Another tennis site just put up a video on Youtube of some HD footage from Indian Wells showing Roger's forehand grip during practice sessions.
Their close-ups seem to clearly show that he uses a 3/3 eastern grip. They claim that they've looked at thousands of frozen frames, and only one looks semi-western, and that was a migrated heel-pad.
I'm surprised, as my scrutinizing had me convinced he was closer to a 3.5/3.5 than Yandell's conclusion of 3.5/3.
I've looked really closely at still images, some in the Tour Portraits section, wherein the degree to which the end of his ring finger wraps around the handle onto bevel 8, with the tip of that finger reaching even onto bevel 1!, convinced me that he had the 'heel pad' at 3.5 rather than 3.
Because his heel pad is off the racquet it's hard to place that landmark, as John has pointed out. If he really is a 3/3, then the positioning of his ring finger suggests that he is indeed using a grip size (he uses 4 3/8 + 1 overgrip) at least 4 sizes 'too small'.
Thoughts?
Their close-ups seem to clearly show that he uses a 3/3 eastern grip. They claim that they've looked at thousands of frozen frames, and only one looks semi-western, and that was a migrated heel-pad.
I'm surprised, as my scrutinizing had me convinced he was closer to a 3.5/3.5 than Yandell's conclusion of 3.5/3.
I've looked really closely at still images, some in the Tour Portraits section, wherein the degree to which the end of his ring finger wraps around the handle onto bevel 8, with the tip of that finger reaching even onto bevel 1!, convinced me that he had the 'heel pad' at 3.5 rather than 3.
Because his heel pad is off the racquet it's hard to place that landmark, as John has pointed out. If he really is a 3/3, then the positioning of his ring finger suggests that he is indeed using a grip size (he uses 4 3/8 + 1 overgrip) at least 4 sizes 'too small'.
Thoughts?
Comment