the string patterns were really considered "dense".

IMO, it wasn't until the advent of really huge frames (100 si or bigger) where "open" string patterns really came into play.

Except for some of the Prince rackets like the POG or the Precision Graphite that had 14/18 patterns.

 

[Mig1NC]

I like 16x20, the best of both worlds!

 

[Power Player]

IMO, it wasn't until the advent of really huge frames (100 si or bigger) where "open" string patterns really came into play.

Thats not really true considering the Prince Original graphite was 14/16x18 and one of the most popular graphite frames in history.

 

[PanicRev]

Here's my unscientific contribution to this interesting discussion.

For a couple years I played with the Dunlop 4d 300 tour (a closed pattern racquet) and my son played with an Dunlop 4d 300 (an open pattern racquet). I'm a solid 4.0-4.5 player, he's a 4.0 rallier and a 3.0 competitor

When I played with his racquet, it was always a bit of a surprise where the ball would land. I either had to exaggerate the spin or shorten my stroke to control the ball. Whereas with my racquet I could swing fast and know the ball would stay in.

When he played with my racquet, his ball was so much more consistent. This built his confidence and freed him to swing freely and confidently resulting in a heavier ball. I pointed this out to him but it took him forever to switch because he was emotionally attached to the open pattern (he was told that it would result in more spin and power). Finally, the reality settled in and he switched to the closed pattern Tour.

As far as ball trajectory, the biggest factor was switching from a fully poly bed to a gut (mains)/poly (crosses) hybrid. With the gut the ball flies at a lower trajectory.

I currently play with a Graphene Speed Pro -- another closed pattern racquet.

 

[TroutSc]

That's exactly what the F100 is. Keep us posted!

I'm still using the f100. ( was alternating with a 99s but sold it today).

I'm set on trying a bab psgt team. Wanting to go a little lighter than the f100 now.

 

[Nastase]

16 x 19 opens up the sweet spot of a racquet for me almost universally versus 18 x 20. I def do notice more spin as well for my swing.

 

[PKfan1]

I have a theory that physically stronger humans are more suited to the denser string patterns (like a lot of pros). Maybe I'm just stupid.
I feel more confident and connected to the ball with the denser string patterns. It just feels much easier to hit the ball as hard as I want (normally as hard as I can) and having it still go exactly where I want it to.