PDA

View Full Version : Is Directional Control harder with extended length racquet?


hyogen
03-03-2008, 03:42 PM
Like going down the line especially,

Crosscourt (finding the corners)

and Inside Outside.



I realize that with extended length you can go for more extreme angles...like the really short crosscourt with 2hande backhand..

jayserinos99
03-03-2008, 03:59 PM
In my experiences no after an adjustment period. The last two extended length frames I used at length were the POG LB and Tom's Machine and I didn't have problems at all with direction but did with depth at first (I was hitting too long). One thing that people harped on with the POG LB was volleying but even I didn't have problems with that as I normally don't take a lot of backswing with my volleys.

hyogen
03-03-2008, 04:03 PM
thank you. 10char

ChocolatePie
03-03-2008, 04:04 PM
My down the line with the PD+ is fine. My cross court with the backhand is really nice, but my forehand isn't. It's probably just a lack of practice for me.

jasonchu
03-03-2008, 04:24 PM
No. its not more difficult, you just need time to adjust.

actually, with a longer lever (albeit only 1/2 inch) you have more power and an easier time to "direct the ball"... the extra mass (again minimal) will also help increase angular momentum and impulse to the ball.

Bottle Rocket
03-03-2008, 04:32 PM
Yes, it is. Sort of...

If you're off just a tad with a standard length racket, you're going to be off more with an extended length racket. Imagine using a stick twice as long as normal and trying to time and control shots the way you desire.

For each movement you pass on to the racket through your own hand, the movement at the other end of a longer racket is going to be greater than that of a shorter frame. Trying holding a pen at the top and writing your name with it. Just as you can move the tip on the paper significantly farther than you could writing normally, the same type of thing will happen with the tennis racket.

The longer the racket, the larger the distance that the tip will travel for any given swing path at the handle. This makes timing more difficult and this in-turn causes a percieved loss of control.

I am sorry, this is a pretty bad explanation, but I can't think straight right now. The bottom line is, YES, it is "harder" to control it. The trade-offs may or may not be worth it. Extended reach, increased power, and increased spin might make it worth it (they do for me). Actual control is not affected by the length, it is only affected by the user's innacuracy... And I can gaurantee, if you're missing shots all the time, its not the extra half inch.

YULitle
03-03-2008, 04:35 PM
I found it to be a great explanation. :D

But, like it was said before. If you get use to it. It will be just as good.

jasonchu
03-03-2008, 05:00 PM
Yes, it is. Sort of...

If you're off just a tad with a standard length racket, you're going to be off more with an extended length racket. Imagine using a stick twice as long as normal and trying to time and control shots the way you desire.

For each movement you pass on to the racket through your own hand, the movement at the other end of a longer racket is going to be greater than that of a shorter frame. Trying holding a pen at the top and writing your name with it. Just as you can move the tip on the paper significantly farther than you could writing normally, the same type of thing will happen with the tennis racket.

The longer the racket, the larger the distance that the tip will travel for any given swing path at the handle. This makes timing more difficult and this in-turn causes a percieved loss of control.

I am sorry, this is a pretty bad explanation, but I can't think straight right now. The bottom line is, YES, it is "harder" to control it. The trade-offs may or may not be worth it. Extended reach, increased power, and increased spin might make it worth it (they do for me). Actual control is not affected by the length, it is only affected by the user's innacuracy... And I can gaurantee, if you're missing shots all the time, its not the extra half inch.


good points... if your pencil is 95 sq inches in width though, the sweetspot more than makes up for the pinpoint accuracy lost. :)

Bottle Rocket
03-04-2008, 04:47 PM
good points... if your pencil is 95 sq inches in width though, the sweetspot more than makes up for the pinpoint accuracy lost. :)

Even though you were kidding around, I feel the need to mention that increasing headsize has absolutely no effect on the sweet spot size.... This idea is getting spread around too much, probably because of the loop-holes Prince and others are jumping through with their marketing and advertising...

Sweet spots are "spots". They have no size.

What is interesting is that the weight distribution on extended length rackets, all else being the same compared with its standard length version, actually changes the sweet spot location. Of course, this is a fairly insignificant change...

Forgiveness? Now that's an issue worth talking about.

...And since I've already rambled on a good amount, I'll add that if you have a sensitive elbow, or just want to avoid elbow problems at all costs, it is a good idea to avoid extended length rackets.

Z-Man
03-04-2008, 06:02 PM
I've used extended racquets for a long time, but recently I've been using a LE Radical. I don't think directional control is that much easier with a shorter racquet, but some shots are easier than others. I've found that the extra length makes it easier to hit a little late, and therefore the down the line and inside out forehands are easier to hit than a sharp angle crosscourt forehand. The sharp angle crosscourt backhand is easier because the length gives you more topspin, which allows you to dip the ball. The POG LB gave me more spin control, which translated into depth control and control over the arc of the ball, which factors into hitting passing shots. The extra length is better for most backcourt shots. I only switched because I'm mostly playing doubles these days.