yeah, this is actually the reason why i shifted to regular length rackets. The lack of options was, and still is, glaring. I kinda lucked out though because I was getting a lot stronger and better at tennis. Shifted from an extended length babolat pure drive to regular length player frames and at the same time, I shifted from a two hander to a one handed backhand.
Nice! I need to talk about my backhands a bit. In a future video for sure. Lack of options is super sad to see. It seems to just get a little worse but I know Solinco offers one now but that racket isn't sold just anywhere. I will probably look into it, maybe even get it but it's a 16x19 and I hear kind of powerful.
@@ZeroLoveTennis I am due to my body size going on small size of 25 inches have my old model and several, but I feel limited as well that a slimed down throat racquet with full grip is out there and using actual adult tech not just slightly older quality graphite you would find on cheaper quality 2000's model, you are basically limited to a few models if you want a 25 inch in carbon fiber and forget ever having a titanium model made in a 25 inch size as most are Jr aluminum or Jr advanced graphite maybe slipping up to a 26 inch for a few more choices in carbon fiber included but that is all you can get.
On your handle length problem. The easy solution is to make use of the fact that replacement grips come with extra length. Just wrap past the top of the pallet onto the shaft of the racket as needed. Most rackets come with a 1/2 to 1 inch shaft. I’m not talking Donnay Borg Pro grip here. Just wrap up the shaft to match your hands. On extending the the length of a racket. They sell butt caps that extend the length of a racket. The old school way and probably more solid solution is to take a octagonal shaped piece of wood the same dimensions as your pallet and with the height you want to lengthen a racket and epoxy it onto the end of the racket. I did this to experiment when I went through my “tennis nerd” phase decades ago. I tried up to half a inch. You’ll be amazed at how well it works. If it’s to long take a small fine tooth saw and shorten the wood plug as much or as little as you want. Don’t like it? Just saw all but a thin veneer of wood off and sand the remainder off with a sanding block so as not to damage your racket. It was easier in my day since it was easy to find a old wood racket that matched the grip dimensions of a graphite racket. It was just a matter of sawing off a short length of wood handle. A band saw would be the easiest but anyone with basic woodworking skills and a small hand saw could cut the shape out of scrap wood. It doesn’t even have to be a exact match since the epoxy joint will still be within the butt cap and so won’t be felt through the grip. Any racket with a removable butt cap can be extended.
Good point but some rackets aren't friendly to this. Like pro staff or new Wilson shift. But yeah anything can be extended pretty much but I've figured all this extended dilemma stuff out well after this video but thanks for sharing! Back on standard length now. Pure Aero 98 handle is plenty long. I'm happy
`Over 100 sq inch frames work just fine for those of us who have strokes forgerd before poly. Serena and Venus used extended oversize frames as kids & pros. The extra lenght bumps up the swing weight, which the majority of the playing public, who are by USTA stat below 4.5 find a barrier to use. Many of the senior players use the large head extended frames in tourney play. The runner up in the 70's Grass National, a 6'4" Marine vet used the Head Ti-6, which is a. 115
I forgot if in this video I explained the interesting dilemma of extending a frame, that you increase the swingweight without actually increasing the weight which means it is harder to swing but without any static gains in stability. It is harder to swing but equally stable (especially on slower balls or where you aren't swinging: volleying) despite being harder to maneuver. So you need to be very careful of that trade-off. Other things are affected but that is a big deal that seems overlooked. Really hard to justify a quarter inch for ten swingweight units when you could add a couple grams and get way more stability at the head and it would still be easier to swing than the 1/4" length.
Players my age remember the one change that the fall of the Berlin wall. The Ultra High Modulus graphite was available for the sporting goods market. The Secret 04, Wilson Profile 2.7 & other frames were in the over 65 RDC range of stiffness. When the HM & UHM layups became available, frame weights started to drop. The style of very fast swings across the board is the generation who grew up in a co-poly world. The history of the game is out there, but only a few players study that.& those of us who were playing in the early 1990's are getting up in age.
I use the Serena 102 v7 racquet and I love it. It's great for serves and two handed bh. I use wilson revolve twist polyester and string it at 55lb, or else it will just be too powerful
For a significant extend length you should adjust your strokes. For a given speed you should have more accuracy because with the movement of the racket head as it approaches the ball will be straighter, i.e. less sharply curved. So a little bet earlier or late won't change the direction of the strings as much. Today's rackets are so much lighter than in the 1930s. Most wood rackets were 14 ounces; Jack Kramer's racket was 15 ounces, and Don Budges was 16 ounces. So it would be interesting how a person would do on the groundstrokes with a 29 inch racket but going back to CORRECT (i.e. "Old School") groundstroke technique. And you could always choke up for volleys.
Fair but I think racquets then were partly heavy because they needed to be. So flexy back then the only way to get more power from the racquet was with more weight. Nothing at the time (from racquet technology) really favored the spinny technique of today's game. So I'd say today's technique is largely an evolution of the game and the technology allowing for so much spin. We also have 2 handed backhand more common now than 1. It is a very different time.
@@ZeroLoveTennis Yes, because wooden rackets were (relatively speaking) dead, they didn't need much spin to keep the ball in, and yes, heavier weight could add (flat) power. But also note that with wood, heavier weight also meant greater stiffness -- there was more wood to resist bending.
I see. Yeah I guess I feel today's racquets just allow for more stylistic variety and to better success. I trust the performance of today's material more "like it's less weather and time sensitive for sure" and you don't need the weight to get power or stiffness but you can still have it! Pretty cool
"I feel today's racquets just allow for more stylistic variety and to better success." Yes, despite the difficulty for a pro to change, in the long run they will do whatever best helps them win. I just think it's a shame that new technology has resulted in players using incorrect technique. But because tennis technique correctness was determined seventy years ago based on what was best when the game was played with wooden rackets and the most prestigious tournaments were played on bad grass, I guess it was inevitable.
I feel you. I struggle to call today's technique "incorrect" though. What parts? Just the bent arm forehands? You'd think that if the limits were being pushed hard enough, then these flaws in the technique would be holding players back. Djokovic has a kind of crazy grip and a bent arm forehand but has proven himself to be among the best of the best by many metrics. I don't know what to say. I think a bent arm can lead to more angles, a faster whippy stroke path, a more compact swing and potentially less stress on the arm. And then you have a guy like Medvedev who I definitely don't stand by as an example of correct but I can't fault it too much. He's an unusual body-type and height so what mechanics work for him in todays game might just look that different. Maybe it is indeed optimal for him.
@@ZeroLoveTennis cut a perfect fit wooden rolling pin with a kitchen knife, taped it up. One observation, when you lenghten the racket, you proportionally make the racket head smaller. With a 1 inch extension, a 98 racket becomes equivalent to a 94.5 sq inch frame on a 27 length.
Yeah relative to the length. Micro spacing becomes more important. The same wrist movement will mean more head movement and can make precision a little harder to achieve.
Nice! I had a really bad run in with those guys that I'll never forget haha. But I hope you enjoy the racket. I still mess around with extended length (apparently) bought an Angell just the other day
I’m thinking about trying the gravity mp xl but if I do like it, it may render my raquets useless. But the lack of options scares me to make the switch. Not sure how smart it would be to go back and forth if I just add 1 to my bag and rotate.
I personally have never had much issue adjusting to different lengths. The body can kind of tell where the contact point should be based on how the racquet swings but maybe I have an easier time than some. Either way, I am no longer that interested in XL racquets because the swingweight increases a lot but the length only a little. And the swingweight is superficial because it comes from length as leverage against you, not actual weight. So you don't get the stability actual weight would offer but it is harder to swing as if you added weight. However, on contact with the ball, the racquet will have the same stability of the shorter length but have been harder to swing the entire time.
@@ZeroLoveTennis yea, I’m planning on demoing and seeing what it’s like and make a decision based on how much I like it. Strongest part of my game is serving missles so interested to see how much of a boost I get there.
I know of it. I had one for a while but these are older and discontinued, right? Funny how they made that and just stopped and never did again. 27.25" was a cool idea. I think Wilson was stupid to drop that idea but they have to go with endorsement, as dishonest as those often are. I think Nishikori still uses the ncode
In the 1990's most of the major brands had frames from 27.25 to 29. Many in the 95 - 100 inch range. As most of the players in the USA are 4.5 or below the increase in SW didn't work for a lot of people. they have the data on sales and the type of oversize frames that aren't for your game style are what sells for payers looking for a little more. In 2024 you have Solinco offer 2 models in both 27.5 & 28 inches so the ,market will tell. Thanks for your reply
Thank you! Yes, it's a few things (I think) 1. Older frames always had more swingweight. The game was slower and the racquets relied on weight to get power because they were inherently very flexy. Now, weight and power have less to do with each other whereas before they were in lockstep due to material (especially in wooden era) 2. This transition ushered in a new stereotype. Nobody knows that racquets from those days were often in longer lengths. So they don't challenge the conventional wisdom of today. But as someone who really explored that for themselves, I'm pretty happy with my findings. I'll maybe make more content on it. I still mess around with racquet extending but much more subtly. Never more than a half inch.
Great video. Majority of frames I’ve played with have been extended. I’ve played with 27.5. 27.4, but prefer 27.25. My racquets were always customised to 27.25, and doctored up(balance, etc) . I am thrown off when I try a standard length frame. I definitely agree there are not a lot of options for consumers who want an extended length frame. Great video 😀
Thank you, glad you appreciate the video! I think it's so crazy that there is almost no selection for good extended frames and the stigma is really tiring and kind of ignorant. 27.25 is cool. I'm still playing around but really trying to get along with 28. If I can, I think I should.
@@ZeroLoveTennis you’re very welcome. There are not as many consumers wanting extended frames possible. I’m also tall (6ft )so I too find it hilarious that some think only a shorter player may want an extended frame. Many elite level players play with extended frames. 28 inches was too long for me, 27.5 was nice. 27.4 worked well, but 27.25 was perfect for me. Definitely use what is the most comfortable for you. I’ve seen the ins and outs of the tennis world. It’s what i grew up in. Training at IMG from a young age. I’m definitely looking forward to more great content from you. Cheers 😄
There aren't but I think there could be if the market pushed it a little. I just see a lot of potential in the market and I think a lot would love or benefit from it. Not saying it's for everyone but it seems so unfairly unavailable. Also, I think you should consider getting the longest frame you can play well with, no the shortest. Does that make sense? Same with weight. Heaviest you can play really well with. Obviously when messing with length, then weight is to be reconsidered but it's all in relation to each other, weight and length when it comes to rackets.
Test sw102 n püre drive...top 2 men players are using 18x19....joker is also slight extended....if you a net player avoid extended...if your baseliner then test it
@@b.lakeberg7456 that's interesting. That's not available retail, is it? Or is it? I haven't really looked but was seeing some 18/20 offerings from technifibre. Who's the other person this guy is mentioning?
Both Djoker and Medvedev use an 18x19 pattern. I think Djoker is a customized drill pattern on his Head Liquidmetal Radical Tour mold while Medvedev uses a Tecnifibre racquet, likely one of the older Tfight 305s with a 95 inch head and 18x19 pattern (most speculate it’s the Dynacore version)
Very cool. 18/19 seems weird but I guess my comment about that in the video was sort of more pointed at the SW102 and why they make a funky and long racket like that but not a regular one at longer length, as if that wouldn't do well or better but they still bother to make a silly racket like that instead? Just seems dumb to do that or at least not both. There is certainly no saturation of tennis rackets in the extended length options, know what I mean?
I think that taller people with longer arm span have longer levers and thus are harder to accelerate and are less maneuverable. So adding racquet length to already a lengthy arm is a risk, Isner uses a long racquet so he can serve better while the rest of his game is awkward. Il give you another point to think of, what is standard length ? 27 inch ? why ? because that's the best size for the player's height in the ATP tour, so the rest of the world just copies them. I think shorter people should use longer racquets as a standard.
By the way, I've bought pure aero 98 online and then I saw your video about the sx300. So I cancelled my order and bought the Dunlop. Great racquet at half of the price, thanks !
@@ZeroLoveTennis ye it is ! But I'm constantly changing the weight and balance currently I'm at 354 grams and 350 sw so I don't even remember how the racquet is originally. I'm very much like you, an experimenter so I love it that I found your channel as you can save me some time. I'm also practicing ambidexterity started 7 years ago. Last thing is that we don't have restring in europe..you think the cannon weiss rock and roll is any good as a substitute?
Hey, cool to hear about the Ambi play! I have yet to try the rock and roll. I tried understanding if the string is only sold as a set or reels because one is a hybrid the other seems not to be. Weiss Cannon never replies to any attempts to reach out. Maybe they're all German and can't understand my emails?? IDK!
yeah, this is actually the reason why i shifted to regular length rackets. The lack of options was, and still is, glaring. I kinda lucked out though because I was getting a lot stronger and better at tennis. Shifted from an extended length babolat pure drive to regular length player frames and at the same time, I shifted from a two hander to a one handed backhand.
Nice! I need to talk about my backhands a bit. In a future video for sure. Lack of options is super sad to see. It seems to just get a little worse but I know Solinco offers one now but that racket isn't sold just anywhere. I will probably look into it, maybe even get it but it's a 16x19 and I hear kind of powerful.
@@ZeroLoveTennis I am due to my body size going on small size of 25 inches have my old model and several, but I feel limited as well that a slimed down throat racquet with full grip is out there and using actual adult tech not just slightly older quality graphite you would find on cheaper quality 2000's model, you are basically limited to a few models if you want a 25 inch in carbon fiber and forget ever having a titanium model made in a 25 inch size as most are Jr aluminum or Jr advanced graphite maybe slipping up to a 26 inch for a few more choices in carbon fiber included but that is all you can get.
How tall are you? I guess you can always cut racquets down. I did that again with my current main racquet haha.
@@ZeroLoveTennis 5 foot 2 inch or 157.5 cm and 107--110 pounds or 48--49 kilograms.
On your handle length problem. The easy solution is to make use of the fact that replacement grips come with extra length. Just wrap past the top of the pallet onto the shaft of the racket as needed. Most rackets come with a 1/2 to 1 inch shaft. I’m not talking Donnay Borg Pro grip here. Just wrap up the shaft to match your hands.
On extending the the length of a racket. They sell butt caps that extend the length of a racket. The old school way and probably more solid solution is to take a octagonal shaped piece of wood the same dimensions as your pallet and with the height you want to lengthen a racket and epoxy it onto the end of the racket. I did this to experiment when I went through my “tennis nerd” phase decades ago. I tried up to half a inch. You’ll be amazed at how well it works. If it’s to long take a small fine tooth saw and shorten the wood plug as much or as little as you want. Don’t like it? Just saw all but a thin veneer of wood off and sand the remainder off with a sanding block so as not to damage your racket. It was easier in my day since it was easy to find a old wood racket that matched the grip dimensions of a graphite racket. It was just a matter of sawing off a short length of wood handle. A band saw would be the easiest but anyone with basic woodworking skills and a small hand saw could cut the shape out of scrap wood. It doesn’t even have to be a exact match since the epoxy joint will still be within the butt cap and so won’t be felt through the grip. Any racket with a removable butt cap can be extended.
Good point but some rackets aren't friendly to this. Like pro staff or new Wilson shift. But yeah anything can be extended pretty much but I've figured all this extended dilemma stuff out well after this video but thanks for sharing!
Back on standard length now. Pure Aero 98 handle is plenty long. I'm happy
`Over 100 sq inch frames work just fine for those of us who have strokes forgerd before poly. Serena and Venus used extended oversize frames as kids & pros. The extra lenght bumps up the swing weight, which the majority of the playing public, who are by USTA stat below 4.5 find a barrier to use.
Many of the senior players use the large head extended frames in tourney play. The runner up in the 70's Grass National, a 6'4" Marine vet used the Head Ti-6, which is a. 115
I forgot if in this video I explained the interesting dilemma of extending a frame, that you increase the swingweight without actually increasing the weight which means it is harder to swing but without any static gains in stability. It is harder to swing but equally stable (especially on slower balls or where you aren't swinging: volleying) despite being harder to maneuver. So you need to be very careful of that trade-off.
Other things are affected but that is a big deal that seems overlooked.
Really hard to justify a quarter inch for ten swingweight units when you could add a couple grams and get way more stability at the head and it would still be easier to swing than the 1/4" length.
Players my age remember the one change that the fall of the Berlin wall. The Ultra High Modulus graphite was available for the sporting goods market. The Secret 04, Wilson Profile 2.7 & other frames were in the over 65 RDC range of stiffness. When the HM & UHM layups became available, frame weights started to drop. The style of very fast swings across the board is the generation who grew up in a co-poly world. The history of the game is out there, but only a few players study that.& those of us who were playing in the early 1990's are getting up in age.
Yeah it's relatively unknown. I know a bit. An MRT I'm friends with walked me through the history. I saw some of the early very thick beam options.
I use the Serena 102 v7 racquet and I love it. It's great for serves and two handed bh. I use wilson revolve twist polyester and string it at 55lb, or else it will just be too powerful
Very nice. I keep trying to like that racket but I can't whip it when I want or need to most and I lose out on my crazy topspin.
For a significant extend length you should adjust your strokes. For a given speed you should have more accuracy because with the movement of the racket head as it approaches the ball will be straighter, i.e. less sharply curved. So a little bet earlier or late won't change the direction of the strings as much.
Today's rackets are so much lighter than in the 1930s. Most wood rackets were 14 ounces; Jack Kramer's racket was 15 ounces, and Don Budges was 16 ounces. So it would be interesting how a person would do on the groundstrokes with a 29 inch racket but going back to CORRECT (i.e. "Old School") groundstroke technique.
And you could always choke up for volleys.
Fair but I think racquets then were partly heavy because they needed to be. So flexy back then the only way to get more power from the racquet was with more weight.
Nothing at the time (from racquet technology) really favored the spinny technique of today's game.
So I'd say today's technique is largely an evolution of the game and the technology allowing for so much spin.
We also have 2 handed backhand more common now than 1. It is a very different time.
@@ZeroLoveTennis Yes, because wooden rackets were (relatively speaking) dead, they didn't need much spin to keep the ball in, and yes, heavier weight could add (flat) power. But also note that with wood, heavier weight also meant greater stiffness -- there was more wood to resist bending.
I see. Yeah I guess I feel today's racquets just allow for more stylistic variety and to better success. I trust the performance of today's material more "like it's less weather and time sensitive for sure" and you don't need the weight to get power or stiffness but you can still have it!
Pretty cool
"I feel today's racquets just allow for more stylistic variety and to better success."
Yes, despite the difficulty for a pro to change, in the long run they will do whatever best helps them win. I just think it's a shame that new technology has resulted in players using incorrect technique. But because tennis technique correctness was determined seventy years ago based on what was best when the game was played with wooden rackets and the most prestigious tournaments were played on bad grass, I guess it was inevitable.
I feel you. I struggle to call today's technique "incorrect" though. What parts? Just the bent arm forehands? You'd think that if the limits were being pushed hard enough, then these flaws in the technique would be holding players back. Djokovic has a kind of crazy grip and a bent arm forehand but has proven himself to be among the best of the best by many metrics.
I don't know what to say. I think a bent arm can lead to more angles, a faster whippy stroke path, a more compact swing and potentially less stress on the arm.
And then you have a guy like Medvedev who I definitely don't stand by as an example of correct but I can't fault it too much. He's an unusual body-type and height so what mechanics work for him in todays game might just look that different. Maybe it is indeed optimal for him.
I extended my blade 98 to 28 inches and tinkered with the weight and balance, very happy with the results.
Very cool! How'd you do it?
@@ZeroLoveTennis cut a perfect fit wooden rolling pin with a kitchen knife, taped it up. One observation, when you lenghten the racket, you proportionally make the racket head smaller. With a 1 inch extension, a 98 racket becomes equivalent to a 94.5 sq inch frame on a 27 length.
Yeah relative to the length. Micro spacing becomes more important. The same wrist movement will mean more head movement and can make precision a little harder to achieve.
The past 10 years I've been playing most with a Wilson nTour which is normally 27.25in, I guess a hidden perk lol
Yeah those are cool! This is one of those rackets I wonder why they stopped. That was an interesting length.
Been using TenX Xcallaber racket for a few yrs now. Its 98 27.5 length, 22mm beam.
Nice! I had a really bad run in with those guys that I'll never forget haha. But I hope you enjoy the racket. I still mess around with extended length (apparently) bought an Angell just the other day
I’m thinking about trying the gravity mp xl but if I do like it, it may render my raquets useless. But the lack of options scares me to make the switch. Not sure how smart it would be to go back and forth if I just add 1 to my bag and rotate.
I personally have never had much issue adjusting to different lengths. The body can kind of tell where the contact point should be based on how the racquet swings but maybe I have an easier time than some.
Either way, I am no longer that interested in XL racquets because the swingweight increases a lot but the length only a little. And the swingweight is superficial because it comes from length as leverage against you, not actual weight. So you don't get the stability actual weight would offer but it is harder to swing as if you added weight. However, on contact with the ball, the racquet will have the same stability of the shorter length but have been harder to swing the entire time.
@@ZeroLoveTennis yea, I’m planning on demoing and seeing what it’s like and make a decision based on how much I like it. Strongest part of my game is serving missles so interested to see how much of a boost I get there.
I think on serves it is all good. Everything else, a bit more suspect. I can't see it being a bad thing on serve, really.
Have you looked at the wilson ncode tour? Extended, 95sq, 16x20
I know of it. I had one for a while but these are older and discontinued, right? Funny how they made that and just stopped and never did again. 27.25" was a cool idea.
I think Wilson was stupid to drop that idea but they have to go with endorsement, as dishonest as those often are.
I think Nishikori still uses the ncode
In the 1990's most of the major brands had frames from 27.25 to 29. Many in the 95 - 100 inch range. As most of the players in the USA are 4.5 or below the increase in SW didn't work for a lot of people. they have the data on sales and the type of oversize frames that aren't for your game style are what sells for payers looking for a little more.
In 2024 you have Solinco offer 2 models in both 27.5 & 28 inches so the ,market will tell. Thanks for your reply
Thank you!
Yes, it's a few things (I think)
1. Older frames always had more swingweight. The game was slower and the racquets relied on weight to get power because they were inherently very flexy. Now, weight and power have less to do with each other whereas before they were in lockstep due to material (especially in wooden era)
2. This transition ushered in a new stereotype. Nobody knows that racquets from those days were often in longer lengths. So they don't challenge the conventional wisdom of today.
But as someone who really explored that for themselves, I'm pretty happy with my findings. I'll maybe make more content on it. I still mess around with racquet extending but much more subtly. Never more than a half inch.
Great video. Majority of frames I’ve played with have been extended. I’ve played with 27.5. 27.4, but prefer 27.25. My racquets were always customised to 27.25, and doctored up(balance, etc) . I am thrown off when I try a standard length frame. I definitely agree there are not a lot of options for consumers who want an extended length frame. Great video 😀
Thank you, glad you appreciate the video! I think it's so crazy that there is almost no selection for good extended frames and the stigma is really tiring and kind of ignorant.
27.25 is cool. I'm still playing around but really trying to get along with 28. If I can, I think I should.
@@ZeroLoveTennis you’re very welcome. There are not as many consumers wanting extended frames possible. I’m also tall (6ft )so I too find it hilarious that some think only a shorter player may want an extended frame. Many elite level players play with extended frames. 28 inches was too long for me, 27.5 was nice. 27.4 worked well, but 27.25 was perfect for me. Definitely use what is the most comfortable for you. I’ve seen the ins and outs of the tennis world. It’s what i grew up in. Training at IMG from a young age. I’m definitely looking forward to more great content from you. Cheers 😄
There aren't but I think there could be if the market pushed it a little. I just see a lot of potential in the market and I think a lot would love or benefit from it. Not saying it's for everyone but it seems so unfairly unavailable.
Also, I think you should consider getting the longest frame you can play well with, no the shortest. Does that make sense? Same with weight. Heaviest you can play really well with. Obviously when messing with length, then weight is to be reconsidered but it's all in relation to each other, weight and length when it comes to rackets.
@@ZeroLoveTennis apparently some shops can extend length fr you like unstrung customs in marbella
@@Bambotb true. Or rpny in New York or CTR in Florida. There are a few people doing this professionally.
ive been a longbody user since the 90s.. of help me since i am 5'8"
As for the reach problem, you can choke up the handle..
Test sw102 n püre drive...top 2 men players are using 18x19....joker is also slight extended....if you a net player avoid extended...if your baseliner then test it
Which top 2? Yes, mentioned Djoker. .1 inches I believe. Baseliner for sure, probably. A lot of net people do it as well for doubles especially.
@@ZeroLoveTennis Medvedev is also using an 18x19 string pattern.
@@b.lakeberg7456 that's interesting. That's not available retail, is it? Or is it? I haven't really looked but was seeing some 18/20 offerings from technifibre.
Who's the other person this guy is mentioning?
Both Djoker and Medvedev use an 18x19 pattern. I think Djoker is a customized drill pattern on his Head Liquidmetal Radical Tour mold while Medvedev uses a Tecnifibre racquet, likely one of the older Tfight 305s with a 95 inch head and 18x19 pattern (most speculate it’s the Dynacore version)
Very cool. 18/19 seems weird but I guess my comment about that in the video was sort of more pointed at the SW102 and why they make a funky and long racket like that but not a regular one at longer length, as if that wouldn't do well or better but they still bother to make a silly racket like that instead? Just seems dumb to do that or at least not both. There is certainly no saturation of tennis rackets in the extended length options, know what I mean?
I think that taller people with longer arm span have longer levers and thus are harder to accelerate and are less maneuverable. So adding racquet length to already a lengthy arm is a risk, Isner uses a long racquet so he can serve better while the rest of his game is awkward. Il give you another point to think of, what is standard length ? 27 inch ? why ? because that's the best size for the player's height in the ATP tour, so the rest of the world just copies them. I think shorter people should use longer racquets as a standard.
Pretty good thinking. Yes I've wondered why 27" exactly ended up the standard.
By the way, I've bought pure aero 98 online and then I saw your video about the sx300. So I cancelled my order and bought the Dunlop. Great racquet at half of the price, thanks !
Lmaooo that's a great story. Isn't it crazy comfortable? I still don't quite understand how.
@@ZeroLoveTennis ye it is ! But I'm constantly changing the weight and balance currently I'm at 354 grams and 350 sw so I don't even remember how the racquet is originally.
I'm very much like you, an experimenter so I love it that I found your channel as you can save me some time. I'm also practicing ambidexterity started 7 years ago.
Last thing is that we don't have restring in europe..you think the cannon weiss rock and roll is any good as a substitute?
Hey, cool to hear about the Ambi play!
I have yet to try the rock and roll. I tried understanding if the string is only sold as a set or reels because one is a hybrid the other seems not to be. Weiss Cannon never replies to any attempts to reach out. Maybe they're all German and can't understand my emails?? IDK!
Vcore 100+??
Haven't tried it but I mention it briefly in an upcoming video.