Advantages of a Small head size VS Big head size.... no punt intended :-)

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by VanGuy10, Apr 14, 2006.

  1. VanGuy10

    VanGuy10 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    118
    I currently play with a 90 square inch frame, and plan to stick to it for quite some time. But everywhere I turn... people keep saying that my raquet sucks. I always tell them its just becuase they can't play with it. They always have those 100+ frames, and I just wanted to know the advantages of having a smaller head size versus a larger head size. I know its partly becuase of the control, and power. But I've always been a firm believer that to be a true tennis power, you should always be able to generate your own power, not need a raquet to create it for you. Dunno if I make any sense... but I just wanted to know what people thought :confused:
     
    #1
  2. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,460
    OH NO!!! Here we go again!! :(

    Just be ready for some nasty arguments to ensue.

    (BTW, if you do a search you'll see that there's been many, many...shall we say "heated"?......discussions on this board on this very subject since the beginning of time.)

    Now better put that flak jacket on. ;)
     
    #2
  3. VanGuy10

    VanGuy10 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    118
    haha. thanks for the heads up. I will still stick with my 90 square inch frame 100% and say that they are better than the OS for sure :)
     
    #3
  4. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,460
    BTW, I agree with everything that you said above.

    Oh, and, welcome to the board!!!! :D
     
    #4
  5. chess9

    chess9 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,274
    Location:
    1.d4
    Ignore Breakpoint. He is a racquet snob. Simply put your hands up, walk into Sports Authority and get yourself something nice in a 135 square inch, 2 oz. racquet-head heavy of course. :)

    -Robert
     
    #5
  6. Kevo

    Kevo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,157
    I only started playing with a mid about a year ago. Before that it was MP and in my early years a 110". However, I am playing better now with the mid. I think the benefits are more control, accuracy, and touch. Of course that goes with less power, more footwork needed, and additional weight so it's generally less maneuverable. However for me the tradeoff is worth it, because I am beginning to be able to keep the ball inside those white lines. :)
     
    #6
  7. samster

    samster Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,017
    Yeah, there was a very long thread (now deleted) about Midsize vs. Midplus not too long ago.

    I would just say use whichever racket you like. If you are happy with it, who cares about what other people say. Be yourself, be unique!
     
    #7
  8. Galactus

    Galactus Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,291
    Use whatever racquet improves your game and allows you to play injury-free...but don't just depend on that alone.
     
    #8
  9. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    Well, given that there's plentiful info on the TW main site (the Learning Centre) as well as in almost every 'how to play tennis' book published I think you'd have been better off looking in one of those two places for an answer.
     
    #9
  10. badger_badger

    badger_badger New User

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2006
    Messages:
    45
    OP, what pun are you talking about
     
    #10
  11. basil J

    basil J Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,464
    Location:
    boston area
    I agree. Go with whatever works for you. I like a 95" head, but have successfully used 90" 100" and 102" frames in the past with no problem. I like a heavier frame, and usually the smaller head frames are also heavier, so my options are in a sense, limited to whatever headsizes are available over 11.7 oz., which are usually 100" or smaller. I think weight is more important than headsize. Headsize is easier to adjust to than swing weight IMO...
     
    #11
  12. Morpheus

    Morpheus Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,136
    I believe he meant double entendre...
     
    #12
  13. Aeropro joe

    Aeropro joe Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    420
    i have an assortment of frames that vary from 90sq in. to 110sq in. and honestly can change from frame to frame without much trouble. smaller headsize rackets usually offer less power at slower swingspeeds, more control, and decreased sweetspot. midplus rackets are a combination of the power and eazy to find sweetspot of an oversize, with the control of a midsize. and oversize frames are usually the most powerful at slower swingspeds, the biggest sweetspot and the least amount of control. also midsize frames tend to be the heaviest with the highest swingweight. generally i choose my mid or midplus frames such as my prestige (93sq in.), radical(98sq in.), or mfil 200(95sq in.) for singles play, and for doubles i will use my radical or lm fire(102sq in.)
     
    #13
  14. Marius_Hancu

    Marius_Hancu G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    17,810
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    try for yourself, you can buy a 2nd hand OS for under $50 for sure
     
    #14
  15. yonex90

    yonex90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    146
    Beat all of the guys who talk **** about your racquet. That will shut em up. No need to explain then.:cool:
     
    #15
  16. Honestlybad

    Honestlybad Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    284
    I'm not getting into this argument again :)
     
    #16
  17. ta11geese3

    ta11geese3 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    487
    How about for 1hb? Today I decided to hit with my brother's n61 95 after hitting for about an hour with my tweener pk 15g. And the difference for my 1hb was sick... my bh was so much more solid and I was hitting with confidence. Is the difference due to head size (95 vs 105)? Or is it due to the 61 being a more stable stick/some other factors?
     
    #17
  18. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,460
    It has to do with the smaller headsize, the heavier static weight, the higher swingweight, and that the n6.1 95 is a stable racquet.
     
    #18
  19. Take2

    Take2 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    48
    It comes down to the "W" versus the "F" factors. The Win versus the Fun.

    You will Win more easily when using a larger size racket head when strung appropriately to control the power.

    You will have more Fun when using a smaller size racket head when your fitness and strength are such that you can handle the weight. You will beat lesser and equals badly. But, you'll struggle with better players.
     
    #19
  20. Captain America

    Captain America Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    143
    Just one guy's 2-hour experiment using a smaller head size....

    Played a match yesterday and broke the strings of my NPro Surge (100in) in warmup. Had my wife's NTour (95in) with me as a spare. I definitely noticed the difference at first - a few more off-center shots on my returns (particularly backhand) and hitting on the run where more precision was required. After the first few games I realized I needed to concentrate more on my footwork to get into position more quickly and ensure the right position of the racquet head at contact. Smooth sailing after that. I have to say I enjoyed playing with the NTour and felt that the racquet offered a bit more control than the Surge without any noticeable drop in power. I may be borrowing my wife's racquet more often....
     
    #20
  21. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    Being new to the board such as yourself, I do not know what to expect from people with different opinions on the subject, but here goes.

    I think in general smaller head sizes equate to smaller sweet spots (the optimum spot to get the best hit on any given stroke). There is a reason why most pros play with smaller head sizes compared to the general public, and it is because their strokes are much more consistent, and they can hit the smaller sweet spot more often than the average player. I play with a 95 ' inch head, but I've demo'd with a much larger head, and have played with a T-2000 for fun as well. The thing I find with playing with a small head is that it forces you to concentrate more in an effort to hit the smaller sweet spot. So when I have taken out the T-2000 (which I bought for fun) it takes better footwork to get in position, and much better timing to strike the ball properly. Mis-hits are a lost point, not a weak hit that still goes over the net and gives you a chance to stay in the point. How Jimmy Connors and his contemporaries played and won so much with tiny head rackets is something to be respected.

    As we get older our reactions slow a bit, we lose a half step, and yes our eyes are not as sharp. Having a larger head helps to compensate for the inevitable ravages of time, and helps to even the playing field. If you were a 5.0 player (A-player) your long stokes will always be to long to go for one of those giant head rackets because they typically generate too much power. However, everyone can benefit from a larger sweet spot based on the aforementioned.

    A final comment would be that just because you play with a small head does not mean that you are a better player. I know a player who uses Pete's old Prostaff and feels he is good enough to play with it. While he is a decent player, it is the wrong racket for him on several different levels. However he pulls it out with pride as if to say that because he uses such a racket, that it shows how good of a player he is.

    If you are a top level player and a 90' head suits you then by all means continue to play with it. As I said, it does make you work more for the best shot, so that in itself might make it worth playing with. In my case, the largest head I feel comfortable with is a 98' which I recently tried in the Wilson nBlade which I am actually considering. Other than being a little light for me (I'll add some weight if needed) and not having the PWS of other Wilson rackets, I enjoyed the feel of it.

    Hopefully I did not offend anyone with my opinion, but if so, you are welcome to express your differing opinion.

     
    #21
  22. louis netman

    louis netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,386
    Location:
    SoCal
    Excellent debut post and welcome to the TW message boards, Eviscerator. Hoping that you may contribute more in the future...
     
    #22
  23. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    Thanks for the welcome and kind words. I visit several forums, and happened upon this one today. Depending on the forums membership and quality of posts, I might very well enjoy posting here since I enjoy tennis so much.
     
    #23
  24. tennis_nerd22

    tennis_nerd22 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,240
    Location:
    Canada
    ya! :D
     
    #24

Share This Page