View Full Version : How is your Swing length related to choice of racquet?

12-18-2004, 03:47 AM
Just a little question that is probably very obvious to most everyone else.

When I've been looking at reviews of various racquets they are often categorised as being for players with short, medium or long swings. I've always said that I had relatively short strokes but am beginning to think my definition is quite different to the reviewers.

I recognise my swing speed as generally slower (a lot quicker when I go to western on the backhand) but when I say my stokes are short to medium I only mean I dont take the racquet back a mile and a half above my head to begin the swing. I take the racquet back with a full shoulder turn and follow-through properly (perhaps I mean classically) not just poke at the ball but call the preparation compact - ie no big flourish etc.

After trying out a few frames based on my initial interpretation and evaluation of my strokes I'm getting the feeling that my definition is all wrong.

How do others interpret those definitions - short, medium and full ?

Steve H.
12-18-2004, 05:12 AM
I think that stroke length was more relevant before modern swing styles made it possible to get a fast head speed with leverage -- for example Fed, who has quite a compact stroke but gets loads of power from a 90 sqin frame.

Maybe the term "short swing type" is a polite way of describing players who do just poke at the ball, and the idea is to guide them to a more powerful racquet without insulting them.

12-18-2004, 03:26 PM
I think that stroke length was more relevant before modern swing styles made it possible to get a fast head speed with leverage .

I agree completely Steve, with the old, heavy wooden racquets it was a little harder to get quick acceleration from the cumbersome 13-16oz racquets, so longer smoother styles were a bit more necessary for power. I suppose that there might still be some correlation between the average swing length and swing speed, but there are obviously many who wouldnt' fit in this categorization. You can have a 3.0 senior with an enormous swing, who simply doesn't get the racquet going all that fast...he needs a frame with more pop....obviously Jim Courier has about as compact swing as anyone....doesn't mean he should use a Wilson Outer Limits! ;-)

I think it has become a nicer way of saying(at least in regards to Rac ratings)....do you swing slow, medium or fast....

They are referring only to the inherant power you can get with the racquet...not trying to actually say anything about how the racquet relates to the actual length or type of swing you take. Don't worry at all about relating your backswings to the racquets...just how much power you get/need at impact.

12-18-2004, 04:12 PM
Great way to look at it Datacipher. Makes me look at my strokes in a slightly more helpful light. I don't knock people over with enormous power or weight of shot (not huge amounts of top) but am more than capable of hitting winners from any position not through brute force but an ability to hit the lines consistantly.

Problem solved. I guess it means I swing medium-fast but wouldn't mind some generating some extra racquet head speed, especially on serves, but dont want to sacrifice the control necessary to hit those lines or be able to use the pace of my opponents shot to get into the net.

Any racquet suggestions?