Let’s talk heads. Every single pro with the exception of Federer is pretty much using 98 and 100 square inch heads. Some even larger. Has the game evolved? Has the technology evolved? The answer to both questions is yes.
A larger head means more access to spin and power. Done. The string pattern (18x20, 16x19, 16x18, 16x14, etc...) is almost as significant. If more space between your strings means less friction and more snapping back and forth, then that also means more spin and more pop power. That also means less control when you flatten your shots out. An 18x20 string pattern has the least amount of space, and therefore the least amount power. An 18x20 string pattern on a 93 square inch head is a rare combination that equates to almost zero off-the-string-bed power. The beholder must swing with force in order to hit high velocity shots. This happens to be the set up of yours truly and not a single semi-competitive rec player has failed to critique the equipment in my hands. From rec players to coaches to open players, they all have words about the smaller racket.
That said, I can hit winners with my set up like few others in my competitive bracket - most people at my skill set are playing on the same sticks that Nadal, Murray, and Djokovic wield. They’re the best, therefore their sticks must be too. Are you sure about that? They grew up playing what they were told to swing. Me and you and every other rec player grew up playing with what we decided to pay hard earned cash for. When Murray and Djokovic were respectively growing up, more power and spin was the hype in racket technology - and their coaches gave them this revolutionary equipment. Not a single one of them can serve and volley like Federer. Not single one of them can rip obscene winners, or carve the ball with more slice and precision than Federer. Federer predates the technology they are wielding and uses technology that is considered outdated by most so called tennis experts. Yet his shot library is much vaster than all of his younger rivals’ libraries combined.
Today I was in my local racket shop debating this topic vigorously with two stringers, who also play, and currently string my (outdated?) clubs. They were both jabbing me for my 93 square inch head size. Salesmen or honest tennis junkies? Who knows. I do know this though. A good magician doesn’t need a big hat to hide the rabbit. Similarly, a good tennis player does not need a larger head to create power. A large reason Nadal generates the ferocious topspin and power that he does on his forehand is his racket. He is using a larger trampoline to put it simply. His large head takes away from his control though. Without extreme spin Nadal could never hit his targets. The ball would sail long every time.
And you look around at the competitive club guys and everyone seems to be ripping it long, frequently. Everyone is on mid plus and oversized heads. One out of every fifteen players is using a smaller head. Are smaller heads going extinct? I do not believe they are. There are rumors of a new fleet of 93s from different big name racket producers hitting the market in 2014. You just leaned in. Don’t worry. I did too when I learned of this earlier today.
I know that we are being sold on larger heads. We are told that we need larger heads by the tennis industry (pro shop stringers and junkies and coaches alike) because they want to please us with fewer errors on the court and quicker results. Are they selling themselves on knowing which racket you will hit the fewest errors with, or are they selling to your needs? What about your technique? A large head on a light stick is easy to whip. Topspin is the name of the game right now; but I believe we will see a revolution to smaller sized heads soon.
The rage around larger heads intrigues me, partially because I am a rare outlier on the tennis courts. Is everyone around me in the tennis circles on to something that I am missing out on? I do not think so. I honestly believe they are missing out on the joy of carving a ridiculously low slice or punishing the put aways with complete conviction that the ball will not sail long because of the precision and softer touch of the smaller head. I am truly engaged in this debate and cannot contain my intrigue in the dark side. It begs me to join every time I play tennis or go to the shop or read the forums. I will not be biased. Not totally at least. I ordered a 95 pro staff off ebay today to test drive some of the hype - I guess I could have gone bigger, but I was too fearful falling in love with topspin and forgetting how to blast a flatty winner down the line. The soon to be new frame is lacking in power so I should be fine. Tennis-warehouse gave it a 71 there.
No comments:
Post a Comment