Beyond Suspician?

Amazon Five Stars!!! Now you can see inside the book! “Unputdownable” wrote C. V. Devan Nair, former President of Singapore.

Other outfits charge $48/year for 40GB, $89/year for 80GB, $199/year for 200GB.

Escape from Paradise, the game

Amazon Kindle

Book by Mary Bancroft

Google Ads

Pan For Gold – It’s Easy Income, and Tax Free! As recommended by Maureen Dowd in The New York Times

Federer unstrung

Nadal

Nadal

The slowing of the game of tennis explains why Roger Federer is on the slippery slope downhill.

Federer’s game, is much like the hard hitting tennis of the past, modeled on his idol, Sampras. Federer does use topspin, but not to the extreme degree of that of his nemesis, Nadal.

Here’s why: Slow is in.

The Australian Open this past February introduced a slower hard court surface.

Wimbledon has been using different grass and at different lengths to slow the grass game down. Slick carpets have been converted to have less speed.

The trend to slower courts is part of the reason why European players, most of whom learned on super-slow red clay courts, are now at the top of the game.

Of the two variables, strings are a much bigger factor than slower courts. This is because, both players are on the same court, but they don’t have to use the same strings.

Tennis is now in the era of “dead strings,” which are akin to the illegal “spaghetti strings” used briefly and very effectively in the 70s.

Spaghetti strings

Spaghetti strings

At the 1977 U.S. Open, using spaghetti strings, Michael Fishbach, ranked 200th by the Association of Tennis Professionals, upset 16th-seeded Stan Smith. This sent the tennis establishment into an uproar. This new spaghetti double-stringing system was producing huge upsets, negating natural talent and years of practice. The racket was turning predictable shots into wild, unreturnable ones.

Spaghetti strings grabbed the ball and held it on the racquet longer, putting top-caliber spin on balls hit with an average topspin stroke.

Where traditional stringing used a single set of main strings interwoven with a single set of cross strings, all on one plane; spaghetti strings had three planes of non-intersecting strings, with a plastic protective coating that made them look like uncooked spaghetti – hence the term “spaghetti strings.”

No sooner had spaghetti strings shown their stuff, than they were banned in October 1977.

Now we have a new string – a string that can give anyone a chance to play like Nadal. That string is Luxilon, the so-called “dead” string!

Luxilon strings are so effective that it is one of the few companies – and maybe the only company in professional tennis that does not pay top players who use its products. It does provide free product to a number of players, but the majority of top players do, in fact, purchase Luxilon strings.

With dead strings, a player can swing loose and hard with more dip, whip and power. The ball jumps dramatically-unbelievably so. A ball that looks long, suddenly dips and drops like a stone inside the court.
Nadal doesn’t yet use Luxilon, but uses Babolat stings which have much of the same “dead” effect. Nadal’s topspin has been laser measured at 3,200 rpm.

Huge topspin is the main reason why Nadal’s shots tend to land short of the baseline and rarely go out. Moreover, Nadal’s shots drop suddenly and do with an uncharacteristically high bounce. This forces his opponent into returning an “above shoulder height” ball – a shot where they have less power and control.

U.S. Davis Cup captain Patrick McEnroe has said of Nadal, “His normal safe forehand is the toughest shot in the world.”

In the 1990s, the best that Agassi could do with gut was 1,900 rpm.

The good old classic Federer forehand

The good old classic Federer forehand

Current world No. 2 (and sinking) Roger Federer, whose forehand is considered among the game’s best (but deteriorating), generates 2,700 rpm.

Federer, like the players of old, likes to hit his ground strokes early, while the ball is still on the rise. This allows him to take the ball closer to the net and reduces the reaction time of his opponents. They, in turn, are limited in how they can return such a stroke which typically produces a weak return that has allowed Federer to pounce with the angled winners that are a trademark of his game.

Federer, however, is being forced to change his game. He started out with gut strings, but now uses Luxilon Alu Power Rough crosses (across the racquet face) and Wilson Natural Gut mains (the longer strings).

Many pros use the same Luxilon/gut combination but with Luxilon mains. This is far more effective in catching the ball.

Hopefully for him, Federer will catch on and realize that using Luxilon on the crosses does very little to catch the ball. He should use it on the mains. (Federer might also try mixing up his game now and then, which Nadal does beautifully.)

Federer has had to adapt mid-career to the technology of these new strings. He no longer plays as aggressively as at the beginning of his career.

“I realized things were slowing down,” Federer said.  “The new string generation came along where returning and passing shots were made easier. It was harder to attack in some ways. I think that’s been a big change because of the strings, the way we’re able to cover the court now and hit through the ball and still keep the ball in play. Before we were all playing with natural gut, and by having that it was just hard to control the ball.”

Nadal, five years younger than Federer, has had the advantage of developing a complete game based on dead strings. We’re witnessing the first great player to use dead strings his entire pro career.

He very likely won’t be the last!

8 comments to Federer unstrung

  • KF Chan

    Part of it is also psychology.Federer has been magnificent for the last 5 years to 2007 and thus finds it difficult to change his winning game against new-generation counter-punchers like Nadal and Murray,who in my books,are superior versions of Michael Chang and Hewitt.As Uncle Toni puts it,Fed is without doubt the best player still but Nadal is best at winning.Maybe marriage might sort a bit of this out for Fed.

  • admin

    Good observation that Nadal and Murray are superior versions of Chang and Hewitt. Bill Tilden said, “Never change a winning game; always change a losing one.” Nadal gave a good example of changing his game at Indian Wells when he began to slice backhands to Murray’s forehand. Nadal is smart and knows when to change his game. Federer NEVER changes his game.

  • KF Chan

    Hi,never write-off the best player.This being such a strange year in all things,Fed might win the French and no other Grand Slam.Marriage can do strange things!

  • KF Chan

    While Nadal says the French Open surface is a completely different kettle of fish from Madrid’s,it looks like Marriage is settling Fed’s game like it did Agassi’s.Stranger things have happened,so the odds on Fed winning the French must have shortened considerably.
    The key was Fed trotted out his A Grade+ Serve in Madrid.If he can focus on this,his natural talent will make any contender,Nadal included,have mental doubts.It’ll be an interesting 2 weeks in Paris.

  • KF Chan: In addition to a better serve, Federer mixed up his game – played a bit of cat and mouse with Nadal – came to the net on short balls, and made some great drop shots. You can’t just stay on the baseline and trade shots with Nadal; you have to break up his rhythm, which is what Federer did. Years ago, I played Nicola Pietrangeli on clay. Pietrangeli was unbeatable that year on clay, and won both the Italian and French Opens. Pietrangeli was not a hard hitter, but kept you deep in back of the court. After losing 6-0 to him in the first set, I broke his first service game in the second by playing drop shots and lobs. I was too stupid to keep it up and went back to trying to beat Pietrangeli at his own game. He took the second set easily for a 6-0, 6-1 victory. My only consolation is that, in the next round, Pietrangeli beat Australia’s Neale Fraser by the same exact score – 6-0, 6-1. Fraser went on to win Wimbledon (once) and the US Open (twice).

  • KF Chan

    Wow,can’t quite remember Pietrangeli but it must have been fun.Well the Paris 2 weeks starts in a couple of days,here’s looking forward to a Fed-Nad Final.I just get the feeling that Nadal is,like Fed was a year ago,beginning to feel the heavy burden of both the No.1 ranking and his Clay exceptional record.Like the Stock Market,every trend must end but of course it pays to follow the trend too!

  • KF Chan

    Even tho Nadal was not in the Final,Fed played to perfection in that game and joined the Immortals.As I suspected,the heavy burden on Nadal proved just too much.But here’s hoping his knees recover fully for Wimbledon.Fed must be favorite for the grass and with no pressure too.Another fascinating tournamnet to look forward to.

  • Maybe, just maybe, the other players are on to Nadal – they may have cracked the code and hacked into his game to find a weakness.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>