PDA

View Full Version : How to Set Your Racquet Up Like a Pro III: the Modern Pro Racquet


travlerajm
09-07-2006, 11:37 PM
Deleted by author.

jace112
09-07-2006, 11:59 PM
Thanks for sharing! My only concern would be to be able to get enough racquet head acceleration with this kind of setup. I have to give this high SW / high mass a try really soon.

anirut
09-08-2006, 12:10 AM
My racket's close to 13 oz. (366 grams) with only 326 SW and 11.5 pts HL.

I can propably handle higher SW, but, I wouldn't want to. As of now, it's very, very nice and very comfy ...

Thanks for sharing the info, Tjam.

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 12:10 AM
Thanks for sharing! My only concern would be to be able to get enough racquet head acceleration with this kind of setup. I have to give this high SW / high mass a try really soon.

I should note three things:

1) On the forehand, it might take a 20-minute adjustment period to get used to a high swingweight. At first it may seem like you are hitting late, but once you realize that you simply have to start your swing earlier to still meet it out in front, the added swingweight should pay off with more control.

2) On the volleys, it takes an adjustment period to get rid of any habits that you developed from using a lighter racquet - like swinging. As soon as you realize that no swing is necessary with a super-leaded racquet, the volley becomes the world's easiest shot.

3) The serve will probably feel a little weird at first if you are not used to swinging a high swingweight racquet. Don't try to swing too fast at first, and don't overdo it. Treat serving with a heavy racquet like a session in the weight room - and take days off between serving sessions. It will likely take a few weeks for your arm to adjust to the weight so that you can start getting the explosiveness of a high swingweight serving stick.

Talon
09-08-2006, 12:11 AM
Eh? I remember in your last post you recommend to use no longer than 4" strips at 3 + 9 o'clock. Now we should use 10" and 11" strips on the OUTSIDE extending from the bumperguard to the throat? That is some odd leading.

FitzRoy
09-08-2006, 12:27 AM
Eh? I remember in your last post you recommend to use no longer than 4" strips at 3 + 9 o'clock. Now we should use 10" and 11" strips on the OUTSIDE extending from the bumperguard to the throat? That is some odd leading.

I'd guess that adding it to the outside has a greater impact on twistweight, since that's determined by distance from the center.

You have my compliments on another interesting post, travlerajm. Compared to the Sampras setup, it seems like you've removed some lead from the throat/hoop and added a portion of it as tailweight. I remember the Samprasized NXG stick had a SW of something like 375, while this new setup seems like it'd be somewhere sub-365. Have you noticed much of a difference in the speed and spin of your serve with this setup?

Also, what do you think the disadvantages of the Nadal setup are, compared to what you've posted here? Since he doesn't use lead at 3 and 9 I know his twistweight suffers, but the recoil weight shouldn't be too much less. What do you think I would lose if I set my racquet up like Nadal or Moya, instead of the high static weight/high SW combo?

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 12:29 AM
Eh? I remember in your last post you recommend to use no longer than 4" strips at 3 + 9 o'clock. Now we should use 10" and 11" strips on the OUTSIDE extending from the bumperguard to the throat? That is some odd leading.

I may still do some fine tuning. The main reason the lead is spread to the lower hoop is to keep the swingweight down. This is the same reason I recommended using short strips at 3 and 9 in a previous post.

Also, I should add that in the past, I had a mental block about using high swingweights. I've pushed through that. And I'm glad I did.

In the past I had tried to match setups of many top pros, armed with knowledge of their static weights and balances, but just guessing at their swingweights. I now know that I grossly underestimated the swingweights of most of the pro setups I used. If you match weight and balance to a pro's racquet, but use a lower swingweight, the result is a racquet that is too depolarized (not spin-friendly enough).

And by underestimating pros' swingweights, I was not using enough lead in the hoop, which is a key to the stability that makes a pro's racquet superior for returning pro level pace and spin.

andyroddick's mojo
09-08-2006, 12:32 AM
oh snap that's too heavy for me! over 13 oz?? over 360 swingweight??? right now my racket is 12 oz, with a swingweight of 312 or so. too big of a jump for me..

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 12:48 AM
I'd guess that adding it to the outside has a greater impact on twistweight, since that's determined by distance from the center.

You have my compliments on another interesting post, travlerajm. Compared to the Sampras setup, it seems like you've removed some lead from the throat/hoop and added a portion of it as tailweight. I remember the Samprasized NXG stick had a SW of something like 375, while this new setup seems like it'd be somewhere sub-365. Have you noticed much of a difference in the speed and spin of your serve with this setup?

Also, what do you think the disadvantages of the Nadal setup are, compared to what you've posted here? Since he doesn't use lead at 3 and 9 I know his twistweight suffers, but the recoil weight shouldn't be too much less. What do you think I would lose if I set my racquet up like Nadal or Moya, instead of the high static weight/high SW combo?

This setup actually morphed from my Samprasized NXG. I removed the weight from the throat (as I posted in that thread). But the 67 lbs was still too overpowered. Instead of restringing at 72 lbs to reduce power, I went with the tailweighting approach to reduce power, which also adds spin. The result was very nice.

I still like my Samprasized POG OS strung at 72 lbs a lot. But it is a very different type of stick from this one. My Samprasized POG is the prototypical depolarized pro-style racquet. It hits a very flat, penetrating type of ball, with amazing precision and directional accuracy. The flatness of the ball is both a strength and a weakness - I love the penetration and precise targeting, but I have a lot less margin for error. On the serve, I'd say that this new setup hits a ball that is slightly lower velocity, but with significantly more spin than my Sampras setup. On groundstrokes, the spinnier setup was much more comfortable for me during baseline rallies, as the margin for error gives me more confidence to go for shots.

As for the Nadal/Moya setup, I would say that the disadvantage is not only lower twistweight, but also just that it has less mass overall in the hoop. The Nadal style weighting (extreme polarization) is more spin-friendly than mine, but you would be giving up stability on returns and volleys. That's why you don't see any doubles specialists using the Nadal setup.

Kryztof
09-08-2006, 12:52 AM
So a prostaff tour 90 is just perfect?

william
09-08-2006, 12:58 AM
travlerajm, where did you put the lead on the handle and does the racquet end up hh, hl or balanced

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 01:07 AM
travlerajm, where did you put the lead on the handle and does the racquet end up hh, hl or balanced

The lead is wrapped around the butt, under the grip. The final balance is 12.25". Since the racquet is 27.5" long, that means it is 12 pts HL.

william
09-08-2006, 02:34 AM
How much is 12 pts head light. Also I got the impression on these boards that quite a lot of pro's are using head heavy or balanced racquets?

Thor
09-08-2006, 02:55 AM
1)when you warpped it around the butt,didnt it make the handle bigger in that section alone making the handle not too comfortable?
2)isnt it better to wrap the lead around the entire grip(and then obviously add an overgrip).
3)any suggestions on how to customize my nsurge?

chess9
09-08-2006, 03:19 AM
The lead is wrapped around the butt, under the grip. The final balance is 12.25". Since the racquet is 27.5" long, that means it is 12 pts HL.

What happened to 4 points head light? :)

-Robert

Davai
09-08-2006, 07:06 AM
Chess9 put up a significant question. My own question is what would you recommend more the Sampras setup or this new approach? Also from what I'm seeing the general specs of the third approach matches an old Spalding racket. However I have found that serving sessions just didn't work and it took more than a practice and a match to get used to swinging the racket on groundstrokes. The ball indeed seemed to stay in more and have more pace but it also seemed to be very flat (no spin), I attributed the change to the semi high stiffness and not necesserily the SW. On a different note it seems like the LM Prestige MID is a pretty good platform to start with since it already has high SW.

FD3S
09-08-2006, 07:51 AM
I'm assuming this setup (with a few mods accounting for racquet difference) would work for a lot of racquets out there? Man, I can't wait to try this with my O3 Tour...

thomas martinez
09-08-2006, 08:29 AM
You know, Moya's frame actually has a TON of weight up in the hoop. That is actually where the bulk of his weight is. His frame though light, has a rather heavy balance and a high swingweight. It is actually a rather stable frame.

FitzRoy
09-08-2006, 10:20 AM
You know, Moya's frame actually has a TON of weight up in the hoop. That is actually where the bulk of his weight is. His frame though light, has a rather heavy balance and a high swingweight. It is actually a rather stable frame.

I was under the impression that most, if not all, of Moya's weight in the hoop was actually underneath the bumper guard - something like 15 or so grams there. He does play with a high swingweight, and I think travlerajm is aware of it, as he's been talking about Nadal/Moya's racquet balance as a sort of seperate category for a while now. The customization he talks about here has 26g in the hoop, which is a 60 percent increase from 15 (if that's what Moya really uses). So travlerajm's has more weight in the hoop total. Also, the placement of the weight isn't nearly as high in the frame as Moya's, so it has a different level of impact on stability. In other words, I don't think travlerajm is saying Moya's frame isn't stable, but rather that it's not as stable as the frame he's described in this thread. I think Moya and Nadal are ok with slightly lower (lower relative to racquets with high static weight, like those of doubles specialists) stability because they're both so physically strong and they don't make their living at the net.

thomas martinez
09-08-2006, 12:19 PM
No, here is the exact quote:
"As for the Nadal/Moya setup, I would say that the disadvantage is not only lower twistweight, but also just that it has less mass overall in the hoop. The Nadal style weighting (extreme polarization) is more spin-friendly than mine, but you would be giving up stability on returns and volleys. That's why you don't see any doubles specialists using the Nadal setup."

Moya might only have Xg under his bumper, but the frame starts out with a fair amount of mass up at the tip to being with when Babolat makes the frames for him. Plus his overall static weight, it's not THAT light. It's about 305g, with a 36 or something cm balance. It's beyond a Hammer in terms of balance, weight and swingweight. I couldn't take swingweight measurements since I did not have a swingweight machine on site, but it's massive.
His other theory that it'll take about 20 min to get used to what he is suggesting you do to a frame is quite off, especially if your muscle memory is for a considerably lower weight, different balance and lower swingweight. You might not ever be able to get used to a heavier frame.
Throw in the constant assumption that many male tour players use a frame between 350-360g is quite far off. Average these days is roughly 330g with about a 31 cm balance and a guess at swing(since the diagnostic machine I use does not give out an RDC style number), 335. They get up close to the 350 mark when strung, but it is not common for a club of a frame out there anymore. Heaviest in recent years I've done, is Gaudio with a 361g/30.6cm/~360sw frame. That's no string, no overgrip, no dampener. Then you got someone like Nadal, who is using a frame which weighs only a small handful of grammes more then the stock version. Then you got a middle weight guy like Safin at 336g/31.2cm/~335sw. You get more of the Safin style weight/bal/swing then you do the Gaudio or Nadal. Though the lighter frames are more common simply because they're what manufacturers are offering to players, players can generate obscene head speed with them, which enchances their spin(which Nadal needs to change a bit of technique, not the weight and such of his frame), and the amount of power they get which they can harness with the spin.

FitzRoy
09-08-2006, 12:26 PM
No, here is the exact quote:
"As for the Nadal/Moya setup, I would say that the disadvantage is not only lower twistweight, but also just that it has less mass overall in the hoop. The Nadal style weighting (extreme polarization) is more spin-friendly than mine, but you would be giving up stability on returns and volleys. That's why you don't see any doubles specialists using the Nadal setup."


I can't really disagree with the rest of your post, since you have much more knowledge of pro frames than I do.

But I don't think this quote here counters my point; in fact, I think it demonstrates it. What travlerajm said there is definitely meant to be a relative comparison to his racquet setup. "you would be giving up stability on returns and volleys" doesn't mean that it's not stable, rather that it's less stable than what I asked him to compare it with. I asked him what the disadvantages of the Nadal-style setup are to what he posted, and he gave me advantages and disadvantages: more spin-friendly, and less stable. It's a relative measure, not meant to suggest that Nadal plays with a frame that has a low stability.

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 02:29 PM
Moya might only have Xg under his bumper, but the frame starts out with a fair amount of mass up at the tip to being with when Babolat makes the frames for him. Plus his overall static weight, it's not THAT light. It's about 305g, with a 36 or something cm balance. It's beyond a Hammer in terms of balance, weight and swingweight. I couldn't take swingweight measurements since I did not have a swingweight machine on site, but it's massive.
His other theory that it'll take about 20 min to get used to what he is suggesting you do to a frame is quite off, especially if your muscle memory is for a considerably lower weight, different balance and lower swingweight. You might not ever be able to get used to a heavier frame.
Throw in the constant assumption that many male tour players use a frame between 350-360g is quite far off. Average these days is roughly 330g with about a 31 cm balance and a guess at swing(since the diagnostic machine I use does not give out an RDC style number), 335. They get up close to the 350 mark when strung, but it is not common for a club of a frame out there anymore. Heaviest in recent years I've done, is Gaudio with a 361g/30.6cm/~360sw frame. That's no string, no overgrip, no dampener. Then you got someone like Nadal, who is using a frame which weighs only a small handful of grammes more then the stock version. Then you got a middle weight guy like Safin at 336g/31.2cm/~335sw. You get more of the Safin style weight/bal/swing then you do the Gaudio or Nadal. Though the lighter frames are more common simply because they're what manufacturers are offering to players, players can generate obscene head speed with them, which enchances their spin(which Nadal needs to change a bit of technique, not the weight and such of his frame), and the amount of power they get which they can harness with the spin.

Thomas, I believe your swingweight measurements are in agreement with my numbers. The difference is that I prefer to discuss specs in terms of strung specs instead of unstrung specs. A typical poly stringjob will add roughly 35 kg-cm^2 to the swingweight. So your 335sw unstrung spec for "middle weight guy" Safin would be about 370sw strung. And Gaudio's would be about 395. Nadal's swingweight is about 365 strung (or ~330 unstrung), as it can be calculated accurately with knowledge of his stock swingweight, customized weight and balance, and lead distribution info from his fansite, assuming his fansite is accurate.

And Fitzroy's explanations of the meaning of what I was saying in my posts are accurate.

travlerajm
09-08-2006, 02:43 PM
Chess9 put up a significant question. My own question is what would you recommend more the Sampras setup or this new approach? Also from what I'm seeing the general specs of the third approach matches an old Spalding racket. However I have found that serving sessions just didn't work and it took more than a practice and a match to get used to swinging the racket on groundstrokes. The ball indeed seemed to stay in more and have more pace but it also seemed to be very flat (no spin), I attributed the change to the semi high stiffness and not necesserily the SW. On a different note it seems like the LM Prestige MID is a pretty good platform to start with since it already has high SW.

I think the answer to the question of "which is better, the Sampras setup" or the Double Specialist setup?" depends on your style. If you possess a big and accurate flat forehand, and you rely more on placement than power on your serve, the Sampras setup would be a good option. My forehand is the weakest part of my game (although the Sampras setup does improve my forehand), so it's probably not ideal for my game. If you rely on a big flat forehand, the Sampras setup will turn it into a serious weapon. I am more of a power server than a placement server - that is I like to overpower my opponent with big serves with heavy spin that are not necessarily well placed. The Sampras setup hits a more penetrating and accurate serve, but because it's flatter it has a smaller margin for error. The Sampras setup is also tough to beat on volleys because it is basically like playing with a paddle that is heavy enough that no swing is necessary, it has slightly better accuracy on volleys due to it's tighter stringbed and higher dynamic stiffness.

It basically comes down to what type of ball you are most comforatble using during a match. If you like hitting a flatter ball with more precise targeting, the Sampras setup is tough to beat. If you prefer to hit a spinnier ball with more net clearance, with more margin for error at the expense of a little targeting accuracy, then the Doubles Specialist setup is better. And the feel is much different too. The Sampras setup has a crisp, boardy feel, while the Doubles Specialist setup has the soft and cushy feel.

normrose
09-08-2006, 11:37 PM
Travlerajam - firstly thanks for your thought provoking post it cretainly has made me look at my current frame set up.

Question - you mentioned in a previous thread that you needed to strengthen your shoulder to accomodate the additional weight placed in the hoop.

What exercise(s) did you find the most effective to cope with the additional swingweight?...........Thanks

mileslong
09-08-2006, 11:55 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Mad_scientist.svg/641px-Mad_scientist.svg.png

Woodstock_Tennis
09-08-2006, 11:57 PM
will read in the mornnning

travlerajm
09-09-2006, 12:09 AM
Travlerajam - firstly thanks for your thought provoking post it cretainly has made me look at my current frame set up.

Question - you mentioned in a previous thread that you needed to strengthen your shoulder to accomodate the additional weight placed in the hoop.

What exercise(s) did you find the most effective to cope with the additional swingweight?...........Thanks

I would say that swinging a groundstroke with a high swingweight is not that big a deal, because you are not working against gravity. The serve is a bit different.

If you want to adjust your shoulder (and arm) to a higher swingweight, I think the best approach is to treat serving with a heavy racquet with the same respect that you would treat resistance workouts in the weight room.

If you don't lift weights for 2 months, the first day back you need to take it easy, and use light weights, and maybe only do one set. If you overdo it on the first day, you'll be really sore for a couple of days. After a few sessions, you'll be able to start increasing the weight, and doing multiple sets in a session. And you will no longer get sore the next day.

With a high swingweight racquet, I think it's a good idea to take the same approach. If you want to use a racquet that has a swingweight of 365, but your normal racquet has a swingweight of 330, then it's probably a good idea to add the weight in smaller increments, giving your arm a few weeks to adjust each time. Start out by increasing your swingweight to 340 or so. It might feel heavy at first, but it will soon feel natural. Once you feel like your arm is no longer challenged by the higher swingweight, then you can try bumping up to 350, and so on.

While this approach obviously take longer, I think it allows you to continue playing tennis at a high level without missing a beat. If you try to make the jump all at once, it is likely that it will feel cumbersome and unwieldy. That's why racquet companies don't think that they can sell racquets with pro-style specs (even though they know that they are superior for performance). They assume that recreational players would be turned off by the heaviness.

For ~10 kg-cm^2 increase in swingweight, I recommend adding about 5g total at 3 and 9. Then you may try adding about 1 or 2 g to the butt for every 5 grams added in the hoop (you can use the amount of butt weight to adjust the power level to your tastes, as it's easier and more instantaneous than adjusting the string tension).

I should add that when I first started experimenting with high swingweights, 350 sw usually felt great for me... I felt like I could bomb serves while I was fresh, but I became erratic when my arm tired, especially if I tried to serve on back-to-back days. But now, a swingweight of 350 feels almost too light, and I can serve hundreds of balls with 350 sw and not get tired. Once I get used to a heavier racquet, it feels like there is no going back. My old low swingweight setups feel like toys to me now. My arm still tires on serves with swingweights in the 360s now, but as long as I keep playing regularly, I'm certain that my arm will adjust. I've also noticed that both my arms seem to be looking stronger and more muscular than ever, even though I stopped going to the gym months ago (my right arm especially is beginning to show the effects).

And if anyone is wondering if you need a large physique to play with such high swingweight? Nope, I'm 5'11", and a lean 158 lbs.

travlerajm
09-09-2006, 12:16 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Mad_scientist.svg/641px-Mad_scientist.svg.png

Should this be my Avatar?

normrose
09-09-2006, 02:10 AM
traverlajam - thanks for the reply.

Would you please calculate the SW on the undementioned specs of my frame. Pleease show the formula and insert the figures so that I can help mysel in the future - maths is not my strong suit!

Racquet Head: 100 sq ins
Static Weight: 346 gms
balance Point: 30.5cms
Lead Weight ; 2gms @ 3 & 9 ( Total - 4gms)
10gms end of butt cap

Mant thanks

william
09-09-2006, 05:12 AM
OK how should I place my lead on my flexpoint prestige mid? Help would be greatly appreciated.

FD3S
09-09-2006, 09:24 AM
Looking back at one of your previous posts (in another topic) you said you wanted to try the Sampras seetup with an O3 Tour Mid, but not the MP. (I think.) My question; would applying the lead on the MP help it any compared to the Mid? From what I've seen, the stock MP specs are somewhat close to the NXG OS...

tennisplayer
09-09-2006, 03:23 PM
After much experimentation, I have found that high SW doesn't work for me... sigh. My stock PC MP Plus supposedly has SW of 335 or so, and that's about all I can handle consistently at my level. The problem is, higher SW feels fantastic, but I keep hitting balls long, especially the sitters, unless I'm feeling superbly fit, in which case I can barely muster that extra bit of concentration required to hit the ball just right. Without that extra "liveness" in my arms, which some folks are blessed with, I need to limit SW so that the total power level of the racquet is commensurate with the spin I can impart, with my physical capabilities and skills. I have added lead to the handle so that the total static weight varies between 12.1 and 12.3 oz depending on the string, and this has made the racquet feel a lot more stable.

If you can handle pro-level SW, that's great, and it's probably an indicator of your potential. But it's all about compromise for us ordinary mortals...

Woodstock_Tennis
09-09-2006, 04:43 PM
How far up from the handle did you add the tape travel? I guess .5'', this make it somewhat uncomfortable to grip? Would be interesting to see the resaults on a 27 inch frame.

stules
09-10-2006, 06:14 AM
Just finished customising my new Redondo 98.
Old specs.........
343gm
324 SW
10 pts HL

New improved specs.....
358 gm
340 SW
8 pts HL (on the money with the ATP formula from Travlerjm)

It took a bit of a juggle.
4.5gm at 3 and 9 oclock (9 total)
24gm inside the handle. Removed the leather grip (losing 18gm net) and put on an overgrip only.

It plays nice, but I need more time on it to get familiar.......
Tme will tell. It feels different enough to throw my timing out a bit. Frustrating, until I get the hang of it. I have got feeling that I will not go back though.
Regards Stuart

moist
09-10-2006, 08:01 AM
I tried going straight to the 360 sw range, but it was just way too unwieldy. I tried a more modest spec, and maybe I'll try upping it again later.

Volkl T10 VE Mid
Starting specs(actual measured, not TW's):
338 grams
325 SW
8 pts hl

Additions:
2 grams at 12 o'clock
8 grams at 3 and 9 o'clock
6 grams wrapped around the handle at 1 inch up.

New Specs:
354 grams
346 SW
9 pts hl

Following the recommendations, this brings it more in line with the 44.6/(sqrt(M)) balance than the stock was. Increases the recoil weight and hitting weight substantially as well.

Only was able to play with it for a bit, but it felt very nice. Not much harder to swing than stock. Felt a little over powered though, so I might try a poly to see if it helps with control. I usually use a multi on this frame since it's pretty low powered to start. The multi felt pretty trampoline like with the added weight.

ubel
09-10-2006, 08:14 AM
Should this be my Avatar?
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/skimmons/rqt_madsciv2.gif
or
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/skimmons/rqt_madsciv3.gif
:mrgreen:

Richie Rich
09-10-2006, 08:23 AM
After much experimentation, I have found that high SW doesn't work for me... sigh. My stock PC MP Plus supposedly has SW of 335 or so, and that's about all I can handle consistently at my level. The problem is, higher SW feels fantastic, but I keep hitting balls long, especially the sitters, unless I'm feeling superbly fit, in which case I can barely muster that extra bit of concentration required to hit the ball just right. Without that extra "liveness" in my arms, which some folks are blessed with, I need to limit SW so that the total power level of the racquet is commensurate with the spin I can impart, with my physical capabilities and skills. I have added lead to the handle so that the total static weight varies between 12.1 and 12.3 oz depending on the string, and this has made the racquet feel a lot more stable.

If you can handle pro-level SW, that's great, and it's probably an indicator of your potential. But it's all about compromise for us ordinary mortals...

most of us that play at the 5.0 and under level don't need high the swingweights from adding all this lead, at least not as high as the pro's or tournament players. higher swingweights require extra strength and better timing. plus you tend to slow your swing down which results in less speed of shot.

a swingweight of 330 seems to work for me as well. i get enough spin, power and stability to be able to play a couple of sets without my arm getting tired.

LuckyR
09-10-2006, 09:26 AM
The lead is wrapped around the butt, under the grip. The final balance is 12.25". Since the racquet is 27.5" long, that means it is 12 pts HL.


Okay, when you say "butt" how far up the handle are you wrapping the 22 inches of tape?

Also when you made your calculations. Did you come up with the final weight first, then derive the final balance, then calculate the distribution of the lead to come up with that balance?

stormholloway
09-10-2006, 10:01 AM
Funny thing is it seems like most pros don't even use player's frames. Look at Roddick, Ljubicic, Ginepri, etc.

tennisplayer
09-10-2006, 11:06 AM
How far up from the handle did you add the tape travel? I guess .5'', this make it somewhat uncomfortable to grip? Would be interesting to see the resaults on a 27 inch frame.

Not sure if you are asking me, but here's the info anyway. I have put 12 grams of lead (4 strips, each weighing 3 grams) under the grip, away from the butt end, length-wise over the bevels. Pretty basic, but makes a considerable difference to feel. The grip (4 3/8") doesn't feel any different.

oray777
09-11-2006, 02:37 PM
3) Pro Style Balance R = ~ 44.6/sqrt(M), with R in inches and M in ounces.

Can someone explain to me how to calculate this when customizing your racquet. Does it mean that the racquet will be evenly balanced?

AJK1
09-11-2006, 02:43 PM
Just buy the book "Technical Tennis" and you can find out how to properly customise your racquet. A lot of what is said around here is just garbage.

Amone
09-11-2006, 03:22 PM
Just buy the book "Technical Tennis" and you can find out how to properly customise your racquet. A lot of what is said around here is just garbage.
A lot of what that book says doesn't exactly gouge the surface; how else do you explain the fact that The Physics and Technology of Tennis is about 10 times the size, with few other topics therein?

A lot of the stuff they say in there doesn't describe the changes that the customization causes; for instance, when I added a considerable (~32g) to the lower hoop, I found that I got less power because I couldn't swing through the ball on my serve. However, I got crazy spin from it, again on my serve. You'll never find that in your Technical Tennis, or even in TPaToT.

oray777
09-11-2006, 03:42 PM
Ugh, can anyone give me a little example of what i means so i might be able to comprehend in layman terms. Thanks.

sureshs
09-11-2006, 04:21 PM
In your first posts, you said pros favor even balanced racquets - actually 2 to 4 pts more HH than the equivalent stock stick. Here you are sayihg it is 12 pts headlight.

In another of your posts, you said that pros now prefer lower static weight and high swingweight. Now you are saying both should be high.

Even a classic player like Federer plays with a sub-13 oz stick and a muscleman like Nadal probably plays with a 12 oz stick after customization (and so does Roddick it appears). Many WTA players pay with 11.5 oz racquets after leading.

I am confused.

Also, can a 3.5 or 4.0 recreational player (75% of rec players are 3.5 according to the USTA) handle this latest setup?

moist
09-11-2006, 04:44 PM
3) Pro Style Balance R = ~ 44.6/sqrt(M), with R in inches and M in ounces.

Can someone explain to me how to calculate this when customizing your racquet. Does it mean that the racquet will be evenly balanced?

Just put in what the racquet weights for M, and it will tell you the balance point (R) you're shooting for.

In my previous post, I said my racquet after weight added was 354 grams, or 12.5 ounces. So 44.6/sqrt(12.5) = 12.61 inches from the butt cap. That's my goal balance point.

I cheated a little at that point and used the USRSA racquet customizer tool to find what weight to add where for my goal swingweight of 345.

moist
09-11-2006, 04:49 PM
In your first posts, you said pros favor even balanced racquets - actually 2 to 4 pts more HH than the equivalent stock stick. Here you are sayihg it is 12 pts headlight.

In another of your posts, you said that pros now prefer lower static weight and high swingweight. Now you are saying both should be high.

I thought I read this contradiction as well, but I thought maybe I hadn't been paying attention and I didn't feel like searching ;) .

Anyways, I've tried both ways, and it's no contest that the 44.6/sqrt(M) results in a far more pleasant balance for me.

Amone
09-11-2006, 05:04 PM
I thought I read this contradiction as well, but I thought maybe I hadn't been paying attention and I didn't feel like searching ;) .

Anyways, I've tried both ways, and it's no contest that the 44.6/sqrt(M) results in a far more pleasant balance for me.

You're not confused. Travler, I believe, addressed this contradiction in his first post, something like 'I had originally thought X, but it turns out the case is Y.'

FitzRoy
09-11-2006, 05:34 PM
You're not confused. Travler, I believe, addressed this contradiction in his first post, something like 'I had originally thought X, but it turns out the case is Y.'


Yeah. I think he's been engaging in a sort of learning process. No one starts out knowing everything about something like this, but he seems to be pretty good at figuring it out. The good thing is that he's been posting information as he learns and experiments with it, so we can sort of go along for the ride. ;)

travlerajm has, I think, put together a good and fairly reliable amount of information about pro player racquet customization. This thread and others by him are a good way to learn a lot about this sort of stuff - at least, I've found them to be. Ultimately the idea is to try these setups out and adjust your racquets until you find something you really enjoy playing with.

oray777
09-11-2006, 05:45 PM
Just put in what the racquet weights for M, and it will tell you the balance point (R) you're shooting for.

In my previous post, I said my racquet after weight added was 354 grams, or 12.5 ounces. So 44.6/sqrt(12.5) = 12.61 inches from the butt cap. That's my goal balance point.

I cheated a little at that point and used the USRSA racquet customizer tool to find what weight to add where for my goal swingweight of 345.

Thanks. That's all i needed.

travlerajm
09-11-2006, 11:52 PM
In your first posts, you said pros favor even balanced racquets - actually 2 to 4 pts more HH than the equivalent stock stick. Here you are sayihg it is 12 pts headlight.

In another of your posts, you said that pros now prefer lower static weight and high swingweight. Now you are saying both should be high.

Even a classic player like Federer plays with a sub-13 oz stick and a muscleman like Nadal probably plays with a 12 oz stick after customization (and so does Roddick it appears). Many WTA players pay with 11.5 oz racquets after leading.

I am confused.

Also, can a 3.5 or 4.0 recreational player (75% of rec players are 3.5 according to the USTA) handle this latest setup?

If you read carefully, these posts are not contradictory.

Pros prefer balance points on average about 4 pts more HH than stock (when normalizing for balance point). My racquet described in the OP has R = 44.6/sqrt(R) = 12.25" = 12 pts HL. Most stock racquets have R = 44.6/sqrt(M) - 0.5, which means that my racquet is 4 pts more HH than the line for average stock racquets.

On the type of racquet pros play with, I have posted many times on this, but my posts are generally consistent. As I have said before, pro setups can generally be divided into several categories.

I posted in detail on this in a thread started by the coach of a top junior using a 15-oz. frame.

To recap some generalities of pro setups:

1) Almost all pros use high swingweights (usually between 350-370). Federer is an exception on the low side. Gaudio and Dent are among the exceptions on the high side.
2) Average pro singles player racquet is 12.5 oz.
3) Average pro double specialist racquet is 13.0 oz.
4) Flatter hitters tend to use less polarized weight distribtions (with lots of weight at 3 and 9, plus counterweight in the top of the handle). This includes players like Baghdatis, Sampras, Pavel, Blake.
5) More spin-reliant players use more polarized weight distributions.
6) "Depolarizers" tend to use counterweighting in the top of the handle.
7) "Polarizers" tend to use counterweighting in the butt.
8) Serve and volleyers use heavy static weights (>12.5 oz).
9) Serve and volleyers use lots of weight at 3 and 9 (Sampras, Bjorkman).
10) Heavy Spin players tend to use lots of weight at 10 and 2 (Nadal, JHH).
11) Doubles specialists tend to use setups with lots of weight at 3 and 9, plus counterweight in the butt (in other words, a hybrid of the features of the depolarized and polarized setups).

travlerajm
09-11-2006, 11:54 PM
After much experimentation, I have found that high SW doesn't work for me... sigh. My stock PC MP Plus supposedly has SW of 335 or so, and that's about all I can handle consistently at my level. The problem is, higher SW feels fantastic, but I keep hitting balls long, especially the sitters, unless I'm feeling superbly fit, in which case I can barely muster that extra bit of concentration required to hit the ball just right. Without that extra "liveness" in my arms, which some folks are blessed with, I need to limit SW so that the total power level of the racquet is commensurate with the spin I can impart, with my physical capabilities and skills. I have added lead to the handle so that the total static weight varies between 12.1 and 12.3 oz depending on the string, and this has made the racquet feel a lot more stable.

If you can handle pro-level SW, that's great, and it's probably an indicator of your potential. But it's all about compromise for us ordinary mortals...

It's possible that your racquet may have simply been overpowered. The 2 easiest ways to cure an overpowered racquet are to (1) increase tension, or (2) add weight to the butt. The first way will make your shots flatter but with better depth control. The second way will make your racquet spinnier.

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 12:17 AM
Looking back at one of your previous posts (in another topic) you said you wanted to try the Sampras seetup with an O3 Tour Mid, but not the MP. (I think.) My question; would applying the lead on the MP help it any compared to the Mid? From what I've seen, the stock MP specs are somewhat close to the NXG OS...

I mentioned that I was considering trying the Sampras setup with the O3 Tour OS. It's not possible to make an O3 Tour mp play exactly like the mid, because it has less hoop rigidity, and more weight at 10:30 and 1:30. The weight distribution of the O3 Tour mp is similar to the NXG OS except that the NXG has more weight in the lower handle.

IMO, the O3 Tour mp is a crappy feeling stock frame, but it's probably a great platform for pro-style lead customization due to it's low static weight and spin-friendly design. It's not surprising that it's one of the most popular platforms for spin-reliant ATP pros.

thomas martinez
09-12-2006, 04:22 AM
Baghdatis and Pavel do not have any extra weight on their frames at 3, 9 nor do they have a counterweight at the top of the handle. Baghdatis' frame is little more then a stock Vacuum Pro 98. Pavel's is a little more custom, but not by much. And Bjorkman, he has NO extra weight at 3,9 as well. Where are you getting your information on pro frames?

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 09:14 AM
Baghdatis and Pavel do not have any extra weight on their frames at 3, 9 nor do they have a counterweight at the top of the handle. Baghdatis' frame is little more then a stock Vacuum Pro 98. Pavel's is a little more custom, but not by much. And Bjorkman, he has NO extra weight at 3,9 as well. Where are you getting your information on pro frames?

For example, if Bjorkman has no weight at 3 and 9, then he has to have a lot of weight at 10 and 2 in order to have the specs he has (12.94 oz with 12.47" balance strung). If you can give me a swingweight measurement for him, then I can give you an even more accurate estimate for the weight distribution for his frame. I think you may be underestimating the amount of invisible weight customization that these pro frames have.

I am using the weight and balance information provided by jura. This tells me roughly how much weight is added to the hoop and how much weight is added to the handle. Building on that information, I can then make reasonably accurate guesses as to the way the weight is distributed based on watching the way the ball leaves his racquet. The same information can also be gleaned with better accuracy from knowing swingweight specs, so any insider information you share is helpful. Thank you for sharing the specs for Safin and Gaudio.

LuckyR
09-12-2006, 10:07 AM
One 22" x 0.5" strip wrapped around butt with center of mass at 0.5" = 11g.


Okay, when you say "butt" how far up the handle are you wrapping the 22 inches of tape?

Also when you made your calculations. Did you come up with the final weight first, then derive the final balance, then calculate the distribution of the lead to come up with that balance?

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 10:13 AM
Okay, when you say "butt" how far up the handle are you wrapping the 22 inches of tape?

Also when you made your calculations. Did you come up with the final weight first, then derive the final balance, then calculate the distribution of the lead to come up with that balance?

In this case, I said that the center of mass of the added butt weight is at 0.5" from the butt. This means that the 0.5"-wide tape was wrapped so that the edge was 0.25" from the end of the racquet.

To do my calculations, I use an Excel spreadsheet similar to the one Steve Huff has provided. That way you can simply plug in the amounts of lead and the locations, and it will tell you the weight, balance, swingweight, etc. Then I adjust the numbers until I find the specs I'm looking for.

In my spreadsheet, I include the specs that I call "Rpro" and "pts HH". Rpro is the balance given by the equation Rpro = 44.6/sqrt(M). "pts HH" is the pts HH relative to Rpro. I find these to be useful numbers to have.

LuckyR
09-12-2006, 10:15 AM
In this case, I said that the center of mass of the butt weight is at 0.5" from the butt. This means that the 0.5"-wide tape was wrapped so that the edge was 0.25" from the end of the racquet.



So didn't you have to remove some of the handle to fit in those 22 inches of tape? Or is your handle odd shaped?

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 10:19 AM
So didn't you have to remove some of the handle to fit in those 22 inches of tape? Or is your handle odd shaped?

The ~22" of lead = 4 complete layers wrapped all the way around. It was thin enough that I don't notice a change in grip. Also, the fact that it's on the tapered section makes it less noticeable, because the only effect on grip shape is that it moves the location of the taper further from the butt by a very, very small amount. I can't tell the difference in grip shape when I add it that way.

It's one of those tricks of the trade!

LuckyR
09-12-2006, 10:27 AM
The ~22" of lead = 4 complete layers wrapped all the way around. It was thin enough that I don't notice a change in grip. Also, the fact that it's on the tapered section makes it less noticeable, because the only effect on grip shape is that it moves the location of the taper further from the butt by a very, very small amount. I can't tell the difference in grip shape when I add it that way.

It's one of those tricks of the trade!


Thanks!! I looked up the specs on your stick (original specs, I mean) and am going to give the exact treatment to an old (not that old) PK Ionic 5 that I have lieing around. It should end up within 0.1 gm static weight and about 4 points head heavier than your stick, but I play a ton of doubles. I'll let you know how it goes.

thomas martinez
09-12-2006, 10:28 AM
For Jonas, the extra weight is added directly at 12, not 10 and 2. And again, each frame is different, as will be the molded handle and such that is applied to the frame for him. But when making a frame for him, no weight is added at 3,9.

ACK4wd
09-12-2006, 10:39 AM
Yeah. I think he's been engaging in a sort of learning process. No one starts out knowing everything about something like this, but he seems to be pretty good at figuring it out. The good thing is that he's been posting information as he learns and experiments with it, so we can sort of go along for the ride. ;)

travlerajm has, I think, put together a good and fairly reliable amount of information about pro player racquet customization. This thread and others by him are a good way to learn a lot about this sort of stuff - at least, I've found them to be. Ultimately the idea is to try these setups out and adjust your racquets until you find something you really enjoy playing with.

I agree with you completely.
I enjoy the fact that he shares his information for everyone's benefit rather than some others who seem to feel the need to denegrate for the sake of self flattery.

Bravo

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 10:48 AM
For Jonas, the extra weight is added directly at 12, not 10 and 2. And again, each frame is different, as will be the molded handle and such that is applied to the frame for him. But when making a frame for him, no weight is added at 3,9.

Thanks for that info, Thomas. That's very interesting, because it means that his swingweight must be much higher than I thought. And his recoil weight must be huge!

Do you have a swingweight measurement for him?

surbs
09-12-2006, 11:03 AM
13oz? Right, do you have any idea what % of 4.0 + players can lug that thing around for 3 sets? Not many. By the 3rd set most people will be gettting later and later on the ball with reduced power.
Steve

travlerajm
09-12-2006, 11:12 AM
13oz? Right, do you have any idea what % of 4.0 + players can lug that thing around for 3 sets? Not many. By the 3rd set most people will be gettting later and later on the ball with reduced power.
Steve

There used to be a day when every racquet in the store used to weigh 14 oz. Women and children used them.

But I digress. I've found that the setup in the OP is not difficult at all for groundstrokes, and believe most 4.0s could use it. I let a couple of players try it (one 4.0 and the other 3.5) and both loved how easy it was to hit powerful heavy groundstrokes once they got the hang of the timing. The serve is where it would cause problems for most 4.0s. The large amount of tailweighting is perhaps not ideal for serve.

thomas martinez
09-12-2006, 12:08 PM
Yes I do, but the measurements I take, the units we use are not the same as you get in an RDC, it's a different number. I do not remember exactly what the units are.

Renisis9k
09-14-2006, 06:05 PM
travlerajm,

would you help me out with how much lead tape and where to position it for my racquet to be set up like yours? I have a LM Radical OS 4 1/2.

I really like how you described it hits, would like to try it myself :)

Thanks,
Renisis9k

Jonas
09-14-2006, 06:17 PM
There used to be a day when every racquet in the store used to weigh 14 oz. Women and children used them.

But I digress. I've found that the setup in the OP is not difficult at all for groundstrokes, and believe most 4.0s could use it. I let a couple of players try it (one 4.0 and the other 3.5) and both loved how easy it was to hit powerful heavy groundstrokes once they got the hang of the timing. The serve is where it would cause problems for most 4.0s. The large amount of tailweighting is perhaps not ideal for serve.


Travler,
what's a good setup for the N-Blade?
Thanks,

Down the line
09-20-2006, 09:18 PM
Dear Travlerajm! Can you help me regarding how to modify a wilson n-code sixone 95 with 18/20 string pattern to get to the Safin set up you have concluded is so good? Specially, how do I know how much weight to put near the butt and can I put it in the butt cap instead? Thanks

travlerajm
09-23-2006, 11:54 PM
Dear Travlerajm! Can you help me regarding how to modify a wilson n-code sixone 95 with 18/20 string pattern to get to the Safin set up you have concluded is so good? Specially, how do I know how much weight to put near the butt and can I put it in the butt cap instead? Thanks

You can't match it exactly, but you can get closest by adding ~11g across the 12 o'clock position. You'll probably need to do some fine-tuning as always.

travlerajm
09-23-2006, 11:58 PM
Travler,
what's a good setup for the N-Blade?
Thanks,

The nBlade is uniquely well-suited for polarized pro-style setups.

Try 13g at 3 and 9, plus 15 grams in the butt at 0.5" (28g total). Tension around 60 lbs, or high 50s. I don't own an nBlade, but that's what I would try first if I did.

Punisha
09-24-2006, 03:56 AM
Ok can someone explain in idiot talk what i have to do to work this set up out for my RDX 500 mid.

Any recomendations for setup... where to put lead and how much ><

dave333
09-24-2006, 04:48 AM
dear travlerajm,
would my current modified m-fil 300 (8 grams at 3+9, 4 grams at 10+2, 4.5 grams at top of handle, 3 grams in the butt, 11.5 onces total) be considerered somewhat polarized? if so, would depolarizing it add more pop to my serve? I'm finding this setup produces nice kick serves, mad topspin, and I'm serving much faster than ever but even more would be nice, as the ball still takes 2 hops the reach the back fence.

kissmyace
09-24-2006, 06:52 AM
Traveljam, you mentioned a spread sheet given by Steve Huff but i can't find it anywhere. I 'm trying to set up my Slazenger NX-1's and the sheet would sheet would maybe help as most of the posts are all Greek to me!!:confused:

Punisha
09-24-2006, 10:04 PM
Hey can you please work this out for my RDX 500 mid please trav. Ive tried all your other set ups and theyve been great. Loved the Serve Volley one which is my current set up. And way thnx for posting all these ideas but if you have time can u work it out for me >< i understand the theory of what you say but dont understand much of customizing myself.

travlerajm
09-25-2006, 03:16 AM
Traveljam, you mentioned a spread sheet given by Steve Huff but i can't find it anywhere. I 'm trying to set up my Slazenger NX-1's and the sheet would sheet would maybe help as most of the posts are all Greek to me!!:confused:

Sorry, I meant Steve H.

travlerajm
09-25-2006, 03:37 AM
Hey can you please work this out for my RDX 500 mid please trav. Ive tried all your other set ups and theyve been great. Loved the Serve Volley one which is my current set up. And way thnx for posting all these ideas but if you have time can u work it out for me >< i understand the theory of what you say but dont understand much of customizing myself.

For the RDX500 mid, my recommendation for a heavy polarized setup:

15g stretched across the tip between 10:30 and 1:30 (in 3 10-inch-long x 0.5-inch-wide layers), plus 15g in the butt (at 0.5" from butt end).

travlerajm
09-25-2006, 04:26 AM
dear travlerajm,
would my current modified m-fil 300 (8 grams at 3+9, 4 grams at 10+2, 4.5 grams at top of handle, 3 grams in the butt, 11.5 onces total) be considerered somewhat polarized? if so, would depolarizing it add more pop to my serve? I'm finding this setup produces nice kick serves, mad topspin, and I'm serving much faster than ever but even more would be nice, as the ball still takes 2 hops the reach the back fence.


Your setup is well-balanced, moderately polarized, but very low-powered.

To increase power on the serve, here are 3 options to try:

A) move the 12g in the hoop so that it is in one 24"-long strip going around the top half of the racquet. Then move all the 7.5g counterweighting to the butt.

B) 20g at 3+9 (in 2 layers of 10"-long strips), plus 20g counterweight in the butt.

C) decrease tension by 3 lbs.

I hope one of these options works for you.

wally
09-25-2006, 07:24 AM
travlerajm,

I play an all court singles game and s/v doubles. My racquet is the FXP Rad Tour. I'd like to get a bit more ommph on my serve and groundstrokes without a great loss of maneuverablity at net. Based on your research what suggestions do you have for adding weight to achieve my desired results.

Down the line
09-25-2006, 10:08 AM
You can't match it exactly, but you can get closest by adding ~11g across the 12 o'clock position. You'll probably need to do some fine-tuning as always.

Thanks for the reply Travlerajm! What about the 3 and 9 positions?

dave333
09-25-2006, 10:58 AM
so that first setup will produce a lot more spin than the second one right?

LuckyR
09-25-2006, 07:02 PM
Ok, OK, Ok. I was all set up to give this one a try, now the Safin setup is a lot better! You have made mention a number of times of a "doubles setup". Would this new Safin setup qualify as that? If so, how much and where would you put the lead to get the Safin setup out of the NXG OS? If not, what would you do for a great doubles setup, again starting with the NXG OS?

Amone
09-25-2006, 07:27 PM
Dear TravlerAjm,
Can you tell me how to take my DNX and lead it up to make me play like Connors, or McEnroe? KTHXBAI!

And that's how I feel about half the people in this thread... I have to say, Ajm, you're starting to divulge your different weighting concepts and the like, these different setups, and if I had the money to spend on lead I'd be quite interested in doing a similar series of tests. Too bad I'm not a physics genius like some folks, so I pretty much have to guess at intended specs. ;)

Punisha
09-26-2006, 04:05 AM
Dear TravlerAjm,
Too bad I'm not a physics genius like some folks, so I pretty much have to guess at intended specs. ;)

hehehe thats parts fun... just stick some weight somewhere and have a bash!

Punisha
09-26-2006, 04:15 AM
For the RDX500 mid, my recommendation for a heavy polarized setup:

15g stretched across the tip between 10:30 and 1:30 (in 3 10-inch-long x 0.5-inch-wide layers), plus 15g in the butt (at 0.5" from butt end).

So you saying 3 10 inch long strips across 12 oclock between 10 30 and 130 ><

Also inside the hoop or outside?

Pisolino227
09-26-2006, 10:05 AM
Hey Travlerajm,
I have a stock APD+ and a ton of lead tape. The only thing I'm missing is some expert advice. I love heavy biting topspin. On my last APD+ I placed a few grams of lead along the handle and it definitely became more spinny but it was a bit flimsy and unstable in the hoop. What do you reccomend without sacking too much manuverability. Simply wrapping lead around the butt or do I need some counterbalance in the hoop. All your help is greatly appreciated in advance. You sound like an individual who has enough expertise that they could start a racquet customization service

Stock specs of APD+
Head Size:
100 sq. in. / 645 sq. cm.
Length: 27.5 inches / 70 cm
Strung Weight: 11.3oz / 320g
Balance: 6pts Head Light
Swingweight: 335
Stiffness: 67

Milano
09-26-2006, 10:57 AM
Hey, I used to sue an S10 intelligence, but tried my bros i radical, and liked the control a lot (might need a little more power though...). I use a topspin sw forehand, and a 1 handed eastern backhand. Do you think I should go to an apd like most of the responses I got, the pdr, or add lead to either of my racquets right now? Playing level is probably a 3.5-4.0. Serve wise, I usually do a flat or topspin serve, and trying to learn a better slice serve. Usually stay at the baseline except when I want to put the point away.

Thanks!

EDIT: If this helps anybit, I have about 6' 2" and 14.

BlackJesus
09-28-2006, 07:34 AM
Please can somenone give me this type of setup for a RDX500 MP and for a RD-80? Thanks a lot

travlerajm
09-28-2006, 11:44 PM
Hey Travlerajm,
I have a stock APD+ and a ton of lead tape. The only thing I'm missing is some expert advice. I love heavy biting topspin. On my last APD+ I placed a few grams of lead along the handle and it definitely became more spinny but it was a bit flimsy and unstable in the hoop. What do you reccomend without sacking too much manuverability. Simply wrapping lead around the butt or do I need some counterbalance in the hoop. All your help is greatly appreciated in advance. You sound like an individual who has enough expertise that they could start a racquet customization service

Stock specs of APD+
Head Size:
100 sq. in. / 645 sq. cm.
Length: 27.5 inches / 70 cm
Strung Weight: 11.3oz / 320g
Balance: 6pts Head Light
Swingweight: 335
Stiffness: 67

You might be surprised how much spin the Nadal setup can give you. To match the Nadal setup on your APD+, put 15g at the 3+9 position (in 2 7.5" layers), plus 5g in the butt. It will be a little higher swingweight than you are used to, but your heavy spin will drive your opponents crazy.

ShooterMcMarco
09-29-2006, 12:31 AM
travlerajm any suggestions for a 6.0 95?

Pisolino227
09-30-2006, 02:15 PM
You might be surprised how much spin the Nadal setup can give you. To match the Nadal setup on your APD+, put 15g at the 3+9 position (in 2 7.5" layers), plus 5g in the butt. It will be a little higher swingweight than you are used to, but your heavy spin will drive your opponents crazy.


So let me get this straight......15 grams on each side of the hoop so 4 strips of 7.5 grams in total........30 grams in the hoop and 5 grams in the butt?? I apologize I'm sort of confused. Thanks traverajm for all your time!

LuckyR
09-30-2006, 02:26 PM
To recap some generalities of pro setups:

1) Almost all pros use high swingweights (usually between 350-370). Federer is an exception on the low side. Gaudio and Dent are among the exceptions on the high side.
2) Average pro singles player racquet is 12.5 oz.
3) Average pro double specialist racquet is 13.0 oz.
4) Flatter hitters tend to use less polarized weight distribtions (with lots of weight at 3 and 9, plus counterweight in the top of the handle). This includes players like Baghdatis, Sampras, Pavel, Blake.
5) More spin-reliant players use more polarized weight distributions.
6) "Depolarizers" tend to use counterweighting in the top of the handle.
7) "Polarizers" tend to use counterweighting in the butt.
8) Serve and volleyers use heavy static weights (>12.5 oz).
9) Serve and volleyers use lots of weight at 3 and 9 (Sampras, Bjorkman).
10) Heavy Spin players tend to use lots of weight at 10 and 2 (Nadal, JHH).
11) Doubles specialists tend to use setups with lots of weight at 3 and 9, plus counterweight in the butt (in other words, a hybrid of the features of the depolarized and polarized setups).


travlerajm,

Well I finally did it, I set up the Safin setup using a ProKennex Ionic 5 (very similar spec to your DXG OS). I think I've got a new racquet!! I play a ton of doubles and have always used nasty slices and twists to baffle returners and give me enough time to get to the net. With the "Safin", I don't need to go to the net, can you say 'service winner' on flat first serves? I also play an exclusive S&V style with lots of poaching ie very few groundstrokes, but passes and especially returns (my personal weakspot right now) BOOM, no more problems, and I'm talking hitting flat with minimal topspin, I don't need all that spin, the groundies are very 'heavy' and 6 - 12 inches over the net. Who needs spin? But the volleys! I do 99% of my poaches as anticipation poaches, not called poaches, so some of the time the return is a bit better than I thought it was going to be, instead of sticking my racquet out and getting a squib volley out of it that gets crammed down my throat or chickening out and letting it through, BOOM stick the racquet out and a nice volley occurs! Access to spin is a little low, but again, I don't care!

Thanks, man for all of your work and the sharing attitude you have!

thejackal
09-30-2006, 06:41 PM
hey travlerajm, I was wondering to which kind of pro setup my rackets are like. i use n6-1 95s and built the grip up from L3 to a bit bigger than L5 and use a leather grip. I also added 6g to 3/9 but its still really hedlight (14pt ish). i weighed it with an electronic scale (not sure how accurate) and it came out at 14.1 oz fully loaded (i weighed a strung prestige mp because i couldn't believe it, but it came out at 12oz). they could play better on serves but everything else is pretty solid. any suggestions? btw i'm a pretty strong guy, 4.0 all court with a 1h bh

travlerajm
10-01-2006, 02:45 AM
travlerajm,

Well I finally did it, I set up the Safin setup using a ProKennex Ionic 5 (very similar spec to your DXG OS). I think I've got a new racquet!! I play a ton of doubles and have always used nasty slices and twists to baffle returners and give me enough time to get to the net. With the "Safin", I don't need to go to the net, can you say 'service winner' on flat first serves? I also play an exclusive S&V style with lots of poaching ie very few groundstrokes, but passes and especially returns (my personal weakspot right now) BOOM, no more problems, and I'm talking hitting flat with minimal topspin, I don't need all that spin, the groundies are very 'heavy' and 6 - 12 inches over the net. Who needs spin? But the volleys! I do 99% of my poaches as anticipation poaches, not called poaches, so some of the time the return is a bit better than I thought it was going to be, instead of sticking my racquet out and getting a squib volley out of it that gets crammed down my throat or chickening out and letting it through, BOOM stick the racquet out and a nice volley occurs! Access to spin is a little low, but again, I don't care!

Thanks, man for all of your work and the sharing attitude you have!

Looking at the specs of the k5, it seems that matching Safin's specs is not possible because it is not quite polarized enough. But I'm glad to hear that you found a setup that worked out nicely for your game.

travlerajm
10-01-2006, 03:06 AM
hey travlerajm, I was wondering to which kind of pro setup my rackets are like. i use n6-1 95s and built the grip up from L3 to a bit bigger than L5 and use a leather grip. I also added 6g to 3/9 but its still really hedlight (14pt ish). i weighed it with an electronic scale (not sure how accurate) and it came out at 14.1 oz fully loaded (i weighed a strung prestige mp because i couldn't believe it, but it came out at 12oz). they could play better on serves but everything else is pretty solid. any suggestions? btw i'm a pretty strong guy, 4.0 all court with a 1h bh

There are no pros using a setup similar to yours. The closest weight and balance would be Daniel Nestor, but his swingweight is probably much higher. You might take a look at my SGRP thread (Serve/Groundstroke Power Ratio). The bottom line is that adding lots of weight to the handle can negatively effect the power on your serve, because it adds a lot to the effective swingweight about the shoulder axis, without adding much to the hitting weight.

If you want to reach more of a pro style setup for the n6.195, I'd recommend trying to reduce the handle weight as much as possible, then remove the weight at 3+9, and try adding weight across the bumper region. Add weight one gram at a time until you make sure that you have gone beyond the max-power point, so that adding more weight reduces power and increases spin. Then settle on the amount of lead that gives you a controllable power level on groundstrokes.

Pisolino227
10-01-2006, 06:52 AM
So let me get this straight......15 grams on each side of the hoop so 4 strips of 7.5 grams in total........30 grams in the hoop and 5 grams in the butt?? I apologize I'm sort of confused. Thanks travlerajm for all your time!



Trav, can you clarify regarding the APD+ Nadal Setup..........15 grams on each side of the hoop or 15 grams total in the hoop?

Thanks I appreciate it!

tennis_nerd22
10-01-2006, 07:04 AM
for the nadal setup, its 15g in the hoop TOTAL (7.5g on each side), and 5g in the butt.

Pisolino227
10-01-2006, 07:12 AM
thanks tennis nerd

dricas24
10-01-2006, 07:12 AM
I havent read every page because this looks a bit like ancient hieroglyph to me. My question is I have only been playing for about a week with a racket bought for 39.99 at sports authority. How much of a difference would a pro's racket be compared to my racket?

Keifers
10-01-2006, 07:28 AM
I havent read every page because this looks a bit like ancient hieroglyph to me. My question is I have only been playing for about a week with a racket bought for 39.99 at sports authority. How much of a difference would a pro's racket be compared to my racket?
Perhaps you can tell us which racquet you bought at SA? And how much it weighs? That would help us give you a better answer.

dricas24
10-01-2006, 07:57 AM
IT says 4 and a half 110 SQ IN L4

BlackJesus
10-01-2006, 11:15 AM
I've tried to use Steve H spreadsheet to calculate the new SW on my O3 tour mid but it gives me only results on a depolarized setup. Travel can you explain me how to have a polarized setup or a spreadsheet that give results in that way. Or It's just enogh to spread the wheights more on the hoop and on the handel and the results is the same? Thanks

travlerajm
10-01-2006, 02:34 PM
So let me get this straight......15 grams on each side of the hoop so 4 strips of 7.5 grams in total........30 grams in the hoop and 5 grams in the butt?? I apologize I'm sort of confused. Thanks traverajm for all your time!

No, each 7.5" x 0.5" strip (split lengthwise) weighs 3.75g. So you would actually have eight 7.5"x0.25" strips, with each strip weighing 1.875g. So 15g in hoop plus 5g in the butt. 20g total added mass.

ShooterMcMarco
10-01-2006, 03:45 PM
I added 8, 6" lead strips to 3 & 9 on my PS 6.0 95 with 3 grams on the butt with a center of mass at .25". Racquet felt too whippy, does that mean I should add a few more grams at 3 & 9 or remove the weight from the butt?

LuckyR
10-01-2006, 07:33 PM
Looking at the specs of the k5, it seems that matching Safin's specs is not possible because it is not quite polarized enough. But I'm glad to hear that you found a setup that worked out nicely for your game.



Well you're the boy genius, but since the NXG OS is: 11.9 oz, 11 pt HL, 328 SW and 27.5" long

and the PK Ionic 5 is: 11.8 oz, 7 pts HL, SW 325 and 27" long,

seems like a wash to me...

tennisaddict89
10-01-2006, 08:07 PM
travlerajm, how would i add led to my pc600 in order to give it safins specs? Is this at all possible? Sorry but i am actually taking physics in high school this year, so i may be able to understand the specifics soon.

travlerajm
10-01-2006, 11:46 PM
Well you're the boy genius, but since the NXG OS is: 11.9 oz, 11 pt HL, 328 SW and 27.5" long

and the PK Ionic 5 is: 11.8 oz, 7 pts HL, SW 325 and 27" long,

seems like a wash to me...

The 2 pts difference in balance is a lot. It's probably the main reason why your setup is flat-hitting, while mine is extremely spin-friendly.

travlerajm
10-01-2006, 11:52 PM
travlerajm, how would i add led to my pc600 in order to give it safins specs? Is this at all possible? Sorry but i am actually taking physics in high school this year, so i may be able to understand the specifics soon.

Sorry. It's not possible to get your pc600 to match Safin's specs. Not even close.

wally
10-02-2006, 03:27 AM
travlerajm,

OK I think I understand.. My FXP Rad Tour can't really be matched to much of anything So...

I have a Wilson ROK 93. I don't quite remeber the specs, but I think its a racquet that could be leaded up to come close to your latest ideal spec.

I'd really appreciate your thoughts/suggestions on this one.

shwayguy
10-05-2006, 02:34 PM
travlerajm,

have you ever considered customizing a tt warrior. Is it possible to either 'samprasize" it or "safinize" it?

davedave121
10-30-2006, 02:13 PM
hi there, i' d like to know where's the 3-9 clock position in a pure drive standar. How can i know for sure this (measured from the butt, r')?


thanks

jackson vile
10-30-2006, 04:05 PM
hi there, i' d like to know where's the 3-9 clock position in a pure drive standar. How can i know for sure this (measured from the butt, r')?


thanks


Dave what is your question, 3&9 are just on the right and left side of the frame ie a clock position.

R is the length of the balance point from the butt of the racket to the balance point.

WhiteSox05CA
10-30-2006, 04:29 PM
So I'm looking to get this setup for sure. I'm also buying a new racquet. Which racquet would be best to get if I wanted to achieve this setup? I liked the Babolat Aeropro Drive, Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, and the Fischer M Speed Pro. No. 1. Also maybe the Volkl Tour Gen II. What'd you suggest?
________
WildTigress live (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/WildTigress)

davedave121
10-30-2006, 05:03 PM
Dave what is your question, 3&9 are just on the right and left side of the frame ie a clock position.

R is the length of the balance point from the butt of the racket to the balance point.

i think there's a exact distance from the butt to the position 3 o'clock(or 9). am i right? or you don't measure and just put the lead tape in the location you think it's the 3(or 9) position?

EricW
10-30-2006, 05:27 PM
Can you customize any racquet with the directions you gave? Would a wilson Ncode 61 tour 90 be improved alot with his customization?

WhiteSox05CA
10-30-2006, 06:30 PM
So to add lead to the head, and still achieve a 6-9 HL balance, your going to want to start with a racquet that's about 10, 11 pts. HL right?
________
Yenniffer live (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/Yenniffer)

jackson vile
10-31-2006, 06:48 AM
So I'm looking to get this setup for sure. I'm also buying a new racquet. Which racquet would be best to get if I wanted to achieve this setup? I liked the Babolat Aeropro Drive, Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, and the Fischer M Speed Pro. No. 1. Also maybe the Volkl Tour Gen II. What'd you suggest?



IMO you want a racket that is below 12.5oz so that you have room to customize and the weight will be no higher than 12.5oz after aplication of lead.

You want a good base frame, something that you prefer, is light.

The Babs would be great to bring to SW2 as long as you can handle SW2

jackson vile
10-31-2006, 06:49 AM
i think there's a exact distance from the butt to the position 3 o'clock(or 9). am i right? or you don't measure and just put the lead tape in the location you think it's the 3(or 9) position?


It is just like a clock, just on the sides of the racket.

jackson vile
10-31-2006, 06:50 AM
Can you customize any racquet with the directions you gave? Would a wilson Ncode 61 tour 90 be improved alot with his customization?


The 90 IMO has too much weight already, but many of the 1hbh pro use a racket 13-13.5oz so as long as you don't mind I'm sure you could bring it up to SW2 and add lead into the handle as well.

If you are 2hbh then just add the lead into the nose to bring it to SW2

jackson vile
10-31-2006, 06:53 AM
So to add lead to the head, and still achieve a 6-9 HL balance, your going to want to start with a racquet that's about 10, 11 pts. HL right?


IMO you don't have to worry about that, one thing to worry about is where the majority of weight is located in the racket, i'm no sure how you define this and that is something that Travler would have to answer.

WhiteSox05CA
10-31-2006, 02:21 PM
IMO you don't have to worry about that, one thing to worry about is where the majority of weight is located in the racket, i'm no sure how you define this and that is something that Travler would have to answer.

Isn't that directly related to the balance of the racquet? Head light=majority of weight in handle. HH=majority of weight in hoop. Right?

I just thought it would be easier to only lead the head, so I would start off with the balance at about 10-12 pts. HL.
________
Lesbian live (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/lesbian-couples/)

jackson vile
11-01-2006, 09:45 AM
Isn't that directly related to the balance of the racquet? Head light=majority of weight in handle. HH=majority of weight in hoop. Right?

I just thought it would be easier to only lead the head, so I would start off with the balance at about 10-12 pts. HL.


This may be a very valid point, all I am saying is that I can not give you a 100% answer on this particular topic and have wondered the same thing.

I would guess the potentially there already is enough weight in the handle so that perhaps as you stated you could just worry about adding weight in to head.

FitzRoy
11-01-2006, 12:46 PM
Isn't that directly related to the balance of the racquet? Head light=majority of weight in handle. HH=majority of weight in hoop. Right?

I just thought it would be easier to only lead the head, so I would start off with the balance at about 10-12 pts. HL.


That's how I approach my racquets. If I want a racquet that's say, 360 grams and 6 pts head light, and has a swingweight of 355 (basically impossible to find in a stock racquet), then the easiest way to achieve that would be to start with a frame that's maybe 340 grams, 325 SW, and 9 pts head light (pretty easy to find), and apply lead to the hoop. Basically, when customizing, I prefer setups that don't require adding lead to the handle.

WhiteSox05CA
11-01-2006, 12:54 PM
That's how I approach my racquets. If I want a racquet that's say, 360 grams and 6 pts head light, and has a swingweight of 355 (basically impossible to find in a stock racquet), then the easiest way to achieve that would be to start with a frame that's maybe 340 grams, 325 SW, and 9 pts head light (pretty easy to find), and apply lead to the hoop. Basically, when customizing, I prefer setups that don't require adding lead to the handle.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking of doing. What racquet do you use now?
________
GLASS PIPES (http://glasspipes.net/)

TheSnowMan
11-01-2006, 02:51 PM
Travlerajm, can you give me a bit of advice...

I've been planning to get a couple of rackets for Christmas. Your research interested me, and I am seeking advice on how to customize a racket. I demoed a few rackets and narrowed it down to:

Dunlop M-Fil 200 2006 (price was too good)
Wilson Prostaff Tour 90/nSix-One Tour 90
Yonex RDS 001 Mid
Edit: Head Prestige (any..) Mid

Which one of these would be the best racket to customize to follow the pro setup, (spin friendly, polarized?)

I am looking for more spin, more power and placement on serve, and a lot of feel. I currently use a PD that is around 14 ounces. I don't like it because of the large headsize, stiffness, and difficulty with serve.

I have no problem with weight. I have an all court game, 1 hand backhand, a strong forehand, and a decent serve.

Any other reccommendations would be great.

Thanks a lot.

FitzRoy
11-01-2006, 03:20 PM
Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking of doing. What racquet do you use now?

Currently, mostly a POG Longbody. It starts out very headlight, and unlike some headlight frames, it really feels headlight. So I added 24 grams in the hoop, most of it at 3 & 9. I really like the way it plays now. The mid point of the frame is the 14" mark, so it's about 8 pts head light from there. I string it pretty loose, around 53 lbs with poly (Kirschbaum SuperSmash 1.30 guage).

I also use a LM Radical MP, but I don't like it as much. It plays fine in stock form, but is way too light and unstable for my tastes. I've yet to find a setup with it that I like for more than about two days or so. It's like I hit with it, like it, and then my game distorts itself until I can no longer use the frame. Must be a mental block.

WhiteSox05CA
11-01-2006, 04:43 PM
I'm asking the same thing as TheSnowMan...
Which one of these..
Aeropro Drive,
Pure Drive (100),
Fischer M Speed Pro. No. 1 (98 ), or
Wilson n6.1 (95)?
________
Best Lighter For Vapor Genie (http://www.vaporizers.net/)

stormholloway
11-01-2006, 06:59 PM
Doesn't this thread assume that all pros set their racquet up the same?

The way to set it up like a pro racquet is to make it exactly what feels good.

WhiteSox05CA
11-02-2006, 03:15 PM
Doesn't this thread assume that all pros set their racquet up the same?

The way to set it up like a pro racquet is to make it exactly what feels good.

There pretty similar on average. Some have specs suited best for their game, and what they feel like is best. On the spec page they all had higher swingweights and static weights than the usuall stock, but it varied between one guy and the next.
________
COLORADO MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES (http://colorado.dispensaries.org/)

EricW
11-02-2006, 05:23 PM
The 90 IMO has too much weight already, but many of the 1hbh pro use a racket 13-13.5oz so as long as you don't mind I'm sure you could bring it up to SW2 and add lead into the handle as well.

If you are 2hbh then just add the lead into the nose to bring it to SW2

The nose? Sorry =[ Also, SW2?

WhiteSox05CA
11-02-2006, 06:49 PM
The nose? Sorry =[ Also, SW2?

SW2= Swingweight 2

It's from an earlier thread started by Travelerjam. Here-->
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=123998&highlight=SW2
________
Gartersex cam (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/Gartersex)

WhiteSox05CA
11-20-2006, 02:31 PM
So in the end this is supposed to be about 13 oz. right? Now is that strung or unstrung?
________
Web Shows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

LuckyR
12-20-2006, 12:03 PM
Ok, Ok it's been a couple of months. So Trav, what are you using now? The Pro I, II, III, Safinized or a variant of the SW2?

I'm interested to see what you have come up with recently.

travlerajm
12-20-2006, 01:35 PM
double post

travlerajm
12-20-2006, 01:42 PM
Ok, Ok it's been a couple of months. So Trav, what are you using now? The Pro I, II, III, Safinized or a variant of the SW2?

I'm interested to see what you have come up with recently.

Interestingly, the specs I ended up with after my experiments ended up being exactly the same as the optimal pro specs determined more recently from my statistical analysis.

I'm currently using NXG OS, ~360g, SW ~370, balance ~32.75 cm. Lead is all the way around the top of the hoop, starting from the 4th crosstring from the bottom. Then I have another layer of lead at 12 o'clock about 3" long, but I sometimes adjust the length of this layer depending on temperature and effective string tension. And I've removed the 4g red cross-shaped silicone rubber insert from the butt.

I string with Ashaway Crossfire 16-gauge Kevlar hybrid at 67 lbs, but I don't use it for competition until it's well broken in (so it plays more like a fresh stringjob at ~62 lbs). With the Kevlar I can go 6 months between stringjobs in this racquet, and it plays soft and grippy.

With this racquet, I'm at least a whole NTRP level better on my groundstrokes and returns than with any racquet or setup I used before the past year. And it's definitely not me - it's the racquet. Can you say heavy ball? If I grew up playing with this racquet, a D-I scholarship would have been a sure thing.

Some pros who use setups similar to this one:
Agassi
Robredo
Ferrer
Grosjean

I look at that list, and it seems to me these are guys that don't seem to be especially blessed athletically relative to other players - neither big nor super-speedy. But these little guys are all good shot makers.

And by the way, the optimal specs for WTA players may surprise you:
~320g, SW ~400. (e.g., JHH)

The bottom line is that if your shoulder strength is lower, it's better to sacrifice static weight than to reduce swingweight.

And not surprisingly, the worst-ranked players for both men and women are those with SW in the 350s (in the overpowered zone between SW1 and SW2).

The optimal SW zone for the men is between 365 and 385. There is another narrower optimum that gives decent rankings at SW between 340 and 350 (mostly light-hitting dudes like Davydenko). ATP players with SW below 340 have crappy rankings. The best WTA players are all also at SW >365, but there are some successful WTA players who use stock swingweights.

Men with static weight over 370g tend to have crappy rankings too.

WhiteSox05CA
12-20-2006, 02:04 PM
Interestingly, the specs I ended up with after my experiments ended up being exactly the same as the optimal pro specs determined more recently from my statistical analysis.

I'm currently using NXG OS, ~360g, SW ~370, balance ~32.75 cm. Lead is all the way around the top of the hoop, starting from the 4th crosstring from the bottom. Then I have another layer of lead at 12 o'clock about 3" long, but I sometimes adjust the length of this layer depending on temperature and effective string tension. And I've removed the 4g red cross-shaped silicone rubber insert from the butt.

I string with Ashaway Crossfire 16-gauge Kevlar hybrid at 67 lbs, but I don't use it for competition until it's well broken in (so it plays more like a fresh stringjob at ~62 lbs). With the Kevlar I can go 6 months between stringjobs in this racquet, and it plays soft and grippy.

With this racquet, I'm at least a whole NTRP level better on my groundstrokes and returns than with any racquet or setup I used before the past year. And it's definitely not me - it's the racquet. Can you say heavy ball? If I grew up playing with this racquet, a D-I scholarship would have been a sure thing.

Some pros who use setups similar to this one:
Agassi
Robredo
Ferrer
Grosjean

I look at that list, and it seems to me these are guys that don't seem to be especially blessed athletically relative to other players - neither big nor super-speedy. But these little guys are all good shot makers.

And by the way, the optimal specs for WTA players may surprise you:
~320g, SW ~400. (e.g., JHH)

The bottom line is that if your shoulder strength is lower, it's better to sacrifice static weight than to reduce swingweight.

And not surprisingly, the worst-ranked players for both men and women are those with SW in the 350s (in the overpowered zone between SW1 and SW2).

The optimal SW zone for the men is between 365 and 385. There is another narrower optimum that gives decent rankings at SW between 340 and 350 (mostly light-hitting dudes like Davydenko). ATP players with SW below 340 have crappy rankings. The best WTA players are all also at SW >365, but there are some successful WTA players who use stock swingweights.

Men with static weight over 370g tend to have crappy rankings too.

So are your specs strung or unstrung? Does that NXG setup follow the "Ideal Balance Line of ATP Pros?"

I thought you were coming out with something new, are you still? And when?

jackson vile
12-20-2006, 02:56 PM
Travler I tried out the different specs on my 2 tnt-90s and one on a 200g xl for my wife, I will have a write up on it.

Amone
12-20-2006, 03:43 PM
So are your specs strung or unstrung? Does that NXG setup follow the "Ideal Balance Line of ATP Pros?"

I thought you were coming out with something new, are you still? And when?

Travler has, in a few places, posted that he prefers to work in strung specs. Thus, these specs should fall under that category.

LuckyR
12-20-2006, 05:13 PM
Interestingly, the specs I ended up with after my experiments ended up being exactly the same as the optimal pro specs determined more recently from my statistical analysis.

I'm currently using NXG OS, ~360g, SW ~370, balance ~32.75 cm. Lead is all the way around the top of the hoop, starting from the 4th crosstring from the bottom. Then I have another layer of lead at 12 o'clock about 3" long, but I sometimes adjust the length of this layer depending on temperature and effective string tension. And I've removed the 4g red cross-shaped silicone rubber insert from the butt.

I string with Ashaway Crossfire 16-gauge Kevlar hybrid at 67 lbs, but I don't use it for competition until it's well broken in (so it plays more like a fresh stringjob at ~62 lbs). With the Kevlar I can go 6 months between stringjobs in this racquet, and it plays soft and grippy.

With this racquet, I'm at least a whole NTRP level better on my groundstrokes and returns than with any racquet or setup I used before the past year. And it's definitely not me - it's the racquet. Can you say heavy ball? If I grew up playing with this racquet, a D-I scholarship would have been a sure thing.

Some pros who use setups similar to this one:
Agassi
Robredo
Ferrer
Grosjean




Thanks for the followup. From my read it sounds like the "Safinized" hoop but actually removed weight from the butt, rather than added lead (like the posted Safin setup). Is that right?

IT WAS IN!!!
12-20-2006, 06:09 PM
so travlerajm im a junior who uses a pure drive+ (old) which would be the best homeade custom set up to use

travlerajm
12-20-2006, 06:19 PM
Thanks for the followup. From my read it sounds like the "Safinized" hoop but actually removed weight from the butt, rather than added lead (like the posted Safin setup). Is that right?

Yes. The longer balance point improved my serve. And the swingweight is a little higher (slightly different base swingweight and longer balance on this frame). And the tension is a little lower.

Ljubicic for number1
12-21-2006, 03:41 AM
I'm currently using NXG OS, ~360g, SW ~370, balance ~32.75 cm. Lead is all the way around the top of the hoop, starting from the 4th crosstring from the bottom. Then I have another layer of lead at 12 o'clock about 3" long, but I sometimes adjust the length of this layer depending on temperature and effective string tension. And I've removed the 4g red cross-shaped silicone rubber insert from the butt.





So you are saying you have lead from about 8 to 4 clock? That cant be right can it?

Surely you meant 4th cross from the top?

John.

travlerajm
12-21-2006, 08:58 AM
So you are saying you have lead from about 8 to 4 clock? That cant be right can it?

Surely you meant 4th cross from the top?

John.

No, I meant what I said - from about 4 to about 8. I have about 16g of lead (or about 32" of 0.5"-wide tape) on the hoop. The swingweight is about average for the top echelon of ATP pros.

Having added mass in the top 2/3 of the hoop (with a little higher concentration near the tip) helps give a more even ball response over the entire string bed, which is why pros like Safin and Agassi prefer to use this style of weighting.

The swingweight is still much, much lower than the old wood racquets (which were at about 450), but the racquet is much more stable with more control than modern stock racquets.

IN210S
12-21-2006, 09:10 AM
Travlr,
Great thread.
If you have the time, could you comment on the possible alterations for an fischer mspeed 98. I rely on a powerful serve, have a good kick and slice (I'm lefty) and love to volley. My forehand tends to set up most of my points and my weakness is the old serve return. any possible suggestions to maximize the racquet so that the rest is left to me? Your response would be greatly appreciate. thank you.

p.s. if you do not feel this racquet is amenable to serious customization, I also play with the o3tour 100. thanks.

LuckyR
12-21-2006, 11:41 AM
Yes. The longer balance point improved my serve. And the swingweight is a little higher (slightly different base swingweight and longer balance on this frame). And the tension is a little lower.

Sorry to Nickel and Dime you with little questions but, I am currently using the Safin setup mostly for volleys and the heavy ground strokes. Yes, my serve is way heavier too. But I am a bit reticent to start doing surgery on my stick's in***** without your description of the effect on volleys and groundies from moving from the "Safin" to your current stick (you mentioned you did it for your serve).

Ljubicic for number1
12-21-2006, 12:12 PM
No, I meant what I said - from about 4 to about 8. I have about 16g of lead (or about 32" of 0.5"-wide tape) on the hoop. The swingweight is about average for the top echelon of ATP pros.

Having added mass in the top 2/3 of the hoop (with a little higher concentration near the tip) helps give a more even ball response over the entire string bed, which is why pros like Safin and Agassi prefer to use this style of weighting.

The swingweight is still much, much lower than the old wood racquets (which were at about 450), but the racquet is much more stable with more control than modern stock racquets.

Travlerajm, I also have NXG OS "on the way" I can imagine this set up would greatly improve a flat serve but how does it effect a kicker? Can you still generate enough racquet head speed to get the balls kicking high? Is this the best set up you have found for topspin on groundies? I dont want to hit flat. Still ok for fast exchanges at net in doubles?

Thanks John.

Ljubicic for number1
12-25-2006, 11:06 PM
Travlerajm, Do you have any receipies for a Head FXP tour? I have tried the John Cauthern handle weight but ended up going back to stock. I am enjoying the frame as it is other than its a bit under powered especially on the serve. Mine has a half length heatshrink on the handle adding about 12gms.

What about a N6.1 95?

!Tym
12-26-2006, 01:48 AM
sorry stricken from record

travlerajm
12-26-2006, 03:13 PM
Sorry to Nickel and Dime you with little questions but, I am currently using the Safin setup mostly for volleys and the heavy ground strokes. Yes, my serve is way heavier too. But I am a bit reticent to start doing surgery on my stick's in***** without your description of the effect on volleys and groundies from moving from the "Safin" to your current stick (you mentioned you did it for your serve).

Moving the balance point up slightly by repositioning a few grams of handle mass from butt to upper handle won't hurt your volleys.

It will affect the power level of your groundstrokes slightly, so may need to tune the power level.

If you groundstrokes feel a little overpowered or difficult to control and landing long, add weight at 12 in 0.5g increments until your depth is just right.

If your groundstrokes feel a little underpowered or "too heavy" and landing short, subtract weight from 12 in 0.5g increments.

travlerajm
12-26-2006, 03:28 PM
Travlerajm, I also have NXG OS "on the way" I can imagine this set up would greatly improve a flat serve but how does it effect a kicker? Can you still generate enough racquet head speed to get the balls kicking high? Is this the best set up you have found for topspin on groundies? I dont want to hit flat. Still ok for fast exchanges at net in doubles?

Thanks John.

My current setup with the NXG OS is the best I've found for groundstrokes. The NXG is extremely spin friendly. This setup excels for spin serves. Still solid for flat serves, but the racquet is so spin-friendly that your serve will have some spin o it no matter how flat you try to hit it.

The swingweight is not an issue for net exchanges in doubles, and the added mass makes it very stable for volleys.

Of course, the ideal volley racquet would be a little stiffer. Stiffer racquets have better directional precision because the frame does not deflect. But frame deflection is what makes flexible frames like the NXG so spin-friendly, and a stiffer frame will not allow you to hit the "Federer" angles and dippers that the NXG is so perfect for. So it's a tradeoff.

Ljubicic for number1
12-26-2006, 03:53 PM
Thanks for the reply Travlerajm, Looking forward to playing around with the NXG after I get familiar with it in stock form first. Any ideas on the FXP Rad tour?

John.

Ljubicic for number1
12-30-2006, 05:02 AM
Travler. If I was to modify my NXG by adding a overgrip plus adding 14gm's of lead at the 64cm mark "triple braid points" it would give me a static weight of 357gms - Balance @ 32.29cm and a SW of 368.82. "very similar specs to your set up.

Do you think this set up would play like yours or do you think the weight needs to be spread out like your set up?

Thanks in advance John.

Ljubicic for number1
01-06-2007, 03:56 AM
Travler, May I ask what you thought of the NXG in stock form?

I now have mine and it seems heavier than advertised, weighing in at 348gms strung and 354 with a overgrip.

I must say that I am not a fan of it so far. It turned up strung with Duraflex at what seemed like 65 - 67lbs or there abouts, I could not produce any top spin with this set up for some reason, except on kick serves.

I restrung with cyberflash at 58 which increased the top spin dramatically but it was overpowered still. "I know it was too low a tension for a OS"

I have now restrung with Signum PPP at 63lbs but am yet to test it.

I dont think this thing is going to be any good for me as I lose control with the massive flex and it feels awkwardly long for some reason even though I am accoustomed to 27 1/2 inch frames. It seems to have a very long throat where as my other 27 1/2's have the hoop extended down the throat.

Your thoughts on the stock frame would be appreciated.

Richard Parnell
01-06-2007, 10:44 AM
Hi Travler,
Where are you getting your weights and swing weights from (for the different players) ??
Richard

jace112
01-06-2007, 11:10 AM
Hi Travler,
Where are you getting your weights and swing weights from (for the different players) ??
Richard
I guess from Jura
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=48880
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=49034

Amone
01-07-2007, 07:57 AM
Hi Travler,
Where are you getting your weights and swing weights from (for the different players) ??
Richard

His weights are accurate, from Jura. His swingweights are largely speculated over. Many he makes an educated guess on, to which people reply that he's wrong by roughly 20 points, unstrung. He replies that he uses strung specs. So he's usually within a few points strung. A lot of numbers were given to him by people like ThomasMartinez, who string and match racquets for the pros.

travlerajm
01-07-2007, 08:07 AM
Travler. If I was to modify my NXG by adding a overgrip plus adding 14gm's of lead at the 64cm mark "triple braid points" it would give me a static weight of 357gms - Balance @ 32.29cm and a SW of 368.82. "very similar specs to your set up.

Do you think this set up would play like yours or do you think the weight needs to be spread out like your set up?

Thanks in advance John.

As long as you find SW2 correctly, it will play fairly well. However, one of the reasons why my current setup feels perfected is that the hoop weight seems tob distributed in a way that evens out the power level across the stringbed.

travlerajm
01-07-2007, 08:36 AM
Travler, May I ask what you thought of the NXG in stock form?

I now have mine and it seems heavier than advertised, weighing in at 348gms strung and 354 with a overgrip.

I must say that I am not a fan of it so far. It turned up strung with Duraflex at what seemed like 65 - 67lbs or there abouts, I could not produce any top spin with this set up for some reason, except on kick serves.

I restrung with cyberflash at 58 which increased the top spin dramatically but it was overpowered still. "I know it was too low a tension for a OS"

I have now restrung with Signum PPP at 63lbs but am yet to test it.

I dont think this thing is going to be any good for me as I lose control with the massive flex and it feels awkwardly long for some reason even though I am accoustomed to 27 1/2 inch frames. It seems to have a very long throat where as my other 27 1/2's have the hoop extended down the throat.

Your thoughts on the stock frame would be appreciated.


In stock form, I found the NXG OS to have a very soft and flexy feel, and to be very spin friendly. With a multi, I found the power level felt about right at 64 lbs. I personally feel like Kevlar hybrids give me the most spin in low swingweight (stock) setups, and that poly's are more appropriate for SW2 setups. But I still prefer the more even ball response of Kevlar hybrid in SW2 setups also - it's just my personal preference.

I found the stock NXG to be excellent for my 2hb. For my forehand, it did feel a little like you describe (awkward). It almost felt like I should be choking up. The serve had a similar issue. I could not get good control unless I choked up by 1/2 inch. The issue turned out to be a weight distribution problem that was fixed with lead (the balance is excessively HL) and had nothing to do with the length.

I have found that stock NXGs can have high variance in the weight of the handle. I suspect that it's because the process for filling the foam handle is not very consistent. I needed to add several grams to the mid and upper handle of one of mine to match the weight and balance of the other (the starting sw seemed to be the same). Also, I have removed the red silicone cross-shaped rubber butt insert from both of my frames, which seems to improve performance regardless of how much weight I use in the hoop.

WhiteSox05CA
01-07-2007, 08:56 AM
I thought this theory was being replaced by something much better in the making?