BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Not even a new 200 sq. in. racquet would have helped Federer yesterday. What he needed was a new brain, not a new racquet.OK now do guys think he needs a new frameI could not resist, Just kidding
Who thinks Fed would play better with a 95" racquet?
- Thread starter Mickey Finn
- Start date
xD OUCH!!! lolz
Silky Sampras
Rookie
Quite a statement to make...I think we can all safely assume there is nothing wrong with his (competitive) brain.
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
^^True. delpos frame must feel like a fly squatter in his hands.
I would beg to differ. Given DelPos' frame, string, and tension, it probably feels more like a railroad tie. That thing has got to be the single stiffest thing this side of Vivid video.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Like just about everyone else, even Federer has temporary lapses of reason and sanity. The USO final last year was a perfect example. I re-watched the match last week on Tennis Channel and even the commentators were dumbfounded and perplexed as to why Federer was trying to out-slug Del Potro from the baseline when using his tried and proven tactic of mixing things up and bringing Del Po to the net had won him the 1st set and all 6 previous meetings against Del Po. Absolutely inexplicable. Perhaps his ego got the better of his brain so he wanted to beat Del Po at his own game? I can't think of any other logical explanation. Overconfidence kills I guess. :neutral:
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
And this is not new. Boris Becker at some point decided he could duke it out from the baseline with the likes of Agassi. That change in tactic sent his career in a tailspin as well. Once he "rediscovered" his strengths, he started winning again. I still remember Mary Carillo opining that if Boris Becker could get 70% of his 1st serves in and follow them to net, he'd never lose a match. It's hard to disagree with her logic.
Sampras is one player who never lost site of what his goal was. He held serve and looked for a break, just one.... I never remember Sampras going through a walkabout where he tried to become something he was not.
Oh yeah, and to the OP, this has been covered ad nauseum. It's farily presumptuous to second guess the gear of one of the all time greats - IMO.
baseline_monster
Professional
Wow this thread has been restarted nearly a year later.... These threads are just silly
baseline_monster
Professional
Hang on, newsflash. Fed just hit a winner down the line with his tour 90, would have hit the line if it was an 88, should he switch?????????????
Bolivian Ace
Rookie
ohh noooo not again!!!!!!
Dedans Penthouse
Legend
nearly 90 pages....and 1,734 opinions later.....
oooh, maybe he should try something bigger than 90" such as a 95" racquet....nah, that's be too drastic a change in head size....hmmm, maybe an in-between racquet, say 93"?... but then again that might be too big as well so maybe he ought to try a 92" racquet, but those two extra sq. inches might require a change in the string pattern so maybe he ought to try a 91" racquet and while we're on the subject maybe he ought to consider........
:neutral:
oooh, maybe he should try something bigger than 90" such as a 95" racquet....nah, that's be too drastic a change in head size....hmmm, maybe an in-between racquet, say 93"?... but then again that might be too big as well so maybe he ought to try a 92" racquet, but those two extra sq. inches might require a change in the string pattern so maybe he ought to try a 91" racquet and while we're on the subject maybe he ought to consider........
:neutral:
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
I so remember Boris blowing a two sets to love lead against Muster on clay at Monte Carlo. For the first two sets he played the kind of aggressive, all court game that made him seem invicible at times. But then it was almost as if he said to himself, "Now I will show Thomas Muster who is the REAL King of Clay". And the rest, as they say, is history. ZERO clay court titles in Boris' otherwise storied career.
BHBH
ShooterMcMarco
Hall of Fame
Federer is taking questions on his Facebook, ask him what he thinks about this idea.
Praetorian
Professional
Wow, seriously. Someone resurrected a 3 year old post?
Silky Sampras
Rookie
I so remember Boris blowing a two sets to love lead against Muster on clay at Monte Carlo. For the first two sets he played the kind of aggressive, all court game that made him seem invicible at times. But then it was almost as if he said to himself, "Now I will show Thomas Muster who is the REAL King of Clay". And the rest, as they say, is history. ZERO clay court titles in Boris' otherwise storied career.
I knew that Becker had lost this final, and I think he also held a match point in it if I'm not mistaken. It would have been quite something to see.
ZERO clay court titles for Becker? That really is too bad for him...maybe he should have tried a larger faced racquet!
tennis_hand
Hall of Fame
the players sometimes think the change is too drastic and won't do it while they are still playing week in and week out.
however, it doesn't mean it is a bad idea.
a bigger head size racket probably helps him in the mishit and shanked racket. but if he doesn't hit in the sweet spot, the 90 may hit out and a 95 probably can still keep the ball in, though the ball will not be a quality shot and be killed by his opponents. remember ther are pros, if your shot is sub par or lucky shot, they will kill it.
however, a weak shot is still better than an UE, in my opinion. Sampras starting to use Pure storm tour may hold some truth. but still as i mentioned, the playing pros usually do not want to change to avoid any bad result.
his reason for decline is related to age. how can a 29 year old still have the same stamina as a 24 year old. you just have to admit the truth and play a game that a 29 year old should play.
however, it doesn't mean it is a bad idea.
a bigger head size racket probably helps him in the mishit and shanked racket. but if he doesn't hit in the sweet spot, the 90 may hit out and a 95 probably can still keep the ball in, though the ball will not be a quality shot and be killed by his opponents. remember ther are pros, if your shot is sub par or lucky shot, they will kill it.
however, a weak shot is still better than an UE, in my opinion. Sampras starting to use Pure storm tour may hold some truth. but still as i mentioned, the playing pros usually do not want to change to avoid any bad result.
his reason for decline is related to age. how can a 29 year old still have the same stamina as a 24 year old. you just have to admit the truth and play a game that a 29 year old should play.
Last edited:
I've also notice more shanks and misshits from the sheer power of Djoker and Nada and Byrdich and Tsonga, where they are over powering Federer more now than ever...just 'cause Roger is old now, 30/31 plyaing younger kids with more power...so Roger should upgrade his racquet size for the U.S. Open at latest... he won't get past the QF at Wimbledon this year..
Not with RAOINC, ISNER, BYRDICH, DJOKER, DOLGOLPOOLV, GOFFEN, etc...
GOFFEN! LOL
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
He plays great tennis with his racket. All the shots are good. wind and uneven clay affects his tennis more than some others . Still all his life he has had this kinds of mid rackets. His body mechanics and swings function in relation to that kind of racket. A change would hurt that imo.
Praetorian
Professional
HM`s-Tennis
New User
Roger Federer doesn't need to upgrade to a bigger head size, Roger Federer has won 16 grand slams with the same head size he is obviously compotable playing with that head size, Federer Isn't playing bad tennis, he is just coming to the end of his career and players like Djokovic and Nadal have just caught up to Federer.
(HM`s-Tennis)
(HM`s-Tennis)
robbo1970
Hall of Fame
Federer is giving away 5 years to most of the top players these days and still consitently gets to Q's, SF's and finals, the racquet is not the problem, old father time is, but still he does a lot better that most of the younger players with their 100" heads.
And if increasing head size was a guarantee for improvement, why would any manufacturer sell a retail 90" racket.
He prefers the 90.....Actually, this thread bores me so much I can't be bothered to write anymore..
And if increasing head size was a guarantee for improvement, why would any manufacturer sell a retail 90" racket.
He prefers the 90.....Actually, this thread bores me so much I can't be bothered to write anymore..
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
The better question is: Who thinks Murray and Djokovic would play better with a 90 sq. in. racquet? ;-)
Larrysümmers
Hall of Fame
this would be slam number 20, at least, if he had been using a racket that is 93-95 and a tad bit stiffer.
and no, Murray nor Novak shouldnt be using a 90. A 90 would cause them to shank way to often. it would also also for less power so they would be leaving balls short a lot and getting them crushed.
and no, Murray nor Novak shouldnt be using a 90. A 90 would cause them to shank way to often. it would also also for less power so they would be leaving balls short a lot and getting them crushed.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
And you know this because?
It's also possible that Federer would have won zero Slams if he used a 93-95. In fact, Wilson designed a 93 specifically for Federer. He tested it but rejected it. So Wilson gave it to Dimitrov, which is what he's using now under the BLX PS 6.1 95 paintjob.
Larrysümmers
Hall of Fame
i dont know. the racket would be more forgiving and offer a slight touch of power on shots that are less than perfect. perhaps it could have helped him fair better in some matches
Feds got OCD about his gear, that's why he won't switch, or won't switch very soon. Same reason why Pete never switched.
Feds got OCD about his gear, that's why he won't switch, or won't switch very soon. Same reason why Pete never switched.
It's not the head size by the numbers alone. It's the width. I don't think Federer could use a larger racquet head size as much as a racquet with a wider face for greater topspin margin for error. If any change would help at all.
Yonex seems to have released somthing akin to that. A wide-width midsize: the VCore 89:
Note: I haven't seen the 89 in person nor been able to compare it to a Wilson midsize in any way.
-SF
Yonex seems to have released somthing akin to that. A wide-width midsize: the VCore 89:
This is an interesting approach that I have wondered about for some time.
Note: I haven't seen the 89 in person nor been able to compare it to a Wilson midsize in any way.
-SF
Last edited:
Absolutely no point changing racket if it works for you, in my opinion. In Feds case it was a matter of shot selection and right tactics. If you watched him playing SF against Djoker, he played totaly different game. He was flattening most of his shots to increase the speed rather than playing his typical loopy topspins. His racket definitely works for him and I'm glad to see he proved a lot of forumers here wrong.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Bigger racquets are only more forgiving for amateurs, not for the greatest player of all time who need the precision of a smaller racquet.
BTW, Federer did switch from an 85 to a 90, so he clearly doesn't have OCD about his gear.
tistrapukcipeht
Professional
Possibly right, or using a mid size racquet that plays like a midsize but it is more forgiving than a midsize AKA Yonex
tistrapukcipeht
Professional
Wilson is no match for Yonex in technology, Yonex racquets feel and are more forgiving than Wilson.
When I demoed the Pro Staff 100 the racquet was longer than the Ezone Xi, but the Xi was wider and the sweet spot on the Xi is much larger than what PS100 offers, I can only assume this is what happens with Yonex midsize ones as well.
I thought power wasn't everything. I thought placement over power and everything was important, can't he just lower tension. Also can't the added manuverability help the fact compentsate for the smaller head size.
correct me if i'm wrong, i new to the whole serious tennis stuff
correct me if i'm wrong, i new to the whole serious tennis stuff
I think bigger racquets are more forgiving for all people. Roger is the GOAT, and everybody knows that. But he is 30 and his rivals are 25 years old. There a difference in footwork, in timing, in physical agility. It is normal, it is the nature of us. He is doing an enormous sacrifice in dueling with his rivals with an equipment that is great, but needs a huge tuning. I think he has to consider switch and adjust the game to his actual age. A more powerful and forgiving racquet will make him go to a winner more quickly, and not rallying.
That is my opinion.
That is my opinion.
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
1. Federer was hitting plenty of winners against both Djokovic and Murray, two guys that get to just about every ball.
2. If bigger racquets are more forgiving for all people, why haven't Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray switched to 110 sq. in. racquets?
Djoko, Nadal and Murray have 100, 100 and 98 sq in head size racquets. Why don't they go to 90?
vsbabolat
G.O.A.T.
Djoko doe snot use a 100. He uses a racquet that is 95. Murray does not really use 98. He really uses a racquet that is also 95.
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
I think there is a flaw of logic in these constant threads about headsize which insist Fed would improve his play were he to change to a 93,95, or whatever.
The flaw goes, "Bigger frames are superior in (blah-blah-blah) ways. Therefore changing to a larger head size frame will improve performance." The 'hidden assumption' is that frame size dictates performance, and in turn success.
The problem is the empirical evidence is wholly to the contrary of this 'hidden assumption'. Specifically, Fed, who uses a 90si frame, has arguably enjoyed the best OVERALL performance of any male player, ever. So, if success is predicated on head size, and the most successful players (Fed, Sampras, Edberg, Mac, Lendl, Laver, etc, etc) have used smaller head sizes, shouldn't the argument be made in the OTHER direction??
When framed this way, the inherent flaw of logic (namely that the size of the frame is a critical factor in performance and in turn success at the ATP Tour level), and silliness of the discussion, will perhaps reveal itself? I think this is why BP, Drak, and many others so enjoy making posts asking things like "When will Murray/Djoker/Nadal/etc/etc/etc change to a 90??"
BHBH
The flaw goes, "Bigger frames are superior in (blah-blah-blah) ways. Therefore changing to a larger head size frame will improve performance." The 'hidden assumption' is that frame size dictates performance, and in turn success.
The problem is the empirical evidence is wholly to the contrary of this 'hidden assumption'. Specifically, Fed, who uses a 90si frame, has arguably enjoyed the best OVERALL performance of any male player, ever. So, if success is predicated on head size, and the most successful players (Fed, Sampras, Edberg, Mac, Lendl, Laver, etc, etc) have used smaller head sizes, shouldn't the argument be made in the OTHER direction??
When framed this way, the inherent flaw of logic (namely that the size of the frame is a critical factor in performance and in turn success at the ATP Tour level), and silliness of the discussion, will perhaps reveal itself?
I think this is why BP, Drak, and many others so enjoy making posts asking things like "When will Murray/Djoker/Nadal/etc/etc/etc change to a 90??" BHBH
vsbabolat
G.O.A.T.
???????????????????????????????????
OriginalHockeytowner
Rookie
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Head_YOUTEK_IG_Speed_18x20/descpageRCHEAD-HS18.html#spec
Unless he's using a PJ'd racquet, looks like 100sq in it is
Unless he's using a PJ'd racquet, looks like 100sq in it is
vsbabolat
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic does not really use the Speed MP. He uses the Ti, i, MG Radical MOLD with his own custom composition. His racquets only have the paint job of the Speed MP.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Maybe they would each have 17 Slams if they did. :shock:
anubis
Hall of Fame
I think that Fed's shanks have .0000009% to do with the size of the frame. I think there's a lot more going on during one of his matches than any of us could really understand. All the pressure, the fame, the money, the responsibility. Then there's the planning, the training, the fitness, the travel, and his family.
He's got eagle-eye vision that can spot a 135 mph serve that's long by less than an inch. His eyes never leave the ball until after it leaves his strings. He's got to consistently hit rallies that are 75+ mph.
His racquet has served him well enough to surpass most world records. IMO that's good enough... no need to change.
He's got eagle-eye vision that can spot a 135 mph serve that's long by less than an inch. His eyes never leave the ball until after it leaves his strings. He's got to consistently hit rallies that are 75+ mph.
His racquet has served him well enough to surpass most world records. IMO that's good enough... no need to change.
You do not understand the logic. Federer with 25 years (win 3 grand slams year with minimum strain), Federer with 30 years (fight a lot to win one after 2,5 years). These two Federer's do not be the same. Look, Michael Jordan number 23 is totally different Michael Jordan number 45. I support Federer too, but know that he has to look for a forgiving racquet. I hope he do that to win more 4 grand slams. If he win without change (it is possibly too), I know that he could win more with racquet change. Sampras, told that he should change their racquets when he was 30.
We have different point of views. I respect yours, but I have mine. We never agree with. Thank You.
