PDA

View Full Version : I have to say that there's nothing like a heavy, solid stick


Torres
08-19-2011, 02:19 PM
Been experimenting with some 315g-330g sticks over the last few months, adjusting stock weights and balances, and whilst there are some advantages in manouverability, and RHS, there really is nothing like a solid, hefty stick for getting results.

Slices bite more, serves boom, volleys are rock solid, you can dominate the rallies just that bit more, generate more action and pace on the ball, as well as increasing the ability to turn defence in offense. Mixed with good, fresh poly - I use BHBR 17 - it really is just bliss.

I've gone back to my 6.1 95s (350g-355g), and I'm staying there.

That is all.

BreakPoint
08-19-2011, 02:32 PM
I'm surprised you didn't switch to a PS 6.0 85. :lol: LOL

Torres
08-19-2011, 02:47 PM
^ I would, but its 2011, not 1985. More rotations on the ball to deal with these days ;-)

roman40
08-19-2011, 03:02 PM
I concur, there is really not downside to a heavier racket, if you can get it moving fast enough and your body can handle the stress. Even 330 was a bit too much for me, causing fatigue in long matches and tender elbow/shoulder, before I started working out more (outside of tennis).

gregor.b
08-19-2011, 03:12 PM
Been experimenting with some 315g-330g sticks over the last few months, adjusting stock weights and balances, and whilst there are some advantages in manouverability, and RHS, there really is nothing like a solid, hefty stick for getting results.

Slices bite more, serves boom, and you can dominate the rallies just that bit more, and generate more action and pace on the ball, as well as increasing the ability to turn defence in offense. Mixed with good, fresh poly - I use BHBR 17 - it really is just bliss.

I've gone back to my 6.1 95s (350g-355g), and I'm staying there.

That is all.
Just got me a 6.1 95 18 x 20 and can't wait to try it out.Moving up from a custom 330g N Blade (1pt h/light).A little extra headspeed should make life interesting.Also,a little more maneuverable on reflex volleys.

TonyB
08-19-2011, 03:41 PM
My 40-year old wrist and elbow sometimes complain about swinging a heavy racquet around for 2 hours, but in general I wouldn't be able to play anywhere near the level that I do without it.

My current frame is 360g and around 340 SW. I've tried dropping to 350g, but I notice the difference right away (in a bad way).

The one downside is that you can't just flick your wrist at the last minute for a defensive shot. Just too much to ask from an old wrist. But when you can get a decent swing on a rally ball, you can really get some pro-quality shots out of a heavier frame. Volleys are like butter, too. The heavy racquet just absorbs the power and reflects it back.

Another downside is that it does get fatiguing over a long match. My serves suffer in the 3rd set. But for 1-2 sets, it feels great.

roman40
08-19-2011, 03:59 PM
My 40-year old wrist and elbow sometimes complain about swinging a heavy racquet around for 2 hours, but in general I wouldn't be able to play anywhere near the level that I do without it.

My current frame is 360g and around 340 SW. I've tried dropping to 350g, but I notice the difference right away (in a bad way).

The one downside is that you can't just flick your wrist at the last minute for a defensive shot. Just too much to ask from an old wrist. But when you can get a decent swing on a rally ball, you can really get some pro-quality shots out of a heavier frame. Volleys are like butter, too. The heavy racquet just absorbs the power and reflects it back.

Another downside is that it does get fatiguing over a long match. My serves suffer in the 3rd set. But for 1-2 sets, it feels great.
Is that 360 strung, or not?

Yeah, 3rd set is a killer with a heavy racket, especially when you spent 2hrs on the first two. It's so common to see older guys play solid the first set, drop a bit in a second, and bomb in the third, and a lot of them use heavy rackets. I guess it's a trade off, between better start and stronger finish.

OldButGame
08-19-2011, 04:02 PM
Is that 360 strung, or not?

Yeah, 3rd set is a killer with a heavy racket, especially when you spent 2hrs on the first two. It's so common to see older guys play solid the first set, drop a bit in a second, and bomb in the third, and a lot of them use heavy rackets. I guess it's a trade off, between better start and stronger finish.
As an older guy, and I'm not speaking for all,..but You are pretty accurate with this,..as far as im concerned,...:neutral:

roman40
08-19-2011, 06:29 PM
As an older guy, and I'm not speaking for all,..but You are pretty accurate with this,..as far as im concerned,...:neutral:
Didn't mean anything bad by it, just something to consider :) Some of our older club members changed to a lighter racket, and it improved their performance in the USTA league.

TonyB
08-19-2011, 06:58 PM
I'd rather hit better shots for 2 hours than scrub around and not play my game with a light frame for 3, even if I ended up winning the match. Maybe if I were a pro, I'd feel differently, but this isn't a way of life for me. It's exercise and personal satisfaction. I get more satisfaction from playing my game and enjoying the shots I hit than I do from winning.

TennisMaverick
08-19-2011, 07:03 PM
Yeah, 3rd set is a killer with a heavy racket, especially when you spent 2hrs on the first two. It's so common to see older guys play solid the first set, drop a bit in a second, and bomb in the third, and a lot of them use heavy rackets. I guess it's a trade off, between better start and stronger finish.

Seriously???....SERIOUSLY????

dParis
08-19-2011, 07:26 PM
If you can put the same strokes on the ball - for the same duration - with a 350g racquet as you can with a 320g racquet; then, sure. Why not?

dParis
08-19-2011, 07:28 PM
Seriously???....SERIOUSLY????
Yes. Seriously. We are not all the crazy-cut, freaky-fit stallions that you spend your valuable time with.;-)

TennisMaverick
08-19-2011, 10:54 PM
Yes. Seriously. We are not all the crazy-cut, freaky-fit stallions that you spend your valuable time with.;-)

I'm no spring chicken.

Don't mistake tiredness and the breakdown of footwork which severely affects timing and stroke production, to perceived breakdown of said strokes do to wielding a 15 gram heavier racket in the third set when the tiredness occurs, nor the loss of racquet head acceleration while serving due to the inability to push off the ground with tired legs.

Larrysümmers
08-19-2011, 11:08 PM
I'm pretty much in love with the BLX 95 16*18, a lot of it has to due with its wt.

roman40
08-20-2011, 12:39 AM
I'm no spring chicken.

Don't mistake tiredness and the breakdown of footwork which severely affects timing and stroke production, to perceived breakdown of said strokes do to wielding a 15 gram heavier racket in the third set when the tiredness occurs, nor the loss of racquet head acceleration while serving due to the inability to push off the ground with tired legs.
I know from personal experience, that 15+ grams does make a difference in a long match, and I am in my early 30s and in pretty good shape. It's not just that you get tired from swinging a heavier racket, it's also that you tire overall, which makes is harder to swing a heavier racket. Of course, it doesn't mean anyone should consider switching to a lighter racket, it's a personal choice and depends on playing style, technique and fitness level.

For me about 330 is just about right, for someone else it may be 350.

TennisMaverick
08-20-2011, 01:02 AM
It's not just that you get tired from swinging a heavier racket, it's also that you tire overall, which makes is harder to swing a heavier racket.

You need to carefully re-read what I wrote, and put it in context.

gregor.b
08-20-2011, 01:08 AM
Just finished hitting with the K 6.1 95 and wow,what a blast.So easy to drill the ball,hit winners and put the opponent under pressure with depth and pace.Even with TE and having to run around my stronger b/h,the f/h came off heavy and deep.Can't wait until my elbow heals and I can give the serve and backhand a ride.To all you 'players racquet' users out there,we are living the dream.

user92626
08-20-2011, 02:16 AM
I'm with roman40. I'm in his age range and find 315g-330g to be the best suitable weight. Anecdotally, there's a 40-ish guy in our group who swings a 12oz federer tour and terribly inconsistently. Typical recreational player who has no training or even if he's technically good, he doesn't train regularly like a pro so (no rec player does) it's easily to slip into lousy, lazy/tired set-up, arm-only swing which leads to terrible game.

It takes serious effort and training to do or use anything heavy. As competent as Federer and Nadal are, they still train hitting simple groundstrokes and tend their fitness day in and day out. These are all the things that recreational people do not do. Hence, it's unlikely that a 350g racket would help their tennis.

gregor.b
08-20-2011, 03:01 AM
I'm with roman40. I'm in his age range and find 315g-330g to be the best suitable weight. Anecdotally, there's a 40-ish guy in our group who swings a 12oz federer tour and terribly inconsistently. Typical recreational player who has no training or even if he's technically good, he doesn't train regularly like a pro so (no rec player does) it's easily to slip into lousy, lazy/tired set-up, arm-only swing which leads to terrible game.

It takes serious effort and training to do or use anything heavy. As competent as Federer and Nadal are, they still train hitting simple groundstrokes and tend their fitness day in and day out. These are all the things that recreational people do not do. Hence, it's unlikely that a 350g racket would help their tennis.
Sorry,let me clarify the above post.I am 42,I hit balls (fixtures 2times)3 times a week but train the rest of my body(arms,legs,core,shoulders a total of 5 times a week plus play over 35/open tournaments regularly.I would probably not be considered a rec player.This submission is in response to the OP whom is also not likely arec player.

Rogael Naderer
08-20-2011, 03:03 AM
Been experimenting with some 315g-330g sticks over the last few months, adjusting stock weights and balances, and whilst there are some advantages in manouverability, and RHS, there really is nothing like a solid, hefty stick for getting results.

Slices bite more, serves boom, and you can dominate the rallies just that bit more, and generate more action and pace on the ball, as well as increasing the ability to turn defence in offense. Mixed with good, fresh poly - I use BHBR 17 - it really is just bliss.

I've gone back to my 6.1 95s (350g-355g), and I'm staying there.

That is all.

While I agree with your initial statement, I don't see why you can't have weight and RHS? If anything I find it easier with my 350gram 320mm balance Dunlops than lighter sticks.

fuzz nation
08-20-2011, 04:10 AM
Little bit of a chicken-or-the-egg discussion starting to happen here I think.

Safe to say that a lot of us have seen good or even exceptional players swinging everything from fly swatters to tree trunks on the courts. When someone has a whole lotta game along with some decent fitness, I think that display of ability tends to make the racquet fade into the background just a bit, at least for me. Whatever...

I've always loved the heavier gear myself, probably because I go to the net so much. If my frame is too light and unstable for me, I'm in big trouble, but I also think I'm a product of my "gear history" having grown up with wood racquets and heavier graphite models later on.

In any case, my reality is that if I want to trade bullets with some of the young sluggers I coach or have a good grind session with one of my hitting pals, I need a hefty racquet to really impose my will on the ball. I've tried some middleweights - for me, that's a bit under 12 oz. - and haven't had any success. My one-handed backhand is even more "self-propelled" when I have enough inertia in my racquet, along with proper timing in my stroke. That's me.

Avadia
08-20-2011, 04:19 AM
Typical recreational player who has no training or even if he's technically good, he doesn't train regularly like a pro so (no rec player does) it's easily to slip into lousy, lazy/tired set-up, arm-only swing which leads to terrible game.

It takes serious effort and training to do or use anything heavy. As competent as Federer and Nadal are, they still train hitting simple groundstrokes and tend their fitness day in and day out. These are all the things that recreational people do not do. Hence, it's unlikely that a 350g racket would help their tennis.

I have to disagree with this. I am 46 and a typical rec player at the 4.0 level. I play 3-4 times a week and prefer a heavy head light racquet. I have lately been using Dunlop AG 4D 200 Tour and PK ionic Ki 5 PSE. These weigh 12 and 13 oz. (340 to 358 grams) strung and are 6 and 9 pts headlight. I don't find that I get tired or that my strokes suffer during a long match. I do know that I have to be vigilant about setting up earlier with the heavier racquet or I will be late hitting the ball. But the weight gives me all kinds of advantages and I wouldn't want to play without it. My serves have more sting, my groundstrokes have more pace and depth, and my defensive shots are more likely to keep me in the point.

Having said all that, it does depend on what you can physically handle. I am 6'1" and 215 lbs. and can bench press my own weight, so I am definitely physically strong enough to handle a heavy racquet. In some ways, it is also what you get used to. When I started using the 12 oz. 5 pts. HL Dunlop, it felt heavy and sluggish and I had a hard time whipping it around to the contact point (my previous racquet was just as heavy but much more head light). But after using the 13 oz. 9pts. HL PK monster stick, the Dunlop actually feels light and whippy!

At any rate, I don't think you can take your personal experience and expand it to all "typical rec players". I know quite a few league players who use heavy (12 oz. and up) racquets and do just fine. Remember, it wasn't that long ago when all the racquets used by "typical rec players" were this heavy or heavier.

BreakPoint
08-20-2011, 09:48 AM
I know from personal experience, that 15+ grams does make a difference in a long match, and I am in my early 30s and in pretty good shape.

For me about 330 is just about right, for someone else it may be 350.

I'm with roman40. I'm in his age range and find 315g-330g to be the best suitable weight.
Just curious as to what level you guys play at? Because I'm much older than you guys and I have no trouble at all swinging a 365g PS 6.0 85 for 3 sets. And I don't ever work out at all so I'm not in very good shape.

user92626
08-20-2011, 10:59 AM
Ava,

I didn't make the comment based on my own personal experience. I made that observation based on my playing from 3, 4 court parks, a pool of 150-200rec players and some of which claim to be in tournament. Take it anyway you want. Obviously there's always a few like yourself who think they play well with a hefty racket. At any rate if hefty racket is really what it cracks up to be, you'd see the majority of tour pro (talking about tournament players) relying on it. But I think most are using average to light weight relative to their calibers. Think about that truism.

Avadia
08-20-2011, 11:17 AM
Obviously there's always a few like yourself who think they play well with a hefty racket.

Well, that's a pretty snide remark. I know I play better with a hefty racquet. I hit more aces on the serve. My groundstrokes have more pace and spin and tend to push my opponents back. And I don't get pushed around by heavy hitters. I have played with enough racquets of different weights and swing weights to know for sure what works best for me. And I have the results to show for it, playing very well at the 4.0 level.

For that matter, I know more than a few people who are solid rec level players who prefer heavier frames. I don't generally see them "slipping into lousy, lazy/tired set-up, arm-only swings." I see them plastering the ball with good form, same as I do.

user92626
08-20-2011, 01:13 PM
Admittedly there's a little snide touch to it but my statement is foremost to say that your case, the few, is more the exception than the rule. How else would I say it? There's always exception and it's in the few.

Again, generally speaking, do you agree with my assertion that it'd take more effort and training to use hefty equipment, and it's something that most non-pro players do not do?

i'm not sure what we're arguing about now. LOL. I stated my observation of the reality I see, backed by explanation and reasoning. So, again, my conclusion is hefty racket isn't what it cracks up to be. It doesn't make sense for me and most people I know to use hefty sticks.

TennisMaverick
08-20-2011, 02:11 PM
Just curious as to what level you guys play at? Because I'm much older than you guys and I have no trouble at all swinging a 365g PS 6.0 85 for 3 sets. And I don't ever work out at all so I'm not in very good shape.

Really....I'm old enough to be some of their fathers.

What is really happening is a perceived tiredness due to the weight of the racquet, instead of understanding that tiredness leads to timing and stroke breakdown, making the stick feel heavier.

Avadia
08-20-2011, 02:16 PM
Again, generally speaking, do you agree with my assertion that it'd take more effort and training to use hefty equipment, and it's something that most non-pro players do not do?

I don't agree with your assertion that it takes more effort and training to use hefty equipment. It does take some getting used to, if you are coming from a light stick. But seriously, it doesn't take a ton of training or anything like that. It helps if you have a little strength though.

I think most people use lighter sticks because that is what is marketed to them by the manufacturers. I also think as most people progress in skill level, they tend to migrate toward heavier frames. They are called "player frames" for a reason.

klementine79
08-20-2011, 02:19 PM
The key is proper stretching and exercise. No matter what racquet you swing.

Fuji
08-20-2011, 06:33 PM
I think I'm a bit out of the ball park here but my KPS88's are swinging at around 388 grams strung! I personally love them and everything they do for my game. Nothing else really hits like them! Volleys are god like and so are return of serves. The only thing that suffers is serving late in the 3rd set. This can be easily remedied with better conditioning however. My whole game is based around attacking though, so if my matches are lasting 3+ hours, I'm doing something wrong anyways! ;)

-Fuji

max
08-20-2011, 06:35 PM
I'm at a point the past two years where I'm just confused by the weight issue. . . I wonder if I'm making excuses for performing bad in the third set. Maybe I'm just tired from all the running!

I tried a light (for me) racquet, at 11.8 ounces, and found it too fluffy and insubstantial.

dParis
08-20-2011, 09:08 PM
I'm no spring chicken.

Don't mistake tiredness and the breakdown of footwork which severely affects timing and stroke production, to perceived breakdown of said strokes do to wielding a 15 gram heavier racket in the third set when the tiredness occurs, nor the loss of racquet head acceleration while serving due to the inability to push off the ground with tired legs.
Point taken. Tired legs/heavy feet - that will kill the stroke faster than just about anything, I suppose. 15 grams may make a difference to some; 30-40 grams heavier will make a bigger difference to many more. Come the third set, with a 350g racquet, I know my serves will suffer and I'll be late on more groundstrokes than I would with a 315.

Larrysümmers
08-20-2011, 09:21 PM
Point taken. Tired legs/heavy feet - that will kill the stroke faster than just about anything, I suppose. 15 grams may make a difference to some; 30-40 grams heavier will make a bigger difference to many more. Come the third set, with a 350g racquet, I know my serves will suffer and I'll be late on more groundstrokes than I would with a 315.

nice sig ;)


for me a heavy stick helps me get a little extra behind juice on my shots, and also feels nice and solid at the net.

dParis
08-20-2011, 09:39 PM
nice sig ;)


for me a heavy stick helps me get a little extra behind juice on my shots, and also feels nice and solid at the net.
True. That's why I said, if you can swing a heavier racquet as effectively as you can a lighter one, then go with the heavier racquet. Not to mention you (and others) are bringing up one of my favorite heavy lines - the n/k/blx 6.1's. Those sticks truly are the sh*t. 8-)

Polaris
08-20-2011, 09:45 PM
Point taken. Tired legs/heavy feet - that will kill the stroke faster than just about anything, I suppose. 15 grams may make a difference to some; 30-40 grams heavier will make a bigger difference to many more. Come the third set, with a 350g racquet, I know my serves will suffer and I'll be late on more groundstrokes than I would with a 315.

I agree with this, from personal experience. I remember playing with the K90 and thinking that it was the best racquet I've ever swung ... for about an hour. After that, shoulder fatigue set in, and I didn't connect as well as before. I guess I need to be stronger and fitter to be able to wield that stick.

And, coming to think of it, the difference in weight between that racquet and my stock racquet (PK Redondo) is about 12-15 grames, and the swing-weight difference is less than 10 units. Still, I felt the difference vividly.

kaiser
08-22-2011, 03:44 AM
What is really happening is a perceived tiredness due to the weight of the racquet, instead of understanding that tiredness leads to timing and stroke breakdown, making the stick feel heavier.

In my experience this is absolutely true! I'm a 55 year old rec player hitting with a 360g 4D200Tour. When I tire in a long match it is because my legs tire from moving my 100 kg (!) body around the court, and as a consequence my strokes suffer because I am getting late in position, not because my arm tires from the extra couple of grams in my racket... I've tried lighter rackets, but I never noticed an appreciable difference in swing speed, because I use the big muscles in my trunk to get my racket (and arm @ ~ 3 kg!!!) moving. I regularly practice my serve hitting hundreds of serves in a row, and my last couple of serves tend to be the best... (PS. I'm in reasonable shape, but certainly not an athlete!)

I'm always amazed when folks claim with great certainty that with a 15-30g lighter racket they tire less in the third set of a close match. How can you possibly tell? Every match is different, your opponent(s) vary, the conditions vary, your own shape and form varies, and so on and so forth... This makes your personal experience totally subjective. To be able to test for an objective, statistically significant difference for the effect of a lighter versus a heavier racket on your tiredness in the third set you'd need to play at least 15 3-setters with each racket (blinded!) and measure your tiredness in an objective way...

Subjectively, I'm pretty sure that most of the recent matches I lost in the third set, I would have already lost in the second if I had played with a lighter racket instead... :)

McLovin
08-22-2011, 04:30 AM
I'm always amazed when folks claim with great certainty that with a 15-30g lighter racket they tire less in the third set of a close match. How can you possibly tell? Every match is different, your opponent(s) vary, the conditions vary, your own shape and form varies, and so on and so forth... This makes your personal experience totally subjective. To be able to test for an objective, statistically significant difference for the effect of a lighter versus a heavier racket on your tiredness in the third set you'd need to play at least 15 3-setters with each racket (blinded!) and measure your tiredness in an objective way...

Well, it's not 15 3-setters (not sure where you get that 15 is statistically sound), but I changed from a 360g racket (C10 Pro) to a 345g racket (M-Pro No 1) 3 weeks ago and have noticed that my shoulder is less fatigued in the 3rd set than it had been during previous matches.

Now, I will caveat this by saying any shoulder fatigue I felt came later in matches, against D1 or D2 players more than half my age (I'm 43), and only on clay courts where I routinely hit balls above my shoulder. On hard & indoor I could handle the added heft as most balls are waist high and most points are over after 6-8 hits.

Some of you may say "Duh! Don't hit balls above the shoulder", but that is easier said than done. I tried moving back 8-10ft from the baseline and I wasn't comfortable back there (I tend to hug the baseline). If I move in any further, I'll be playing from no-man's land.

So for now I am moving to a slightly lighter racket. I'll let you know when I hit that magical 15 3-set match mark...

sansaephanh
08-22-2011, 04:39 AM
You guys argue too much. Go play tennis and stfu.

JackB1
08-22-2011, 05:28 AM
I have tried the whole spectrum of weight...from 12.5 oz to 11 and found more benefits (for my level 3.5) with the lighter racquets. I find myself not perfectly set up many times and this is where the lighter weight really helps. I found that I preferred a "medium" weight of around 11.5 oz strung. Heavy enough to some plowthru and light enough for defensive "flick" shots.

TennisCJC
08-22-2011, 07:53 AM
Agreed, I bought 11 oz racket (316 SW) but customized with lead, dampener, grip replacement, and overgrip to 12 oz with 338 SW. It is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH BETTER with more weight. No freakin' comparison. More spin, easier power, good stability on volleys, and much easier on the arm.

I'm 54. Any adult past 16 years old, should be able to handle a SW of at least 330. If you cannot, I think it is mostly in your head.

By the way, if I tire in 3rd set; it is my legs and stamina that show fatigue more than my ability to swing the rackets.

My wife is 53, 5'4" and small in size. She plays SW about 330-335 and handles it with no problem.

FORCE = MASS * ACCELERATION and there is no way around that basic law of physics. If you have a lighter rackets, you must swing it faster to generate the same spin and ball speed. Swinging it faster requires more timing and introduces errors. It also is very difficult to "swing it faster" when you are volleying, slicing, or blocking back a fast serve. These types of shots require some mass behind the contact point to be effective.

95% of ATP pros play SW over 350 g. Even WTA pros frequently play SW over 350 g.

Mass also protects your arm as the weight absorbs impact.

Manufacturers are screwing public over with the new rackets with very low SW unless you customize to get decent plow.

michael_1265
08-22-2011, 08:36 AM
I typically like a racquet in the 350-360g range. Given that I weigh 108,862 grams, swinging a stick that amounts to 0.3% of my body weight is not significant :)

Seriously, though, as a 3.5, I find that a heavy racquet helps my serves, my volleys, and, most especially, off-center hits.

Fuji
08-22-2011, 09:52 AM
TennisCJC: I just wanted to chime in, my Girlfriends racket that I modded for her has a SW of 340-345 and she loves it. She knows nothing about racket technology or science of it, but she much prefers it now compared to when it was around 320.

I can't remember who said it, but most ATP pro's swingweights are in the 360-390 mark. Definitely high, but I think that higher swingweights even help lower level players connect for a lot more solid shots.

-Fuji

TennisCJC
08-22-2011, 10:41 AM
TennisCJC: I just wanted to chime in, my Girlfriends racket that I modded for her has a SW of 340-345 and she loves it. She knows nothing about racket technology or science of it, but she much prefers it now compared to when it was around 320.

I can't remember who said it, but most ATP pro's swingweights are in the 360-390 mark. Definitely high, but I think that higher swingweights even help lower level players connect for a lot more solid shots.

-Fuji

Agreed. I mod-ed my wife's racket too and she like it better with hi-er SW. My last 2 rackets have been around 337-340 g SW and this works for me at 4.0-4.5 levels. I sometimes consider going hi-er but it feels very stable here and generates easy power with good spin.

I have not played a racket with a sw below 320 that felt solid, and I have tried many.

Fuji
08-22-2011, 10:51 AM
Agreed. I mod-ed my wife's racket too and she like it better with hi-er SW. My last 2 rackets have been around 337-340 g SW and this works for me at 4.0-4.5 levels. I sometimes consider going hi-er but it feels very stable here and generates easy power with good spin.

I have not played a racket with a sw below 320 that felt solid, and I have tried many.

Right now my swingweights are in the 370's. I do have a racket that has a swingweight of around 400, but I rarely use it. They for sure get the job done at this level! (4.0-4.5) As long as I make contact with the ball, the shot is heavy enough to push my opponent back, or at least neutralize their offense.

The lowest swingweight I enjoy playing with is around 335-340. Anything lighter just gets too whippy for my liking, even with my WW forehand.

-Fuji

user92626
08-22-2011, 11:21 AM
i guess my style is that I don't rely much on racket weight. I like the feeling of light weight that I can totally control and whip the ball any way i want. I always suspect that this is a different style of hitting than the one where you rely on a weighty racket to plow through the shot.

basil J
08-22-2011, 11:33 AM
After having shoulder surgery and trying numerous frames over the last 2 years, I will aslo concede that a frame that is HL around 12.3-12.5 oz seems to produce the best results for me, especially with my 1HBH and serving. I also find that my overall control and weight of shot is much more predictable with heavier frames than with lighter ones. I always find myself adding weight to lighter frames to make them play more solidly.
My surgeon also commented that I should try to play with heavier flexy frames and it will protect my shoulder better than using lighter stiffer frames, so that is what I try to do. I have an ag 200 tour on the way and I am excited to see how it compares to the ag4d 200, which I find a little underpowered and missing the plow my old 200GMW's used to have.

TennisMaverick
08-22-2011, 12:08 PM
After having shoulder surgery and trying numerous frames over the last 2 years, I will aslo concede that a frame that is HL around 12.3-12.5 oz seems to produce the best results for me, especially with my 1HBH and serving. I also find that my overall control and weight of shot is much more predictable with heavier frames than with lighter ones. I always find myself adding weight to lighter frames to make them play more solidly.
My surgeon also commented that I should try to play with heavier flexy frames and it will protect my shoulder better than using lighter stiffer frames, so that is what I try to do. I have an ag 200 tour on the way and I am excited to see how it compares to the ag4d 200, which I find a little underpowered and missing the plow my old 200GMW's used to have.

There is no doubt that using the heaviest and softest frame for shoulder issues is the only way to go. Doing so allows the stick to do the work, absorbing the force of the ball, and not stressing your arm. Strategically, if the ball overloads your range, take the loss of point and let it go--you don't play tennis for a living.

EKnee08
08-22-2011, 12:38 PM
Didn't mean anything bad by it, just something to consider :) Some of our older club members changed to a lighter racket, and it improved their performance in the USTA league.

What age do you consider "older"? I'm thinking about a lighter stick but like the heavier ones.

BreakPoint
08-22-2011, 01:03 PM
i guess my style is that I don't rely much on racket weight. I like the feeling of light weight that I can totally control and whip the ball any way i want. I always suspect that this is a different style of hitting than the one where you rely on a weighty racket to plow through the shot.
But what do you do against opponents that hit the ball hard and heavy? They will knock a low swingweight racquet right out of your hand. Your best defense is weight.

TennisMaverick
08-22-2011, 03:44 PM
But what do you do against opponents that hit the ball hard and heavy?

You have to swing faster and hold the shot longer.

user92626
08-22-2011, 04:07 PM
But what do you do against opponents that hit the ball hard and heavy? They will knock a low swingweight racquet right out of your hand. Your best defense is weight.

The truly hard and heavy hitters that could cause my shots to go off rail are rare. But before it reaches that point there are several remedies - take 2, 3 large steps back, it seems like shot's power reduces exponentially every foot it thrusts forward around the baseline; limit my shot redirection, ie hit safely right back.

On the other hand 80% of my games are against folks whose shots require me to stand on or well inside the baseline. Constantly whipping a 12oz racket to generate my own pace and spin to opponent's corners feels like energy wasted.

Anyway, do you think a 323 gr apdc is a feather weight weapon?

Fuji
08-22-2011, 04:11 PM
The truly hard and heavy hitters that could cause my shots to go off rail are rare. But before it reaches that point there are several remedies - take 2, 3 large steps back, it seems like shot's power reduces exponentially every foot it thrusts forward around the baseline; limit my shot redirection, ie hit safely right back.

On the other hand 80% of my games are against folks whose shots require me to stand on or well inside the baseline. Constantly whipping a 12oz racket to generate my own pace and spin to opponent's corners feels like energy wasted.

Anyway, do you think a 323 gr apdc is a feather weight weapon?

I have to ask...

Do you play net a lot? It seems as though taking steps back doesn't really reduce the power of an oncoming volley. The large amounts of weight seem to be very useful for aggressive net and doubles players, but for a baseliner it seems as though extra weight is just a hindrance, depending on who you are playing of course.

-Fuji

OTMPut
08-22-2011, 05:54 PM
I'm no spring chicken.

Don't mistake tiredness and the breakdown of footwork which severely affects timing and stroke production, to perceived breakdown of said strokes do to wielding a 15 gram heavier racket in the third set when the tiredness occurs, nor the loss of racquet head acceleration while serving due to the inability to push off the ground with tired legs.

+1

people needlessly hype up minor weight differences. lack of conditioning is the culprit. if you cannot play the 3rd set with kps88, i am pretty sure you won't be able to play it with EXO3 rebel or PD. the incremental degradation in play because of minor weight difference is negligible and is more mental.

i play with kps88. when i am reasonably conditioned, i can hold out pretty good for 3 sets. if i play with APD, i play on an average 3 strokes more for a point and same 3 sets take probably 2x effort than what it would have taken with kps.

how about shoes? do you complain about shoes that are 1-2 oz heavier than Nike Lunar lites?
How about that sweat soaked wrist bands? I am sure it adds up 10-15 gms to your wrist (swing weight, anyone?).
btw, i do not wear wrist bands at all (tourna grip is my saviour).

max
08-22-2011, 06:19 PM
After having shoulder surgery and trying numerous frames over the last 2 years, I will aslo concede that a frame that is HL around 12.3-12.5 oz seems to produce the best results for me, especially with my 1HBH and serving. I also find that my overall control and weight of shot is much more predictable with heavier frames than with lighter ones. I always find myself adding weight to lighter frames to make them play more solidly.
My surgeon also commented that I should try to play with heavier flexy frames and it will protect my shoulder better than using lighter stiffer frames, so that is what I try to do. I have an ag 200 tour on the way and I am excited to see how it compares to the ag4d 200, which I find a little underpowered and missing the plow my old 200GMW's used to have.

Basil, I remember your love of the 200 G MW; even eloquent at times! Sad to say, I confess to never having tried the frame: a real mistake on my part.

thor's hammer
08-22-2011, 06:49 PM
I have to say that there's nothing like a heavy, solid stick

That's what she said. ;-)

Pro Staff 6.0 95. Too bad Wilson won't crank that one out again. Could be a decent choice for a lot of rec players for whom the 85 is pushing it a little too much.

Speaking of heavy, solid sticks, another fun thing to do is incorporate some time with an old wood racket (like a Jack Kramer Pro Staff) into your playing. Stick a volley or nail a hard slice with one of those!

If you like to do a little short court and some volleys with both players up at net for the first few minutes when you play try that with a wood racket, then go to your regular stick when you move back. Kinda like swinging a baseball bat with a doughnut on it. Makes you focus, and the newer racket feels light yet very responsive and powerful when you go to it, even if it is 12.5 oz.

Avadia
08-22-2011, 06:55 PM
I have an ag 200 tour on the way and I am excited to see how it compares to the ag4d 200, which I find a little underpowered and missing the plow my old 200GMW's used to have.

I think you will like it. I love my AG4D 200 Tour. I replaced the grip with a TW leather grip, which brought it up to 12.6 oz. and 8 pts. (1 in.) HL. Highly recommend that simple mod, which gives this stick the perfect combination of weight, balance and swingweight (at least for me).

TennisCJC
08-22-2011, 08:26 PM
The truly hard and heavy hitters that could cause my shots to go off rail are rare. But before it reaches that point there are several remedies - take 2, 3 large steps back, it seems like shot's power reduces exponentially every foot it thrusts forward around the baseline; limit my shot redirection, ie hit safely right back.

On the other hand 80% of my games are against folks whose shots require me to stand on or well inside the baseline. Constantly whipping a 12oz racket to generate my own pace and spin to opponent's corners feels like energy wasted.

Anyway, do you think a 323 gr apdc is a feather weight weapon?

The APGT has a SW of 331 according to TW. I have hit with one for a bit and it has sufficient power and stability for 4.5 and below. I don't know the SW for APDC but if it is 330+, it should be fine. Nadal's is weighted up to SW around 355 and he is pretty whippy too. If you are under SW 330, I would bet you would like it better with SW around 330-335 in a blind play test. As some one said above, you cannot really back up on a volley and light SW really hurts volleys in my opinion.

Avadia
08-23-2011, 05:28 AM
Anyway, do you think a 323 gr apdc is a feather weight weapon?

I tried the apdc for a few months. I found I could not generate sufficient power with it, especially on serves, volleys, and service returns. I wouldn't classify it as feather weight, but it definitely weakened my game.

JackB1
08-23-2011, 06:04 AM
I think everyone has a swingweight that works best for them and a blanket statement about heavy racquets is just untrue. Personally, I know when my racquet's swingweight is too high for me, when I am "late" on a lot of balls that I shouldn't be. I need to find that middle ground between being "too whippy" and "too sluggish". I know it when I have it right and that's all I care about. I don't need to swing a 13 oz racquet to prove something. I use what works best through trial and error and for me it's around 325.

CDestroyer
08-23-2011, 06:16 AM
I play about 6 different 5.0 - 5.5 players and the best players I have run up against play with racquets right around 11 ounces with low swingweights.

I tried going to lighter frames but my serve is much slower, less action. Groundstrokes don't penetrate the court. You have to swing a lighter racquet much harder to get the same pace. I am finished changing the weight and balance of my racquet and have arrived at 12.6 ounces 8 points head light.

Also just recently switched back to 19 gauge Kevlar and Gosen crosses at 50 pounds from full poly. This gives more control, spin, touch and I can play with that setup for 3 times longer than the full poly.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 06:18 AM
I am not sure how some of you folks can not generate power with an APDC. I have a PK7G and the SW was cranked up to 355.. I really liked it, but generating fast racquet head speed helps my game more than just blasting shots.

I also have the APD, and simply added 7 grams of lead to the handle..the stick is just under 330 still and hits very big..it is not far behind the 7G, except I have much more control and heavy spin on my shots as well. The SW is probably around 335.

Like others have a said, against a huge hitter I just stand a little further back...I can do so much to the ball with a racquet at this weight because I have the ability to meet the incoming shot with a lot of RHS. So far I have not really struggled at net or anything either..Nadal's SW is sometimes lower than 355, he does vary it..his static weight is 11.7 and that is very light for being able to hit so heavy against the best players in the world.

I think the polarized light stick with a healthy SW in the 330s and up is the way to go. The sticks that are the trickest to use for me are heavier ones with a lower SW in the 320s or under. I thikn that is more suited for a flat hitter, and the higher SWs are just better if you hit with heavy topspin and want that racquet lighter for more RHS.

If you hit with heavy top like Nadal, I don't see a heavy stick being a necessity..I think you just need a nice healthy SW behind the ball, and for anyone under 6.0., I think that can be 330-345. If Nadal is 11.7 and 355, I think a 4.0-5.5 is going to be fine with 11.5ish and ~330 using the same racquet.

TennisCJC
08-23-2011, 06:49 AM
I am not sure how some of you folks can not generate power with an APDC. I have a PK7G and the SW was cranked up to 355.. I really liked it, but generating fast racquet head speed helps my game more than just blasting shots.

I also have the APD, and simply added 7 grams of lead to the handle..the stick is just under 330 still and hits very big..it is not far behind the 7G, except I have much more control and heavy spin on my shots as well. The SW is probably around 335.

Like others have a said, against a huge hitter I just stand a little further back...I can do so much to the ball with a racquet at this weight because I have the ability to meet the incoming shot with a lot of RHS. So far I have not really struggled at net or anything either..Nadal's SW is sometimes lower than 355, he does vary it..his static weight is 11.7 and that is very light for being able to hit so heavy against the best players in the world.

I think the polarized light stick with a healthy SW in the 330s and up is the way to go. The sticks that are the trickest to use for me are heavier ones with a lower SW in the 320s or under. I thikn that is more suited for a flat hitter, and the higher SWs are just better if you hit with heavy topspin and want that racquet lighter for more RHS.

If you hit with heavy top like Nadal, I don't see a heavy stick being a necessity..I think you just need a nice healthy SW behind the ball, and for anyone under 6.0., I think that can be 330-345. If Nadal is 11.7 and 355, I think a 4.0-5.5 is going to be fine with 11.5ish and ~330 using the same racquet.

I agree with most everything you have said.

The only difference is I think a depolarized is better for all court players and doubles players as lead at 3/9 o'clock seem to really help with volleys, slices, and blocking back fast serves. I think polarized is great for agressive baseline topspinners. Nadal=polarized, Sampras, Fed, and Djoko=depolarized. Fed, and Djoko do have lead under the bumper but Djoko has loads at 3/9 o'clock and Fed has wilson perimeter weight system built into stock frame to add weight at 3/9 o'clock.

I do agree anyone under 6.0 with a SW 330-345 should be fine. What bothers me is when manufacturers produce frames intended for intermediate and advanced players with a SW below 320. Some of the newer releases have SWs under 310 which is crazy. I think a good 3.5 player will benefit from a 330 SW. I am kind of opinionated about this as I have never demo-ed or played a racket with a SW below 320 that didn't feel and play much better when it was customized to a SW 330+.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 07:03 AM
Yes I agree..I had this issue with many sticks, where the stick swung so light that I could not put any weight on the ball.

I think the reason so many people like Babolats is because they are so polarized and allow you to hit very hard while still wielding a light racquet. This has helped my consistency since I hit with heavy topspin to keep the ball in the court. For flatter hitting, I prefer a tighter pattern and a heavier stick, but for generating tons of spin, I seem to do better with lighter racquets and a SW over 330.

The secret is to get a racquet that you can generate the RHS needed to keep the ball in even under duress, and also have the higher SW you mention so your shots have the weight and pace needed to bother your opponent.

CDestroyer
08-23-2011, 07:10 AM
In all honesty isn't it better to be too light than too heavy. Its easier to customize. Wtf are you going to do to customize a KPS 88, add 15 grams at the handle? Then its going to weigh 13.5 ounces.:-O

kaiser
08-23-2011, 07:16 AM
I have tried the whole spectrum of weight...from 12.5 oz to 11 and found more benefits (for my level 3.5) with the lighter racquets. I find myself not perfectly set up many times and this is where the lighter weight really helps. I found that I preferred a "medium" weight of around 11.5 oz strung. Heavy enough to some plowthru and light enough for defensive "flick" shots.

Now this makes perfect sense to me! A lighter racket with more inherent 'power' will make it easier to produce an acceptable shot when you're late with your footwork and out of position. This may help especially later in a match. With my heavy racket and full style of swing I do need to be set up properly, so if my footwork lets me down, my game tends to collapse... I regularly lose from guys with less well-developed technique (or so my coach tells me...), who play very effectively with lighter rackets and abbreviated swings and flicks. But I don't mind, because I get my satisfaction out of playing well, not out of winning.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 07:21 AM
I used to be the same..just liked playing well..etc. For a while I used a prestige which is an awesome racquet, but poor match for me if I want to win.

My main goal is winning ..so I use the APDGt and for my (full) strokes it just works..I win a lot more with it.

kaiser
08-23-2011, 07:28 AM
+1

people needlessly hype up minor weight differences. lack of conditioning is the culprit. if you cannot play the 3rd set with kps88, i am pretty sure you won't be able to play it with EXO3 rebel or PD. the incremental degradation in play because of minor weight difference is negligible and is more mental.

i play with kps88. when i am reasonably conditioned, i can hold out pretty good for 3 sets. if i play with APD, i play on an average 3 strokes more for a point and same 3 sets take probably 2x effort than what it would have taken with kps.

how about shoes? do you complain about shoes that are 1-2 oz heavier than Nike Lunar lites?
How about that sweat soaked wrist bands? I am sure it adds up 10-15 gms to your wrist (swing weight, anyone?).
btw, i do not wear wrist bands at all (tourna grip is my saviour).

Couldn't agree more...

kaiser
08-23-2011, 07:34 AM
I think you will like it. I love my AG4D 200 Tour. I replaced the grip with a TW leather grip, which brought it up to 12.6 oz. and 8 pts. (1 in.) HL. Highly recommend that simple mod, which gives this stick the perfect combination of weight, balance and swingweight (at least for me).

Agreed, I put some Blue Tack sticky putty inside the handle of my two 4D200Ts, weighing them up to 13 oz and 9-10 pts headlight. Also lowered the tension to ~40#, increasing the spin on my forehands and kick serves. Never played better!

kaiser
08-23-2011, 07:52 AM
I think everyone has a swingweight that works best for them and a blanket statement about heavy racquets is just untrue. Personally, I know when my racquet's swingweight is too high for me, when I am "late" on a lot of balls that I shouldn't be. I need to find that middle ground between being "too whippy" and "too sluggish". I know it when I have it right and that's all I care about. I don't need to swing a 13 oz racquet to prove something. I use what works best through trial and error and for me it's around 325.

I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.

I know an older guy (at least a couple of years older than I am...) who plays doubles with hardly any backswing at all. He steps into the court and blocks, whips and chips back everything you throw at him, unless you really crank it up (which I only do occasionally with him when my side is getting behind...). A bit like a human backwall... He plays with a light, oversized racket, and at his level he's getting good results with it. Little scope for improvement though...

kaiser
08-23-2011, 08:02 AM
I think everyone has a swingweight that works best for them and a blanket statement about heavy racquets is just untrue. Personally, I know when my racquet's swingweight is too high for me, when I am "late" on a lot of balls that I shouldn't be. I need to find that middle ground between being "too whippy" and "too sluggish". I know it when I have it right and that's all I care about. I don't need to swing a 13 oz racquet to prove something. I use what works best through trial and error and for me it's around 325.

PS. That wasn't necessary. I don't think anyone in this thread is swinging a heavier racket in order to "prove something". They just feel they play better with it.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 08:08 AM
I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.



I don't agree completely. I mainly use a full, long swing with the kinetic chain and I still play better with the APD. Sure, it is nice to whip the ball with a reverse forehand, but I still use my whole body to hit that shot.

kaiser
08-23-2011, 08:25 AM
I don't agree completely. I mainly use a full, long swing with the kinetic chain and I still play better with the APD. Sure, it is nice to whip the ball with a reverse forehand, but I still use my whole body to hit that shot.

But, if I remember correctly, you also enjoyed playing with the 4D200, only abandoning it because of wrist problems... :) Anyway, there will always be exceptions, but don't you think that by and large the above will hold?

Larrysümmers
08-23-2011, 08:39 AM
I just think that it is personal preference.A heavy racket isn't better than a lighter one, and lighter isn't better than heavy. In the end it just comes down to the player, and what if comfy for them.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 08:44 AM
But, if I remember correctly, you also enjoyed playing with the 4D200, only abandoning it because of wrist problems... :) Anyway, there will always be exceptions, but don't you think that by and large the above will hold?

Yes I did, but I was hitting the ball flatter and losing more matches as well.

I really enjoyed that racquet, but I am much more consistent and dangerous with my current setup. I am just not a flat hitter if I want to win. Took me a while to figure it out, but it was worth it, since I hit much cleaner now.

It is definitely personal preference. Some people on here like to make rules to convince themselves that what they are doing is fundamentally better, and many times it is at the cost of their own game, and they don't realize it.

It takes a while to figure out what works because your strokes are constantly evolving and getting better.

If I can use a lighter stick and hit just as heavy as with a 12.1 oz stick, then personally, I have found that it is worth it..I get more RHS and more control...but once again, that is for how I hit the ball, and does not apply to everyone.

sparkyS4
08-23-2011, 09:03 AM
Hey Power Player, how would you compare the ball you're hitting with the APD to the results you got from the leaded up 7g? I kinda moved away from the 7g and back to my diablo's, but I still have to find a replacement!

basil J
08-23-2011, 09:23 AM
Basil, I remember your love of the 200 G MW; even eloquent at times! Sad to say, I confess to never having tried the frame: a real mistake on my part.

The 200GMW was a unique frame. For every person I know who loved it, I knew 3 who hated it. It was a demanding frame, but very rewarding to use when your game is "on". The new AG 200 series plays much stiffer & harsher IMO., but also less demanding. I am hoping the 200 tour version plays more like a blend of an old 200G and the wilson K6.1 95 18 x 20. Love the control and comfort of the Dunlop/ power of the wilson. I have been tinkering with the BB legend for the last month, and although it is a very good frame , it lacks that combination of Plow, stability and feel that l have been looking for since I got away from the 200GMW. I think there are much better frames out there today for me than the 200GMW, but I have not found a match of the combination of feel, control & comfort.

Fuji
08-23-2011, 09:56 AM
In all honesty isn't it better to be too light than too heavy. Its easier to customize. Wtf are you going to do to customize a KPS 88, add 15 grams at the handle? Then its going to weigh 13.5 ounces.:-O

Pretty much! My KPS88's are matched at 13.7oz and like 6 points HL! :)

-Fuji

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 10:20 AM
You have to swing faster and hold the shot longer.
It doesn't work that way.

Swinging faster will make the ball impact even more violent, and with a light racquet, one of two things will happen: 1) you injure your arm, or 2) the violent collision with the heavy ball will knock the light racquet out of your hand.

Imagine trying to hit a home run with a light wiffle ball bat off of a 90mph fastball with a baseball. You can swing the wiffle ball bat much faster than a standard wood baseball bat but I can guarantee you will not hit a home run with the wiffle ball bat no matter how fast you swing. In fact, you will either injure your arms when the baseball collides with the wiffle ball bat while you're swinging as fast as you can or the baseball with knock the wiffle ball bat right out of your hands.

TennisMaverick
08-23-2011, 10:30 AM
It doesn't work that way.

Swinging faster will make the ball impact even more violent, and with a light racquet, one of two things will happen: 1) you injure your arm, or 2) the violent collision with the heavy ball will knock the light racquet out of your hand.

Imagine trying to hit a home run with a light wiffle ball bat off of a 90mph fastball with a baseball. You can swing the wiffle ball bat much faster than a standard wood baseball bat but I can guarantee you will not hit a home run with the wiffle ball bat no matter how fast you swing. In fact, you will either injure your arms when the baseball collides with the wiffle ball bat while you're swinging as fast as you can or the baseball with knock the wiffle ball bat right out of your hands.

Dude.........

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 10:30 AM
The truly hard and heavy hitters that could cause my shots to go off rail are rare. But before it reaches that point there are several remedies - take 2, 3 large steps back, it seems like shot's power reduces exponentially every foot it thrusts forward around the baseline; limit my shot redirection, ie hit safely right back.

On the other hand 80% of my games are against folks whose shots require me to stand on or well inside the baseline. Constantly whipping a 12oz racket to generate my own pace and spin to opponent's corners feels like energy wasted.

Anyway, do you think a 323 gr apdc is a feather weight weapon?
But if you stand further back, you've given up your court position. Your opponent can start hitting angles side-to-side that you can't get to or they can attack the net and angle off volley winners or hit drop volleys that you can't get to.

I've hit with a APDC before. It feels extremely light to me.

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 10:34 AM
Dude.........
Believe me, I've tried using lighter racquets and racquets with lower swingweights against big hitters. They don't work. The faster I swing, the more it feels like the racquet is being knocked out of my hand. And the more stress I feel in my arm on ball impact.

HEADfamilydynasty
08-23-2011, 10:41 AM
You guys argue too much. Go play tennis and stfu.

BEST POST EVER!!!!!! LOL:):twisted:

user92626
08-23-2011, 11:01 AM
But if you stand further back, you've given up your court position. Your opponent can start hitting angles side-to-side that you can't get to or they can attack the net and angle off volley winners or hit drop volleys that you can't get to.

I've hit with a APDC before. It feels extremely light to me.

BP,

You're correct about giving up more court position. There's no perfect racket that does everything well. The court thing is only one aspect which I take into consideration with many other aspects that I consider gains. So all in all it's still far a better proposition for me.

OK, to deal with the court position thing, I have long learned to hit shots on the rise. This necessity was borned out of laziness actually :) lazy to move back and get into perfect position so I just trained myself to track the ball better and hit back. In fact I tend to play better when the point is fast, due to my "fast" personality.

But, if you let your opponent put you there, there must be something wrong w/ your game in the first place.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 11:19 AM
Sparky, the apdgt hits pretty big, and you can always add lead . It is light but I disagree with BP. It's definitley not too light, and you can do a lot of damage with it if you hit with heavy spin.

user92626
08-23-2011, 11:24 AM
Believe me, I've tried using lighter racquets and racquets with lower swingweights against big hitters. They don't work. The faster I swing, the more it feels like the racquet is being knocked out of my hand. And the more stress I feel in my arm on ball impact.

BP,

Using a lighter racket has to do with style, personality as well as technique and strategy. Don't look at heavy shot vs lightness aspect alone.

If you exchange rally shots from baseline, which 'modern' game is all about, which is better, ie expensing less energy: lugging around a light racket vs a heavy one, prolonging the point. Personality-wise, do you love grinding shots from baseline or not? Most of my opponent have outrightly told me that they do not want to stay at baseline to exchange shots. Their best chance is to challenge me at the net. :)

Talking about lighter racket, however, there's only so much lighter you could go. I playtested a new wilson Surge a while ago, 10.1 or so strung. It gave me so much trouble dialing the feel and controlling the ball at the same time. The impact on the racket was too much and I had to exert too much counter force. Thus at some point it became inconsistent.

kaiser
08-23-2011, 11:42 AM
Yes I did, but I was hitting the ball flatter and losing more matches as well.

I really enjoyed that racquet, but I am much more consistent and dangerous with my current setup. I am just not a flat hitter if I want to win. Took me a while to figure it out, but it was worth it, since I hit much cleaner now.

It is definitely personal preference. Some people on here like to make rules to convince themselves that what they are doing is fundamentally better, and many times it is at the cost of their own game, and they don't realize it.

It takes a while to figure out what works because your strokes are constantly evolving and getting better.

If I can use a lighter stick and hit just as heavy as with a 12.1 oz stick, then personally, I have found that it is worth it..I get more RHS and more control...but once again, that is for how I hit the ball, and does not apply to everyone.

I can only agree with that, in the end it all boils down to personal preference. But still I would venture that personal preference is not uncorrellated with one's physique, how you play and how you swing your racket, although in vastly more intricate ways that the crude generalizations we tend to make here.

In my case, upon returning to the game I tried hard to like lighter rackets, including several Babolats but not the APDC. Reading through this forum I thought that would be more fitting for my age (conserving energy, getting more RHS and hence spin, blah di blah...). Never noticed any benefits for my style of swing or game, only downsides. Finally found my (current...?) grail in the 4D200 Tour, which allows me to hit with more topspin than ever before, easily more than any of the guys of my age I play with, while opponents are regularly left flat-footed by the amount of work I get on my kick-serves. Only some young guys, including my 21 yr old son, and a 5.5 player I play with regularly hit heavier spin than I do now. And that with a 13 oz 350+ SW racket... Go figure.

TaihtDuhShaat
08-23-2011, 11:50 AM
From my experience, balance and static weight have more to do with tiring out from the baseline than static weight alone.

For example, take a 350g 7pt HL and a 335g 5pt HL racquet. With the same SW, they both should have the same power potential, but the more HL one will have to rotate through a larger angle from the backswing into contact and require more force to achieve the same acceleration.

Due to the larger angle and slower acceleration, more footwork and preparation is required to hit the same shot with the HL one than the lighter, more HH balanced racquet.

sansaephanh
08-23-2011, 11:52 AM
BEST POST EVER!!!!!! LOL:):twisted:

Indeed. They are all arguing over personal preference. Everyone is built differently and likes to play/swing/equipment/etc in too many various ways. Soooo, stfu and go play tennis :twisted:

user92626
08-23-2011, 12:07 PM
Originally Posted by kaiser :
I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.

Kaiser,

I don't agree with your limited view as such. Do you think Nadal whips with arm and wrist only? Abbreviated? Can you imagine if Nadal could whip as well with an oz or two heavier? To me I can't imagine.

Nadal is the pinnacle of the example of whipping of a light racket (and along with the particular movement). Maybe no non-pro of us could whip with that style, but that's the direction how a light racket should be used.

If you or anyone think it's a challenge for a light racket to deal with heavy shots, then it's even more so to be competent with technique to overcome the challenge. You have to have even better timing, better tactic with redirection and as I mentioned above don't be afraid to learn hitting shot on the rise so not to give up more court space and time to opponent.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 12:12 PM
Indeed. They are all arguing over personal preference. Everyone is built differently and likes to play/swing/equipment/etc in too many various ways. Soooo, stfu and go play tennis :twisted:

It's a message board. I think most of us play tennis as much as possible.

CDestroyer
08-23-2011, 12:34 PM
Pretty much! My KPS88's are matched at 13.7oz and like 6 points HL! :)

-Fuji

And you are a chick. You must be very powerful.:smile:

dParis
08-23-2011, 01:37 PM
It doesn't work that way.

Imagine trying to hit a home run with a light wiffle ball bat off of a 90mph fastball with a baseball. You can swing the wiffle ball bat much faster than a standard wood baseball bat but I can guarantee you will not hit a home run with the wiffle ball bat no matter how fast you swing. In fact, you will either injure your arms when the baseball collides with the wiffle ball bat while you're swinging as fast as you can or the baseball with knock the wiffle ball bat right out of your hands.
Come on. :roll: What kind of analogy is this? I'm actually embarrassed for you when I read this.

Comparing a standard wood bat to a lighter, aluminum bat would be more like it. It's not like an 11oz. racquet is going to crumple if you return a 100mph serve with it. Integrity wise, a 12.5oz. or a 10.5oz. racquet are identical relative to the difference between a wood baseball bat and a wiffle ball bat.

No, it doesn't work your way.

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 02:26 PM
Sparky, the apdgt hits pretty big, and you can always add lead . It is light but I disagree with BP. It's definitley not too light, and you can do a lot of damage with it if you hit with heavy spin.
Compared to a 13 oz. PS 6.0 85 or K90, the APDC feels very light.

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 02:32 PM
Come on. :roll: What kind of analogy is this? I'm actually embarrassed for you when I read this.

Comparing a standard wood bat to a lighter, aluminum bat would be more like it. It's not like an 11oz. racquet is going to crumple if you return a 100mph serve with it. Integrity wise, a 12.5oz. or a 10.5oz. racquet are identical relative to the difference between a wood baseball bat and a wiffle ball bat.

No, it doesn't work your way.
I was using an extreme example to illustrate a point that weight makes a big difference. No, the aluminum bat analogy doesn't work because you can hit a baseball harder and further with an aluminum bat.

And, yes, the difference between a 10.5 oz. and a 12.5 oz. racquet feels like night and day to me when playing against a 5.0 who hits very hard with very heavy spin.

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 02:44 PM
BP,

Using a lighter racket has to do with style, personality as well as technique and strategy. Don't look at heavy shot vs lightness aspect alone.

If you exchange rally shots from baseline, which 'modern' game is all about, which is better, ie expensing less energy: lugging around a light racket vs a heavy one, prolonging the point. Personality-wise, do you love grinding shots from baseline or not? Most of my opponent have outrightly told me that they do not want to stay at baseline to exchange shots. Their best chance is to challenge me at the net. :)

Talking about lighter racket, however, there's only so much lighter you could go. I playtested a new wilson Surge a while ago, 10.1 or so strung. It gave me so much trouble dialing the feel and controlling the ball at the same time. The impact on the racket was too much and I had to exert too much counter force. Thus at some point it became inconsistent.
There's some truth to that.

If you swing vertically (whipping up), perhaps a lighter racquet may work for you. But if you swing horizontally (drive through the ball), a heavier racquet should definitely work better for you.

Power Player
08-23-2011, 02:56 PM
^^^^

Most of us have been saying this the whole time.

ben123
08-23-2011, 03:11 PM
Originally Posted by kaiser :
I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.

Kaiser,

I don't agree with your limited view as such. Do you think Nadal whips with arm and wrist only? Abbreviated? Can you imagine if Nadal could whip as well with an oz or two heavier? To me I can't imagine.

Nadal is the pinnacle of the example of whipping of a light racket (and along with the particular movement). Maybe no non-pro of us could whip with that style, but that's the direction how a light racket should be used.

If you or anyone think it's a challenge for a light racket to deal with heavy shots, then it's even more so to be competent with technique to overcome the challenge. You have to have even better timing, better tactic with redirection and as I mentioned above don't be afraid to learn hitting shot on the rise so not to give up more court space and time to opponent.

nadal is not playing with a real light racquet. his racquet is nearly 12oz (its smth like 11,93oz) http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=340181&page=3 335gramm but without his dampner so ~338gramm
and dont forget that nadal is physically in best shape with big muscle arms

Fuji
08-23-2011, 03:16 PM
And you are a chick. You must be very powerful.:smile:

LOL! 6'0 tall 165lbs! Not that big either! ;)

-Fuji

Bartelby
08-23-2011, 03:23 PM
Yes, but Nadal is the best player in the world and his racquet is 100 sq inches and under 12 ounces, whereas a lot of people here laud racquets 90 sq inches and 12 ounces unstrung and they play at a far lower level.

So why wouldn't your advanced player at your local club do well with the racquet stock? I go to tennis tournaments at levels lower than the ATP and hardly anyone is playing with old-school racquets.

It is a matter of preference, as well as matching the racquet with your playing style, but preference is often tied to things like cultural preferences and male machismo.




nadal is not playing with a real light racquet. his racquet is nearly 12oz (its smth like 11,93oz) http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=340181&page=3 335gramm but without his dampner so ~338gramm
and dont forget that nadal is physically in best shape with big muscle arms

Power Player
08-23-2011, 04:53 PM
Lighter sticks for heavier spin players?

Heavier sticks for lighter spin players?

http://wwwc.mentalfloss.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/nixon-v.jpg

tennis-kid
08-23-2011, 05:05 PM
And you are a chick. You must be very powerful.:smile:


LOL that is so hilarious. He just had sex change :-)

Fuji
08-23-2011, 05:19 PM
LOL that is so hilarious. He just had sex change :-)

LOL of course, right?! I still have my uber masculine physic that allows me to wield monstrous KPS88's however, and GHOAT while I'm at it. ;)

-Fuji

d4o
08-23-2011, 05:24 PM
Been experimenting with some 315g-330g sticks over the last few months, adjusting stock weights and balances, and whilst there are some advantages in manouverability, and RHS, there really is nothing like a solid, hefty stick for getting results.

Slices bite more, serves boom, volleys are rock solid, you can dominate the rallies just that bit more, generate more action and pace on the ball, as well as increasing the ability to turn defence in offense. Mixed with good, fresh poly - I use BHBR 17 - it really is just bliss.

I've gone back to my 6.1 95s (350g-355g), and I'm staying there.

That is all.

More like, nothing like anything that suites you best.

BreakPoint
08-23-2011, 05:25 PM
nadal is not playing with a real light racquet. his racquet is nearly 12oz (its smth like 11,93oz) http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=340181&page=3 335gramm but without his dampner so ~338gramm
and dont forget that nadal is physically in best shape with big muscle arms
Compared to the 14-16 oz. wood racquets that pros used to use, an 11-12 oz. racquet IS "really light". :shock:

Even the 12.5 oz. K90 has a sticker on its side that says "L3". The "3" is the grip size (4 3/8 ), but do you know what the "L" stands for? It stands for "LIGHT". Because even 12.5 oz. is considered light. :shock:

Al1978
08-23-2011, 05:44 PM
I think it's less the weight of so-called players frames that makes them "demanding" than it is their high flex and smaller sweetspot, which reduce directional control and power on off-center hits. I don't see what direct relationship there is between the weight of a frame and the ease with which you can hit tennis shots. I certainly don't think an 11.0 oz frame is inherently easier for an intermediate to wield than a 12.5 oz frame is. I'm a 3.5 and play with 12.5 oz racquets, but what I need is more practice, not a lighter racquet to improve. When my game is off, it's usually the result of lazy footwork or other technical mistakes. It's not a matter of an extra ounce of graphite precluding my hitting a good shot.

Hidious
08-23-2011, 05:55 PM
I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.


This post has raised disagreement from some posters who insists they have long swings yet still prefer a lighter and stiffer type of frame. Fair enough but kaiser never said that only players with abbreviated swings could play with lighter frames, he said those with smaller swings would "be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket", which is absolutely true IMHO.

TenFanLA
08-23-2011, 07:48 PM
Sparky, the apdgt hits pretty big, and you can always add lead . It is light but I disagree with BP. It's definitley not too light, and you can do a lot of damage with it if you hit with heavy spin.

PP, I have 3 APDGTs that I bought a year ago and probably hit with 2 or 3 times. I'm thinking about taking them out to the courts again because my ex-coach is cleaning up his competition with APDGT nasty topspin. They measure 320g - 323g static weight. Did you customize your sticks at all with lead? Also they seem to swing pretty lightly. Did you measure the swingweight (supposedly at 330sw)?

Power Player
08-23-2011, 08:01 PM
Yes I added 7 grams of lead and an overgip to the handle. It hits perfect for me like that right now.

I will get the SW measured. The raquet hits bigger then it's weight to me, and I would guess 330 or so.

kaiser
08-24-2011, 12:39 AM
Originally Posted by kaiser :
I think it all boils down to one's type of swing. If you have a full swing where you make use of your full kinetic chain pushing from the ground up into your stroke, you'll be more likely to enjoy a heavier racket. If you have a more abbreviated swing and like to 'whip' the ball primarily with your arm and wrist, relying a lot on defensive 'flicks', you'll be more likely to appreciate a lighter racket.

Kaiser,

I don't agree with your limited view as such. Do you think Nadal whips with arm and wrist only? Abbreviated? Can you imagine if Nadal could whip as well with an oz or two heavier? To me I can't imagine.

Nadal is the pinnacle of the example of whipping of a light racket (and along with the particular movement). Maybe no non-pro of us could whip with that style, but that's the direction how a light racket should be used.

If you or anyone think it's a challenge for a light racket to deal with heavy shots, then it's even more so to be competent with technique to overcome the challenge. You have to have even better timing, better tactic with redirection and as I mentioned above don't be afraid to learn hitting shot on the rise so not to give up more court space and time to opponent.

92626,

My suggestion may well be an oversimplification, but what are you trying to say here? Are you saying that a racket with a 355 SW is 'light'? Nadal clearly uses his whole body to generate a tremendous vertical racket HS, typically launching his whole body mass airborne. He doesn't use a sub-11 oz racket, but one that is probably heavier in the head than what 90% of the folks on this forum are using. What are you trying to prove?

0d1n
08-24-2011, 05:22 AM
Now this makes perfect sense to me! A lighter racket with more inherent 'power' will make it easier to produce an acceptable shot when you're late with your footwork and out of position. This may help especially later in a match. With my heavy racket and full style of swing I do need to be set up properly, so if my footwork lets me down, my game tends to collapse... I regularly lose from guys with less well-developed technique (or so my coach tells me...), who play very effectively with lighter rackets and abbreviated swings and flicks. But I don't mind, because I get my satisfaction out of playing well, not out of winning.

Playing well and winning are directly connected. You can't "play better" but "lose more" with a heavier racquet but "play worse" and "lose less" with a lighter racquet.
If you "think" that...you're fooling yourself...it's all in your head.

Related to the complicated discussions in this thread, I think there are plenty of people who THINK they play better with heavy racquets rather than medium weight ones because of the few screaming winners and/or aces they hit with the heavy ones...but they don't count the many more errors and/or short balls they hit when slightly out of position which give their opponents chances to stuff balls down their throats...and in the end influence the match score more than their own winners/aces.

CDestroyer
08-24-2011, 06:08 AM
LOL that is so hilarious. He just had sex change :-)

Well she said she was 6 feet tall and lived in Canada and alot of the chicks were tall there. I believed her.

TenFanLA
08-24-2011, 07:42 AM
Playing well and winning are directly connected. You can't "play better" but "lose more" with a heavier racquet but "play worse" and "lose less" with a lighter racquet.
If you "think" that...you're fooling yourself...it's all in your head.

Related to the complicated discussions in this thread, I think there are plenty of people who THINK they play better with heavy racquets rather than medium weight ones because of the few screaming winners and/or aces they hit with the heavy ones...but they don't count the many more errors and/or short balls they hit when slightly out of position which give their opponents chances to stuff balls down their throats...and in the end influence the match score more than their own winners/aces.

Fortunately for me my ego will allow me to use any size/weight/shape racket if it will help me win. I'm trying out my girly 11.3 oz APDGT to see if it helps me win more. I think tennis players and golfers are like gamblers. They remember the few spectacular shots and forget the 45 lousy ones just like gamblers always recall the 2 big winning trips but not the 89 times they lost money.

martini1
08-24-2011, 08:00 AM
Just curious as to what level you guys play at? Because I'm much older than you guys and I have no trouble at all swinging a 365g PS 6.0 85 for 3 sets. And I don't ever work out at all so I'm not in very good shape.

Technique perhaps? I notice with a heavy racket one cannot wrist as much. And there is also the thing with pacing oneself. I can swing a lot harder but I need to pace myself.

Fuji
08-24-2011, 08:07 AM
Well she said she was 6 feet tall and lived in Canada and alot of the chicks were tall there. I believed her.

LOL! Scary part is, my girlfriends almost the same height as me. :shock:

-Fuji

bad_call
08-24-2011, 08:15 AM
Compared to the 14-16 oz. wood racquets that pros used to use, an 11-12 oz. racquet IS "really light". :shock:

Even the 12.5 oz. K90 has a sticker on its side that says "L3". The "3" is the grip size (4 3/8 ), but do you know what the "L" stands for? It stands for "LIGHT". Because even 12.5 oz. is considered light. :shock:

not sure about wilson but head uses the "L" in conjunction with swing style (beam thickness,etc) not racquet weight.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110729114642AAJv6ej

CDestroyer
08-24-2011, 08:18 AM
LOL! Scary part is, my girlfriends almost the same height as me. :shock:

-Fuji

That settles it I am moving to Canada!

Power Player
08-24-2011, 08:20 AM
Fortunately for me my ego will allow me to use any size/weight/shape racket if it will help me win. I'm trying out my girly 11.3 oz APDGT to see if it helps me win more. I think tennis players and golfers are like gamblers. They remember the few spectacular shots and forget the 45 lousy ones just like gamblers always recall the 2 big winning trips but not the 89 times they lost money.

haha..I hear you. I use the girlyman apdgt as well and I win more. I think it just matches my stroke style to be honest. If I was still hitting flatter, I'd be back to heavier sticks, but this seems to work for me. I have learned how to hit touch shots with it, and that was my main problem in the past.

I am not sure why BP insinuated that the L meant Light, but nice_call bad_call ;)

Avadia
08-24-2011, 08:41 AM
Related to the complicated discussions in this thread, I think there are plenty of people who THINK they play better with heavy racquets rather than medium weight ones because of the few screaming winners and/or aces they hit with the heavy ones...but they don't count the many more errors and/or short balls they hit when slightly out of position which give their opponents chances to stuff balls down their throats...and in the end influence the match score more than their own winners/aces.

This kind of thinking is just silly. Who would switch to a heavier racquet, start playing worse and losing more, but decide to stick with it because of the awesome winners they hit occasionally? How ridiculous is that? Personally, I have had a long road of racquet tests and demos to come to my preferred weight and balance. I have used racquets under ten ounces and worked my way up to racquets over twelve ounces. I have used oversized tweener racquets and players racquets. Head heavy, even, and head light. I hit with enough different types of racquets for long enough to figure out what works best for my game. I play 3 to 5 times a week, so I know whether a particular racquet is helping me win or lose within a short amount of time.

What leads me to stick with the heavier racquets are the consistency with which I am able to hit a heavy, deep ball that my opponents have trouble handling, the consistency with which I am able to return hard hit balls and serves because of the stability of the racquet, the consistency with which I am able to hit serves that are unreturnable, and the consistency with which I am able to put away volleys. It is consistency in these four areas that win matches for me. And I am able to maintain this consistency with 12 to 13 oz. racquet weights where I wasn't able to do it with racquet weights much under 12 oz.

And my winning percentage shows that this is not just in my head. I am winning more often against better opponents with the heavier racquet than I was with the lighter racquets. And ultimately, that is what matters. I am not saying heavy racquets are for everyone. If you are winning lots of matches with a lighter racquet, then more power to you (you'll need it). But to just assume that anyone who plays with a heavy frame is fooling themselves and playing worse and losing more matches because of the weight of the frame is just stupid.

Avadia
08-24-2011, 08:55 AM
I think it just matches my stroke style to be honest.

And I think that is the key, PP. You have to find a racquet that matches your stroke style and game style. When you find that racquet, you know what it is. But lets be honest. Even you don't leave the apdgt stock, do you? You add weight to it to get it to the weight, balance, and sw that works best for you. So in that regard, you are admitting that the stock version is too wimpy, at least for your game.



I am not sure why BP insinuated that the L meant Light, but nice_call bad_call

Actually, BP is correct on this one. In the european sizing system, the sizes are listed as L1, L2, L3 etc. where the number represents the number of eighths of an inch over 4 inches, and the letter (a holdover from the wood racquet days) stands for weight of the racquet, with L denoting a light racquet (and back in the wood racquet days, 12 to 13 oz. was considered light!).

bad_call
08-24-2011, 09:04 AM
Actually, BP is correct on this one. In the european sizing system, the sizes are listed as L1, L2, L3 etc. where the number represents the number of eighths of an inch over 4 inches, and the letter (a holdover from the wood racquet days) stands for weight of the racquet, with L denoting a light racquet (and back in the wood racquet days, 12 to 13 oz. was considered light!).

only seeing the "L" (or any other letter) on head racquet...not on my dunlops or prince sticks. any such lettering currently on the wilson sticks?

Power Player
08-24-2011, 09:14 AM
And I think that is the key, PP. You have to find a racquet that matches your stroke style and game style. When you find that racquet, you know what it is. But lets be honest. Even you don't leave the apdgt stock, do you? You add weight to it to get it to the weight, balance, and sw that works best for you. So in that regard, you are admitting that the stock version is too wimpy, at least for your game.




Actually, BP is correct on this one. In the european sizing system, the sizes are listed as L1, L2, L3 etc. where the number represents the number of eighths of an inch over 4 inches, and the letter (a holdover from the wood racquet days) stands for weight of the racquet, with L denoting a light racquet (and back in the wood racquet days, 12 to 13 oz. was considered light!).

Wimpy is not really the word I would use. It was just that I prefer the balance to be 6 pts HL instead of 4. The main way I figured I could re-balance it was some lead in the buttcap. I think there are plenty of people who can play the stick in stock form at a high level. It has a healthy SW for being so light.

Rebalanced, it is still under 11.7, which is quite light.

I have played with wooden sticks, old school graphite, but heavy spin and pace at the right time is what seems to give opponents the most trouble. It also is more how I have always played, but I did hit a lot flatter for a while. I like creating extreme angles and using spin to setup a driving winner now..it is saving me from making errors.

The ball produced is very heavy or I honestly would not enjoy the racquet..my last stick was 12.1.

TenFanLA
08-24-2011, 09:23 AM
Recently I switched from 11.8oz 338sw 70stiffness YT Extreme Pro to 12.1oz 325sw 65stiffness Ozone Pro Tour partly to rest my sore elbow and to hit flatter. Hitting flat works well with the heavier but lighter SW OPT but in a pressure situation such as 5-5, 30all in a competitive match, it's much easier for me to hit with a good amount of topspin 5' over the net rather than hit flat shots 1'-2' over the net.

I played against this young guy (K90) who had really good footwork but didn't swing very hard. Mostly he just blocked back my shots and sliced his BH's. But his shots had some weight behind them. They weren't push balls and skidded low.

So for flat hitters, from my personal experience, the heavier sticks tend to work well. But someone who hits with a lot of topspin like my ex-Coach, who uses stock APDGT and plays like the 5.5 - 6.0 version of Nadal, the lighter rackets seem to work better. I can't imagine myself whipping a 12oz - 13oz stick with heavy topspin for 3 sets.

kaiser
08-24-2011, 09:29 AM
Playing well and winning are directly connected. You can't "play better" but "lose more" with a heavier racquet but "play worse" and "lose less" with a lighter racquet.
If you "think" that...you're fooling yourself...it's all in your head.

Related to the complicated discussions in this thread, I think there are plenty of people who THINK they play better with heavy racquets rather than medium weight ones because of the few screaming winners and/or aces they hit with the heavy ones...but they don't count the many more errors and/or short balls they hit when slightly out of position which give their opponents chances to stuff balls down their throats...and in the end influence the match score more than their own winners/aces.

This is just silly and you're twisting my words. I have never said that I "lose more" with a heavier racket, and I'm pretty darn sure I would not "lose less" with a lighter racket. I just said that there are plenty of players with abbreviated swings wielding light rackets and who can build a very effective game around that, effective enough to beat me. But their games could never be my game, because it simply doesn't suit me.

I also said I don't care that much about winning matches. I'm 55, my left knee is shot since I tore several ligaments in it playing soccer when I was 22. I would be a sad case if I were still preoccupied with winning matches, I'm just glad I can still play. Ever heard of that word: "PLAY"?

Your post is stained by a condescending "light rackets are for winners, heavy rackets are for posers" tone that makes no sense whatsoever and was not called for.

Larrysümmers
08-24-2011, 09:31 AM
Fortunately for me my ego will allow me to use any size/weight/shape racket if it will help me win. I'm trying out my girly 11.3 oz APDGT to see if it helps me win more. I think tennis players and golfers are like gamblers. They remember the few spectacular shots and forget the 45 lousy ones just like gamblers always recall the 2 big winning trips but not the 89 times they lost money.

you really have to get in a grove witht that thing, when i was playing with a racket that was about 315g the APDC was really awesome, but when i went from my blx tour 95 to it i framed everything. I cant speak for the GT but the C is a really nice racket and im not sure why, but the spin does come easier with that.

user92626
08-24-2011, 09:49 AM
92626,

My suggestion may well be an oversimplification, but what are you trying to say here? Are you saying that a racket with a 355 SW is 'light'? Nadal clearly uses his whole body to generate a tremendous vertical racket HS, typically launching his whole body mass airborne. He doesn't use a sub-11 oz racket, but one that is probably heavier in the head than what 90% of the folks on this forum are using. What are you trying to prove?

No, Nadal uses a static weight of 335gr. Who knows what his actual sw is. Static weight is what we have been talking about this whole thread. The tone so far is that 315-330 (11oz-sub12) is considered light. Heavy, "solid" sticks are those in the high 12oz, 13oz or more.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 10:27 AM
Playing well and winning are directly connected. You can't "play better" but "lose more" with a heavier racquet but "play worse" and "lose less" with a lighter racquet.
If you "think" that...you're fooling yourself...it's all in your head.

Related to the complicated discussions in this thread, I think there are plenty of people who THINK they play better with heavy racquets rather than medium weight ones because of the few screaming winners and/or aces they hit with the heavy ones...but they don't count the many more errors and/or short balls they hit when slightly out of position which give their opponents chances to stuff balls down their throats...and in the end influence the match score more than their own winners/aces.
I completely disagree. To me (and many others), "playing well" has nothing at all to do with "winning". Even pros will say that they "played well" even if they lost the match. "Playing well" has to do with how you're hitting the ball that day, not with winning most of the points. You can play poorly and still win, and you can play well and still lose. I'm sure every tennis player that has played hundreds of matches has experienced this.

Power Player
08-24-2011, 10:36 AM
I agree..light at a 4.0 and up level is usually going to be 11 ozs and up. Nadal uses a sub 12 oz racquet and that is light for pros.

Roddick is still pretty light at 345 grams.

Pros have played forever and log around 15-20 hours a week hitting balls. So it makes sense that Nadal uses an APD that is leaded up just a little.

A player who plays 5.5 or lower is not going to play as much or need a stick that heavy. So when you look at a stick like the APDgt, it is easy to see how TenfanLA's 5.5 ex coach beat people down with the stick at stock weight. It makes complete sense. I just do not think people want to believe it or want to argue over basically nothing more than preference.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 10:43 AM
not sure about wilson but head uses the "L" in conjunction with swing style (beam thickness,etc) not racquet weight.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110729114642AAJv6ej
Head just made that up for their own marketing purposes. That's not the same "L" that's on the grip size sticker. That's an "L" incorporated into their racquet model differentiation system. Wilson used to use "si" for "Swing Index" for the same thing. E.g., the PS 6.0 85 is really the PS 6.0si 85.

"L" has always stood for "Light" in the tennis racquet industry.

"SL" = Super Light
"USL" - Ultra Super Light

Earlier versions of the PS 6.0 95 have a "SL4" grip size sicker on its side. Later on, that was changed to "L4". Because 12.3 oz. used to be considered "Super Light", but now is just considered "Light".

The Asians versions of the Tour 90, which are 11.9 oz, have a grip size sticker that say "USL4". Because 11.9 oz. is considered "Ultra Super Light".

In the past, there were also:

"LM" = Light Medium (~13-14 oz.)
"M" = Medium (~14-15 oz.)
"MH" = Medium Heavy (~15-16 oz.)
"H" = Heavy (> 16 oz.)

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 10:45 AM
I am not sure why BP insinuated that the L meant Light, but nice_call bad_call ;)
Because it's absolutely true. How long have you been playing tennis and buying tennis racquets?

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 10:51 AM
only seeing the "L" (or any other letter) on head racquet...not on my dunlops or prince sticks. any such lettering currently on the wilson sticks?
Perhaps Dunlop and Prince dropped the letter designation because they don't make any racquets over 13 oz. anymore so everything is "Light" or less.

bad_call
08-24-2011, 10:53 AM
Head just made that up for their own marketing purposes. That's not the same "L" that's on the grip size sticker. That's an "L" incorporated into their racquet model differentiation system. Wilson used to use "si" for "Swing Index" for the same thing. E.g., the PS 6.0 85 is really the PS 6.0si 85.

"L" has always stood for "Light" in the tennis racquet industry.

"SL" = Super Light
"USL" - Ultra Super Light

Earlier versions of the PS 6.0 95 have a "SL4" grip size sicker on its side. Later on, that was changed to "L4". Because 12.3 oz. used to be considered "Super Light", but now is just considered "Light".

The Asians versions of the Tour 90, which are 11.9 oz, have a grip size sticker that say "USL4". Because 11.9 oz. is considered "Ultra Super Light".

In the past, there were also:

"LM" = Light Medium (~13-14 oz.)
"M" = Medium (~14-15 oz.)
"MH" = Medium Heavy (~15-16 oz.)
"H" = Heavy (> 16 oz.)

care to post where you obtained this info? like posted earlier, not seeing this lettering on head, dunlop or prince sticks in my bag.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 11:00 AM
care to post where you obtained this info? like posted earlier, not seeing this lettering on head, dunlop or prince sticks in my bag.
I've been buying tennis racquets for almost 40 years. That's where I got my info. :)

I also own tennis racquets that have "L", "SL", "USL", and "M" on the grip size sticker.

CDestroyer
08-24-2011, 11:06 AM
I've been buying tennis racquets for almost 40 years. That's where I got my info. :)

I also own tennis racquets that have "L", "SL", "USL", and "M" on the grip size sticker.

Jesus what are you 60?

bad_call
08-24-2011, 11:08 AM
I've been buying tennis racquets for almost 40 years. That's where I got my info. :)

I also own tennis racquets that have "L", "SL", "USL", and "M" on the grip size sticker.

:lol: not going to argue with another old geezer but of the sticks u own, which mfg(s) have these grip size stickers? the only one i see is on my old wilson JK PS woodie.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 11:11 AM
care to post where you obtained this info? like posted earlier, not seeing this lettering on head, dunlop or prince sticks in my bag.
Here's a pic of a Slazenger that TW is selling in their vintage racquets section:

http://img.tennis-warehouse.com/new_big/BPCOMSP-2.JPG

Notice that it says "L4 / L 4 1/2" on the grip size sticker? This frame is 12.4oz. unstrung so it is considered "Light".

Maybe your Head, Dunlop, and Prince racquets are all under 12 oz. unstrung? If so, then they do not actually qualify for being "Light" (~12-13 oz.) as they are too light. Thus, they don't have an "L" designation.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 11:12 AM
Jesus what are you 60?
Maybe I bought my first racquet the day I was born? :) :shock:

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 11:19 AM
Here's a pic of a Dunlop Max 200G, which was about 12.7 oz. UNSTRUNG, so it was labeled "L4 / L 4 1/2" and designated as "Light".

http://i38.tinypic.com/2gtxic6.jpg

bad_call
08-24-2011, 11:30 AM
thanks for posting. interesting only seeing the "L" lettering. looks to be "vintage" labeling and appears not currently used.

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 11:42 AM
thanks for posting. interesting only seeing the "L" lettering. looks to be "vintage" labeling and appears not currently used.
Like I said, how many new racquets made today are over 13 oz.? Like none?

And how many are between 12-13 oz. unstrung to qualify as "Light"? Almost none?

Thus, no need to designate them any longer since they are all lighter than "Light", i.e., too light.

BTW, at least Wilson still uses "L", "SL", and "USL" on its grip stickers, and not too long ago, Yonex used "L" and "UL". I had a RDX 500 with "UL4". Some Yonex models used to vary in weight by grip size, e.g., the bigger grips were heavier so had different weight designations than the smaller grips did.

CDestroyer
08-24-2011, 11:46 AM
I have to say well done BP.

ben123
08-24-2011, 11:49 AM
That settles it I am moving to Canada!

average female height in canada 5"3 ....

Larrysümmers
08-24-2011, 11:51 AM
L0 4inches L1 4 1/8 L2 4 1/4 L3 4 3/8 L4 4 1/2 L5 4 5/8 L6 4 3/4

TenFanLA
08-24-2011, 11:53 AM
I remember when I was a 22 year old stud wielding a 200G or PS 85 like they were chopsticks. :cry:

bad_call
08-24-2011, 12:00 PM
I remember when I was a 22 year old stud wielding a 200G or PS 85 like they were chopsticks. :cry:

i remember when i switched from the JK PS woodie to the PS 85. :shock: dang my ntrp went up at least a full point!!!

basil J
08-24-2011, 12:14 PM
Just received my AG 200 tour. Frame feels solid in hand and really,very similar to and not much heavier than the standard Ag 4D 200G. I am off for a quick hit to see how she feels. Strung with 17G PSGD at mid tension 60#. I know I will probably have to tinker with strings and tensions, but I usually start in the mid tension range and work from there. In hand, it feels like a thin beamed 6.1 95. I will post with thoughts after I play.

FriarTuck
08-24-2011, 12:37 PM
I also really enjoy playing with a heavier stick as well. I recently bought a BLX Blade 98 and a BLX 6.1 95 and while I really like the Blade, there's just something about the weight and control/feel of the 6.1 95. I'm going to add some lead to the Blade 98 to bridge the gap between the two, but I may keep playing with the 95 when I play doubles. It just feels so solid at the net.

2Hare
08-24-2011, 01:35 PM
I also really enjoy playing with a heavier stick as well. I recently bought a BLX Blade 98 and a BLX 6.1 95 and while I really like the Blade, there's just something about the weight and control/feel of the 6.1 95. I'm going to add some lead to the Blade 98 to bridge the gap between the two, but I may keep playing with the 95 when I play doubles. It just feels so solid at the net.

might want to just add a leather grip to it. should just add enough weight and head light points to make it more solid.

Agree on solid stick. the plowthrough and feel of solid sticks makes such predictable shots that you know exactly where the ball will land. And it just turn running shots and serve returns like routine winners.

basil J
08-24-2011, 05:28 PM
Got out and hit for an hour. I hit for about 15 minutes and decidied to put her to a test right away and play a practice set. I played a 4.0 buddy who mixes it up well with different pace, spins and heights so at times I could use his pace and I also had to deal with creating my own pace and also dig out drop shots and low curve ball slices.
Groundstrokes: Rock solid. Absolutely no adjustmemnt period at all. The frame plays more like around a 64-66 stiffness, but is very comfortable. Swing weight felt no heavier than the standard 200 to me. The trajectory was a little higher than what I get with the 200 or my current regular stick the BB legend. This was great because I got easy topspin and was getting much better depth with minimal effort. Because I was getting a bit more spin, I found I was generating good pace, without hesitation and I rarely hit long tonight. I was hitting a good heavy "rally" ball with minimal effort. On the backhand side, It felt really solid and I was hitting some nice crosscourt angles with good clearance and pace. Love the Dunlop grip shape. Grip changes are automatic with no thought required. Favorit shot tonight was my running forhand. Just nailed a few with good pace and angle tonight and reall caught my buddy off guard.
Volleys-I am playing a lot more S&V of late and also coming in behind 2nd serves more often and this stick was solid and comfortable. I literally felt no difference between the 200 and the 200 tour. I had no issue with getting the racquet in position or punching volleys with good control.
Serves- I hit a few double faults tonight, mostly long. The frame has more overall pop than the 200, but I have VS gut at 55# on my 200 and honestly, serving is effortless with that set up. The PSGD is stiffer and does not have that easy power that gut offers, so my serves were lacking a bit of easy power. I think the 200 comes through a little easier than the tour, and that was the only time i felt the weight difference, and it was minimal. Having said that, I was getting good spins and placement after I warmed up, but no freebies up the middle. The legend is a better serving stick than the Dunlops, maybe because I am used to it. It also provides nice pop without a lot of effort.
Comfort- excellent. Does not have quite the Boardy feel that the 200 can have. The 200, 200 tour and Legend are all very comfortable. Where the Legend lacks for me is that it feels too flexy on my 1HBH and If I am even a little late with it, the ball just sprays. The 200, is the opposite, I usally will leave it short if late. The tour has enough plow to move the ball pretty deep even if I am late, which was a big plus.
The tour did not feel heavier to me, but rather more substancial and solid than the standard 200. I am going to do a 90 minute workout either tomorrow or Friday and then a league match over the weekend and I will use the tour exclusively for the next few days to see how my shoulder fares with it. I bought this on a whim, because, although I love my legends, I constantly struggle with My 1HBH with it and that typically is my more solid side. Every where else it is fantastic, but the 200 tour equalled or was better in every category, at least first time out. The 4D 200 is a good stick as well, but really low powered and I am probably not good enough to use it in match play unless I start playing several times a week. That is all for now.

Hidious
08-24-2011, 05:29 PM
might want to just add a leather grip to it. should just add enough weight and head light points to make it more solid.


I'm not sure i'm following you, i doubt making the racquet more HL would make it more solid. Not saying you are wrong but i have a hard time understanding how a more headlight balance could add solidness.

bad_call
08-24-2011, 05:34 PM
Like I said, how many new racquets made today are over 13 oz.? Like none?

And how many are between 12-13 oz. unstrung to qualify as "Light"? Almost none?

Thus, no need to designate them any longer since they are all lighter than "Light", i.e., too light.

BTW, at least Wilson still uses "L", "SL", and "USL" on its grip stickers, and not too long ago, Yonex used "L" and "UL". I had a RDX 500 with "UL4". Some Yonex models used to vary in weight by grip size, e.g., the bigger grips were heavier so had different weight designations than the smaller grips did.

checked out a few 9-10 oz wilson racquets this evening and guess what...had the "L" grip size on them and not SL or USL.

TenFanLA
08-24-2011, 06:58 PM
I checked on my HEAD Titanium Ti.S5 Comfort Zone 8.5oz and it says DYHPL 3. According to Head.com it stands for, "Does Your Husband Play Light?"

T3NN15
08-24-2011, 07:19 PM
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=238863&highlight=heavy+racquets

Fuji
08-24-2011, 07:31 PM
average female height in canada 5"3 ....

Indeed it is! I'm not sure if you missed the post where I said in my group of friends and acquaintances! :)

-Fuji

BreakPoint
08-24-2011, 08:39 PM
checked out a few 9-10 oz wilson racquets this evening and guess what...had the "L" grip size on them and not SL or USL.
That's probably because people who buy 9-10 oz. racquets probably have no clue what the "L" stands for anyway. :lol: LOL

Meanwhile, all of my AK90's and AN90's still have "USL" stickers on them, and my PS 6.0 95 has the "SL" sticker on it.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=41559

2Hare
08-25-2011, 12:49 AM
I'm not sure i'm following you, i doubt making the racquet more HL would make it more solid. Not saying you are wrong but i have a hard time understanding how a more headlight balance could add solidness.

Static weight always help even if its at the grip making it much less effective, but I think Blade 98 is solid enough as it is, more so than its weight suggest. I'm just saying some static weight and headlightness would make this stick more perfect.

2Hare
08-25-2011, 12:51 AM
Indeed it is! I'm not sure if you missed the post where I said in my group of friends and acquaintances! :)

-Fuji

Sorry this is kinda off topic and I have no ill intension about this, but why would you pick the gayest guy from the gayest japanese anime as your nickname?

FedExpress 333
08-25-2011, 01:12 AM
Fuji was BEAST! Are you serious?!?!

fuzz nation
08-25-2011, 04:42 AM
I'm not sure i'm following you, i doubt making the racquet more HL would make it more solid. Not saying you are wrong but i have a hard time understanding how a more headlight balance could add solidness.

There may be a theoretical improvement in the "solidness factor" through adding weight to the handle of a racquet (seems reasonable enough), but I've only done that with a couple of frames to improve their handling. I think I depend on the heft that's out in the hoop to furnish the majority of that stability and plow through. Can't say I've ever experimented with adding lead tape to the throat of a racquet as of yet, but it sounds interesting.

My heaviest racquets are a pair of LM Prestige mids with lots of lead tape added under their grips. They were nowhere near the balance I prefer when I first got them, but they had a lot of heft and could steamroll the ball with plenty of authority. My lead addition took their static weights up to 13.4 oz., but increased their balances to 11 pts. HL. For me, this improved the handling and playability of these racquets by a huge margin.

Fuji
08-25-2011, 09:42 AM
Sorry this is kinda off topic and I have no ill intension about this, but why would you pick the gayest guy from the gayest japanese anime as your nickname?

LOL! I loved Fuji! He was by far my favorite character.

I've seen a lot of complete series of anime, and Prince of Tennis was one of my favorites! It probably because I watched the entire series, all 200+ episodes, plus another 30 odd OVA.

To be honest, I've seen A LOT worse series! It's all personal taste though!

No ill wills at all, everyone has an opinion! :)

-Fuji

Fuji
08-25-2011, 09:43 AM
Fuji was BEAST! Are you serious?!?!

I thought so too! He was definitely sweet! Way better then Tezuka who was injured the entire bloody series! :lol:

-Fuji

2Hare
08-25-2011, 04:06 PM
LOL! I loved Fuji! He was by far my favorite character.

I've seen a lot of complete series of anime, and Prince of Tennis was one of my favorites! It probably because I watched the entire series, all 200+ episodes, plus another 30 odd OVA.

To be honest, I've seen A LOT worse series! It's all personal taste though!

No ill wills at all, everyone has an opinion! :)

-Fuji

alright, fair enough.

TennisCJC
08-26-2011, 06:38 AM
I agree..light at a 4.0 and up level is usually going to be 11 ozs and up. Nadal uses a sub 12 oz racquet and that is light for pros.

Roddick is still pretty light at 345 grams.

Pros have played forever and log around 15-20 hours a week hitting balls. So it makes sense that Nadal uses an APD that is leaded up just a little.

A player who plays 5.5 or lower is not going to play as much or need a stick that heavy. So when you look at a stick like the APDgt, it is easy to see how TenfanLA's 5.5 ex coach beat people down with the stick at stock weight. It makes complete sense. I just do not think people want to believe it or want to argue over basically nothing more than preference.

We have a 35 yr old former Div 1 All Conference player on our team. He plays with a piece of crap cheap Wal-mart wilson that probably weighs about 11 oz with a SW around 310. He kills everyone with it. He is playing more for exercise and social connections. But, if he wanted to compete with players his level in serious competition, I think he would want to up his SW to at least 340 or more. I don't think the amount of time or even the level you play determines how heavy a racket you play. A good 3.5 player can hit a hard ball and it takes a decent SW to handle a hard incoming ball. The difference in 3.5 level and 5.5 level is every other "hard" ball will go out at 3.5 level but you may get 4 or 5 consecutive "hard" balls at 5.5 level. I play a 61 year old guy occasionally and he is probably around 4.0. He still hits a fairly heavy ball but just isn't as quick around the court or as consistent as he was years ago. Trying to return his shots with a SW under 320 and it just doesn't feel good. With SW 335-340, much, much, much better.

Power Player
08-26-2011, 06:47 AM
I have been thinking about this when hitting with my APDgt and I am quite happy with the weight of my shot so far at probably 335 SW and under 11.6.

The advantage for me is just being able to use very heavy spin for short angles and other shots that quite frankly, are not going to happen with heavier sticks.

Picking up short balls that have dropped under the net is something that is dramatically easier for me as well.

This is all individual, because I have been dealing with a wrist injury over the past few years that has probably weakened that joint to where a lighter stick is much easier on me. But it is nice to still be able to crush shots when needed.

JackB1
08-26-2011, 06:48 AM
We have a 35 yr old former Div 1 All Conference player on our team. He plays with a piece of crap cheap Wal-mart wilson that probably weighs about 11 oz with a SW around 310. He kills everyone with it. He is playing more for exercise and social connections. But, if he wanted to compete with players his level in serious competition, I think he would want to up his SW to at least 340 or more. I don't think the amount of time or even the level you play determines how heavy a racket you play. A good 3.5 player can hit a hard ball and it takes a decent SW to handle a hard incoming ball. The difference in 3.5 level and 5.5 level is every other "hard" ball will go out at 3.5 level but you may get 4 or 5 consecutive "hard" balls at 5.5 level. I play a 61 year old guy occasionally and he is probably around 4.0. He still hits a fairly heavy ball but just isn't as quick around the court or as consistent as he was years ago. Trying to return his shots with a SW under 320 and it just doesn't feel good. With SW 335-340, much, much, much better.

You are right. It's all about having enough swingweight and plow to handle what's coming in at you. I don't think this becomes an issue until the 4.0-4.5 level.

user92626
08-26-2011, 10:06 AM
I have been thinking about this when hitting with my APDgt and I am quite happy with the weight of my shot so far at probably 335 SW and under 11.6.

The advantage for me is just being able to use very heavy spin for short angles and other shots that quite frankly, are not going to happen with heavier sticks.

Picking up short balls that have dropped under the net is something that is dramatically easier for me as well.

This is all individual, because I have been dealing with a wrist injury over the past few years that has probably weakened that joint to where a lighter stick is much easier on me. But it is nice to still be able to crush shots when needed.

PP,

How/where did you put lead to make your apdgt 11.6oz? What was its original weight before?

Yesterday I played with my pdgt with silicone in handle for the first time, weighs only 324gr (11.4oz). It already felt hefty enough. Seriously if I don't get into position and swing all the way, with my heart in it, my shots would be a joke.

TenFanLA
08-26-2011, 10:51 AM
Last night I played 2 hours of doubles with APDGT (1 hr) and YT Extreme Pro (1 hr) against 4.0 players. With the heavier static and swing weight, higher powered YT EP I was able to push around my opponents. My flat serves were more explosive and kick serves jumped more. I was able to hit more punishing returns. With APDGT I couldn't dictate as much and I had to put more effort into my serves and groundstrokes. APDGT was however more manueverable and had better control.

What I realized is that it takes more upper body strength to play with a heavier racket, but it takes more lower body strength to hit at the same pace when using a lighter racket. So an 18 yo with endless amount of leg energy can launch his legs into every serve and FH but a 40 yo will tire out much faster. It is much easier for me to let the racket do most of the work and use less leg strength. I felt much more tired after using APDGT for 1 hr vs. YT EP for 1 hr.

At 40, I think you lose a little upper body strength but the legs aren't the same as at 20 or 30. That's why you see more baseball players play into their late 30's and mid 40's while that is practically non-existent in leg intensive sports such as tennis, basketball and soccer. If all Sampras had to do in tennis was to just step up to the baseline and serve all day like a batter he would probably in Top 5. So for an old fogie like me, I need the power that comes from heavier, high powered YT EP. Even Agassi has gone to a Head Extreme and he's no pushover at 40.

Power Player
08-26-2011, 10:56 AM
Yep, for me I can generate power pretty easy..I need that control that comes with the heavy spin..I think that is why I like the APD so much.

As for mods, I put a 7 gram lead fishing weight wrapped in a piece of overgrip inside the handle and snug up against the staples. That made a bigtime difference because it re balances the racquet to about 6 pts HL. It gives me even more RHS, a little more SW, and that combo is very lethal for me.

The original strung weight was 11.3..with overgrip, dampener and lead, it is 11.6

Fuji
08-26-2011, 10:58 AM
Yep, for me I can generate power pretty easy..I need that control that comes with the heavy spin..I think that is why I like the APD so much.

As for mods, I put a 7 gram lead fishing weight wrapped in a piece of overgrip inside the handle and snug up against the staples. That made a bigtime difference because it re balances the racquet to about 6 pts HL. It gives me even more RHS, a little more SW, and that combo is very lethal for me.

The original strung weight was 11.3..with overgrip, dampener and lead, it is 11.6

PP, are you still using the 7G, or are you back to the APD??? :)

I think I'm going to steal your idea to bulk up my PSL a bit, with the weights being held with the staples!

-Fuji

Power Player
08-26-2011, 11:01 AM
I actually use both!

The difference for me is the 7g is more suited to a flatter stroke, and I have been seeing what works better for me in matches.

Fuji
08-26-2011, 11:04 AM
I actually use both!

The difference for me is the 7g is more suited to a flatter stroke, and I have been seeing what works better for me in matches.

Makes sense! Same things going on with me, I'm trying to work out between my KPS88's, and my PSL. It's so difficult to decide what to switch to permanently!

-Fuji

Power Player
08-26-2011, 11:16 AM
I just go by won/loss. I win more right now with the APDGt, but I love the 7Gs so much that I can't let them go.

bluetrain4
08-26-2011, 11:19 AM
I couldn't agree more with this thread. For many years I've used Prince Diablo mid and Dunlop 200 series frames, which fit the "heavy, solid" criteria.

Then, I thought that I needed my frame to do a little more for me. A little bit extra "easy" power on groundstrokes, a little more "free" depth from defensive positions, and little more oomph on serve.

So, this summer I've been using a Pure Drive Roddick and I've got the results I'm looking for. It can be sort of a rocket launcher, but I'm a pretty good player, so I know how to control it. But, even though the results speak for themselves, I still think I actually hate it. I just can't stand the way it feels, even if the results are often what I want. I still play with my old frames and always have an "ah, this is why I used this for so long" moment every time I do.

I wish there was a frame exactly like the Diablo mid, but 98 sq inches and 16x19 pattern, maybe 12.1 oz instead of the Diablo's 12.3. Same stiffness, same balance, same thin beam. Thus, I could maintain the heavy solidness but get some exta pop from the bigger head ann more open pattern. I've tried modifying the Diablo Midplus, but it never comes out right.

BreakPoint
08-26-2011, 11:33 AM
PP,

How/where did you put lead to make your apdgt 11.6oz? What was its original weight before?

Yesterday I played with my pdgt with silicone in handle for the first time, weighs only 324gr (11.4oz). It already felt hefty enough. Seriously if I don't get into position and swing all the way, with my heart in it, my shots would be a joke.
You see? With a heavier racquet, you don't have to swing as hard to produce a good shot. You can just take a controlled, smooth stroke to generate lots of pace and spin. :)

Power Player
08-26-2011, 11:39 AM
BP, do you just want to argue opinion with everyone? I thnk you just get bored and like to beat a dead horse..lol.

Everyone is different..I can hit nice and hard with my "fly swatter" and it stands up to heavy hitters as well.

BTW, this is coming from a 12.1, 345 SW setup.

Power Player
08-26-2011, 11:43 AM
PP,

How/where did you put lead to make your apdgt 11.6oz? What was its original weight before?

Yesterday I played with my pdgt with silicone in handle for the first time, weighs only 324gr (11.4oz). It already felt hefty enough. Seriously if I don't get into position and swing all the way, with my heart in it, my shots would be a joke.

And so you know..the PDGT did not work for me in stock form at all..it definitely swung light and did not punish the ball nearly like my APDGt. I had the same experience as you are describing.

I think the PDGT is a racquet that has a lower SW and needs lead at 12..you could probably get it to hit big at 11.7 or so, but something about it requires more lead than the APDGT.

mikeler
08-26-2011, 11:54 AM
I actually use both!

The difference for me is the 7g is more suited to a flatter stroke, and I have been seeing what works better for me in matches.


Does the stiffer stick bother your wrist?

Power Player
08-26-2011, 11:57 AM
Not at all..it surprised me.

My wrist hated my serve..i figured that out finally..and I also think I may have fixed it.

But I have the PKs strung and ready at all times regardless..they are too good and safe options in case anything happens.

BreakPoint
08-26-2011, 12:03 PM
BP, do you just want to argue opinion with everyone? I thnk you just get bored and like to beat a dead horse..lol.

Everyone is different..I can hit nice and hard with my "fly swatter" and it stands up to heavy hitters as well.

BTW, this is coming from a 12.1, 345 SW setup.
User92626 just admitted that he has to swing with all his might just to put anything on the ball with his light racquet. I'm just stating the fact that you don't have to do that with a heavier racquet.

Power Player
08-26-2011, 12:11 PM
With that racquet he is using, I would agree...however there are exceptions to the rule.

TenFanLA
08-26-2011, 12:22 PM
If I had the legs and the strength to generate all the pace, I'd probably use APDGT for a heavy topspin game, and LM Rad MP or MG Prestige MP for accurate, flat hitting.

user92626
08-26-2011, 01:36 PM
You see? With a heavier racquet, you don't have to swing as hard to produce a good shot. You can just take a controlled, smooth stroke to generate lots of pace and spin. :)


It's interesting that I see the same argument made for heavy and low power rackets as well. That is, heavy sticks require you to have good form, techniques and swing harder to generate power (hence why heavy rackets tend to be low power).

basil J
08-27-2011, 12:11 PM
I agree with BP, I find heavier racquets(12-13 oz range, typically Hl) to require a nice smooth stroke, but I find that if my prep and footwork are good, I can play a more "relaxed type of attacking game and generate good power and spin with less "violent" or aggressive swings. I let the weight of the frame do the work.

BreakPoint
08-27-2011, 12:35 PM
It's interesting that I see the same argument made for heavy and low power rackets as well. That is, heavy sticks require you to have good form, techniques and swing harder to generate power (hence why heavy rackets tend to be low power).
You don't have to swing "harder". Just a nice smooth, long stroke. You just can't poke at the ball. High powered stiff racquets allow you to poke at the ball. Heavy, flexible racquets are inherently low-powered because the power comes from the weight so you have to move that weight into the ball to transfer momentum to it. But if you swing a lightweight, high-powered racquet and a heavy, low-powered racquet at the same smooth speed, you will generate more power to the ball with the heavier racquet. With the lighter racquet, you have to swing harder and more aggressively.

TennisMaverick
08-27-2011, 01:21 PM
You don't have to swing "harder". Just a nice smooth, long stroke. You just can't poke at the ball. High powered stiff racquets allow you to poke at the ball. Heavy, flexible racquets are inherently low-powered because the power comes from the weight so you have to move that weight into the ball to transfer momentum to it. But if you swing a lightweight, high-powered racquet and a heavy, low-powered racquet at the same smooth speed, you will generate more power to the ball with the heavier racquet. With the lighter racquet, you have to swing harder and more aggressively.

What you are saying is SOP in the tennis industry, no doubt about it. Using the heaviest frame that you can wield is physically the most efficient. What seems to be obtuse to many is that footwork, dictates timing, even for someone who's timing is exquisite, as Federer's. No footwork, whether it sucks or the player is tired, leads to bad timing/stroke production, so the racquet feels heavier, but it's not due to the weight of the racquet becoming cumbersome from weariness, it's from the breakdown of said footwork.

basil J
08-27-2011, 01:34 PM
Well said TM, well said. I remember watching a teaching pro with young kids in our club last year and he was having the kids only focus on footwork. He stated over & over again, that tennis is a game played with the feet. If the foot work is strong, you are half way there. He ****ed some parents off because he was not spending as much time with strokes, swings & grips as some of the other pros did. He also taught kids from the service line back and made sure that he spent lots of time on volleys, overheads and serves. sadly, he moved on to another club after a year. I thought he made great sense

TennisMaverick
08-27-2011, 01:55 PM
Well said TM, well said. I remember watching a teaching pro with young kids in our club last year and he was having the kids only focus on footwork. He stated over & over again, that tennis is a game played with the feet. If the foot work is strong, you are half way there. He ****ed some parents off because he was not spending as much time with strokes, swings & grips as some of the other pros did. He also taught kids from the service line back and made sure that he spent lots of time on volleys, overheads and serves. sadly, he moved on to another club after a year. I thought he made great sense

Good coaches, frequently don't make good club pros, unfortunately, and your guy was definitely good. In most sports, unless their little darling isn't getting enough playing time, or the coach is an ogre, parents shut-up and let things happen. But tennis is a game, like golf, where the parents intro the kids to the sport.

No one plays pick-up tennis, like baseball, basketball, touch football, stickball, ultimate frisbee, etc. It's not unusual to see toddlers tethered to a net post--seriously--or baby carriages/strollers on the side of the court, and the other women are cool with it, because they did it at one time or the other. Those kids grow-up knowing that the only way to get untethered or any parental attention, is to play tennis and take lessons. So the parents think that they're all tennis pros, which makes a great tennis pro, an actor who can keep the kids happy, and the tennis director without parent/membership complaints. Sad but true.

One of my guys actually did not get hired at a club, because although he taught much better than the rest of the staff, he had difficulty controlling the spoiled brats--they wouldn't follow his direction--and the tennis director, did not feel that he should train pros for his membership; he believes that personality dictates teaching pro fit.

TenFanLA
08-27-2011, 04:09 PM
After trying many, many rackets with low to high power, static weight, swing weight, flexibility, etc., I've come to realize that for a 40 yo who plays at a decent 4.5 level, the high powered moderately heavy rackets such as YT Extreme Pro (11.85oz, 338sw) and PDRGT give me added 5 - 10MPH on the serves and groundstrokes. It allows me to hit with the young studs with enough plow through and not be pushed around. But it is also light enough and powerful so I can last 3 sets without being completely exhausted. I've personally found Ext Pro to be the best in serves and return. It also has a better feel than PDR.

user92626
08-27-2011, 04:24 PM
Well said TM, well said. I remember watching a teaching pro with young kids in our club last year and he was having the kids only focus on footwork. He stated over & over again, that tennis is a game played with the feet. If the foot work is strong, you are half way there. He ****ed some parents off because he was not spending as much time with strokes, swings & grips as some of the other pros did. He also taught kids from the service line back and made sure that he spent lots of time on volleys, overheads and serves. sadly, he moved on to another club after a year. I thought he made great sense

Let's not bill footwork as be all or end all in this game. If you go to any city courts and check it out, you'll see that almost everyone can get to the ball relatively fine but very very few have strokes with good fundamentals. That's why the first thing, ie most urgent thing to address, you see is ugly, ineffective stroke sticking out like sore eye.

BreakPoint
08-27-2011, 09:37 PM
Let's not bill footwork as be all or end all in this game. If you go to any city courts and check it out, you'll see that almost everyone can get to the ball relatively fine but very very few have strokes with good fundamentals. That's why the first thing, ie most urgent thing to address, you see is ugly, ineffective stroke sticking out like sore eye.
Footwork isn't about "getting to the ball". Watch Federer or Nadal and learn what is meant by "good footwork".

fuzz nation
08-28-2011, 05:09 AM
Yeah, I think that when we make reference to footwork, it depends on the context. A reference to good footwork may also include the fundamentals of early, efficient stroke preparation. It's certainly easy to spot when a player makes a late unit turn, right? You can tell that their swing is going to need to be muscled in order to catch up to the ball, even if their feet actually got them to the proper position on time.

When a player uses good footwork along with nice advanced set up and swing timing, it makes the racquet (light, heavy, hot pink, whatever...) seem borderline irrelevant. That sort of generally solid preparation makes it look as though the player can't miss.

Avadia
08-28-2011, 05:33 AM
Along those lines, I think a heavier racquet is instrumental in forcing a player to engage in proper footwork and early preparation. With a lighter racquet, you can get away with poor preparation all too easily, and you tend to get used to that. Instead of a long, smooth stroke, you get used to flicking the ball and arming the ball when you are not quite in position to hit it properly. With a heavier racquet, you pay the price immediately for poor footwork or poor preparation, and therefore, you tend to develop better habits. Just a thought.

Al1978
08-28-2011, 11:14 AM
Along those lines, I think a heavier racquet is instrumental in forcing a player to engage in proper footwork and early preparation. With a lighter racquet, you can get away with poor preparation all too easily, and you tend to get used to that. Instead of a long, smooth stroke, you get used to flicking the ball and arming the ball when you are not quite in position to hit it properly. With a heavier racquet, you pay the price immediately for poor footwork or poor preparation, and therefore, you tend to develop better habits. Just a thought.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Recently I became a convert to the Avery m3 Power, and now use this racquet exclusively after fiddling with a bunch of frames, mostly under 12 oz, for the past two years. As long as I concentrate on footwork, everything else seems to fall into place more easily with the Avery than with any lighter racquet I've tried. I'm not thinking about the take-back, racquet face angles, or wrist position. The racquet's weight makes all of this come more naturally for me.

TennisMaverick
08-28-2011, 01:17 PM
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Recently I became a convert to the Avery m3 Power, and now use this racquet exclusively after fiddling with a bunch of frames, mostly under 12 oz, for the past two years. As long as I concentrate on footwork, everything else seems to fall into place more easily with the Avery than with any lighter racquet I've tried. I'm not thinking about the take-back, racquet face angles, or wrist position. The racquet's weight makes all of this come more naturally for me.

Along those lines, I think a heavier racquet is instrumental in forcing a player to engage in proper footwork and early preparation. With a lighter racquet, you can get away with poor preparation all too easily, and you tend to get used to that. Instead of a long, smooth stroke, you get used to flicking the ball and arming the ball when you are not quite in position to hit it properly. With a heavier racquet, you pay the price immediately for poor footwork or poor preparation, and therefore, you tend to develop better habits. Just a thought.

Both are accurate, but level dependent. Timing the ball come from reading and reacting. The first move coming from the split-step sets everything in motion. Players don't think about anything other than that and ball contact. Having to think about racquet prep, flicking, where's your arm, etc., is not connected to the important things, because you don't need a backswing to hit the ball.

Power Player
08-28-2011, 03:09 PM
Along those lines, I think a heavier racquet is instrumental in forcing a player to engage in proper footwork and early preparation. With a lighter racquet, you can get away with poor preparation all too easily, and you tend to get used to that. Instead of a long, smooth stroke, you get used to flicking the ball and arming the ball when you are not quite in position to hit it properly. With a heavier racquet, you pay the price immediately for poor footwork or poor preparation, and therefore, you tend to develop better habits. Just a thought.

Yes.

But you can go to a heavier racquet, learn the split step to contact point until it is automatic and then go back to a lighter racquet and be lethal.

Fuji
08-28-2011, 09:14 PM
Yes.

But you can go to a heavier racquet, learn the split step to contact point until it is automatic and then go back to a lighter racquet and be lethal.

Exaxctly! This is why I'm playing some wicked deadly singles with my PSL, which I took back to stock. 310ish swingweight, 12.0 oz, 9 points HL. Not by any means a heavy stick, especially in comparison to the KPS88's! If I play the same game with both rackets, the PSL is just such a deadly weapon, it's ridiculous!

-Fuji