tennishistory.com.au

This seems to be a question often raised around tables, at least when the veterans are sipping on a cup of tea (nee Bundy, Jack Daniels, Beer).

In an article, in USA Tennis Magazine March 1997, written by Tennis Authority Alan Trengove, Mark Phillippousis was given the task of testing out woodies versus a standard graphite (his own) and a superlong. The reason the article was written was because the ITF had just banned the SuperLong’s being marketed by both Dunlop and Gamma. This meant that all professional racquets had to be under 29″ in length. I recently saw a Gamma 32″ and it really is a massive racquet with a 137″ head size. See the pic below compared to a standard woodie. To meet the new rules they just chopped the length back to 28″.

Anyway back to the test. All the racquets were strung by Mark’s personal stringer using the strings and tensions he was used to and grips were adjusted as well. They were the Dunlop Superlong 29 1/2″, his standard 27″ Dunlop and the recently voted number one racquet of significance over the past 50 years, the wonderful Dunlop Maxply Fort specially flown over from the UK.

The test was conducted at the Melbourne Park, home of the Australian Open.

The results were very interesting. Wood Ave Speed 122mph, Top Speed 124mph and accuracy 60%. Standard length 124mph, 127mph, 52% and Superlong 126mph, 127mph, 80%.

On speed it is surprising that only 4mph separates the woodie from the two hi tech racquets and the woodie even gave Mark some more accuracy over his standard racquet. Maybe Bjorn should have persisted with his woodie in his infamous come back!!! Then maybe Mark should have tried a Woodie more often!!

In a separate, similar test in the USA, four players confirmed these results but found the woodies accuracy levels very low. I guess this does highlight the impact of frame strength and sweet spot size. However, given that these 4 hadn’t played with a Woodie at all or for many years, it also highlights how stroke techniques have changed with racquets. The importance of hitting with woodies using a more flat stroke and good follow through is certainly not in vogue today as follow throughs are moving across the body or at seems in full circle watching the almost table tennis style forehands seen today.

Were the players of old serving at Speeds like Mark? There may have been some big guns back then, but the rules for foot faulting didn’t allow both feet to be off the ground and over the line, so the level of forward momentum couldn’t have been the same.

The other factor was championship play was continuous so there were no sit down breaks between end changes because there were no chairs and no tie breaks which meant a match could easily go 3-4 hours. The wise players of the day relied more on accurate first serves with more twist than pace as way of conserving energy.

The conclusion of the test was that while extra longs seem to assist with accuracy, the additional size, weight and therefore swing speed didn’t create the massive increase in serve speed the ITF were worried about preventing. It is also proves that you really can generate some service speed using an old woodie afterall and suprisingly not that much slower than today’s technologically advanced racquets.

While not thoroughly researched, many players over the course of their careers have had involvement with a host of tennis racquet manufacturers all vying for player endorsements designed to create credibility and sales. (Just another project to get stuck into)!!

As the Australian Professional players, particularly in the late 1960’s – 1970’s, were proving themselves on the World stage the racquet endorsements proved very lucrative. While often contracted to use Slazenger, Spalding or Dunlop in Australia, contracts often allowed players the opportunity to accept contracts within certain overseas markets and you will discover many racquets in the USA endorsed
by Aussies that were never sold here or were available only as a boutique line if their Australian contracts had expired.

By far most Australian players were with either Rawlings or Chemold, but occasionally there were some other interesting liaisons. Rod Laver, Margaret Court and Roy Emerson were in this former category, however Ken Rosewall became an advisor/ consultant to the
The Seamless Sporting Goods Company and a quite unusual racquet was created. The racquet right is a Rod Laver version.

Seamless started business in the rubber industry in 1877 and had been making rubber tennis balls since the early 1920’s, however in the early 1970’s, decided to move into racquets. Attracting Ken was
a real coup and the signature SEAMLESS Ken Rosewall aluminium racquet was launched in c 1971. The actual racquet, according to Siegfried Kuebler’s book, was made by Acro USA and marketed under the SEAMLESS name which the changed from 1973 onwards to SEAMCO. Where the word Seamless appears in the throat, below, on the later model the words Ken Rosewall are printed on a red sticker with white reversed text.

These racquets were sold in Australia by agents and stringing experts Reynold Racquets in Victoria.

As a design , they are really very sleek. Their external part of the frame has no stringing holes like a normal racquet and the string supports were slotted into the inside channel. Consequently, the external frame is very smooth and elegant.

Please see more racquets and other tennis memorabilia at www.tennishistory.com.au

I do need to keep telling myself I haven’t seen it all. Here is a very unsual attempt to allow the player to adjust the length of a racquet via an inbuilt system with the handle. The length can be altered from 28 inches to 30 inches. Not sure about performance but very unique.

The brand is called RAYCO and very little else is known. The head size is 95 sq.in.