Dilemma of a player's racquet?

[Golden Retriever]

You get more control from a player's racquet BUT you have to swing faster at the same time and swinging faster makes you lose control so your gain in control from the racquet will be lost from swinging faster. So in reality you don't gain any control at all from the racquet because that gain in control is mitigated by you having to swing faster. IF that's the case why bother playing with a player's racquet?

 

[OnyxZ28]

Power is not necessarily generated from a faster swing, nor is a faster swing sufficient to generate power.

 

[El Diablo]

One important aspect of "control" is keeping the ball in play. As the name of the game lately is topspin, swinging faster imparts more topspin which tends to keep the ball from going long, which means more control. If you like doubles, that fast-swing topspin enables you to hit at the other guys' feet (a form of "control" you would not otherwise enjoy) and prevent them from hitting volleys down your throat. Swinging fast is good; this surely explains why the best players do it.

 

[tennisboy87]

Swinging fast without rushing or getting yourself out of balance or out of control is the way to control the ball with spin. You should try and swing fast without getting yourself out of whack.

 

[Flatspin]

You are correct in some ways. It's a myth that if one purchases a players racquet that, somehow, it will cure hitting the ball inaccurately. In fact, "players" racquets will require better stroke mechanics, faster swing, sound racquet preparation, better foot-work and hitting the sweet spot accurately. It seems that many have the wrong thought process regarding a "players racquet". There are many tennis players that play excellent tennis with frames that would fall outside of the general guidelines that define the "players" racquet. It well may be true that a "players" racquet is not a good choice for you.

 

[b.]

First hits with 80something" woodie (of unknown producer), Wilson Rally and T3000 seem to have helped me. Since than I never ever consider headsize as more or less of hitting area. Just feel that comes of it.

I derive power from swing speed. And I can achieve that only with mid swing weighted stick. Since I feel nice swinging fast, I need low powered racquet.

If you have several balls of the same size but different weights, you will find out that one of them you can hit the farthest. With lighter than optimal you will be able to achieve max speed, but kinetic energy (of the ball) will be lower due to lower mass (since you can not increase your swing speed indefinitely). Mass higher than optimal will slow your swing.

Optimum depends on your natural swing speed and strength. So it is individual.

In martial arts you can learn that there is maximal and optimal movement speed for every individual. At optimal speed you achieve best preciseness of your movements, and by training you can get it to some higher level, but more is achieved by learning to move smoothly, with better anticipation, preparation and timing in general. Just like in tennis.

If we take that to be true, every individual needs specific racquet, and there is not "one fits all".

 

[spinbalz]

So true, B.

 

[Brent Pederson]

Wow, b, that was all pretty darned profound for a lowly tennis board, but you nailed it.

From my money, I'd rather have a slightly heavier racket, which means, if anything, I'll have a more stable platform to hit from, as well as a smoother feeling of weight to swing. I find that with too light a racket, under, say 11 ounces or so, makes it hard to feel the centrifugal force in your hand when you swing it.

 

[schange50]

Swing speed + timing = desired control

 

[annihilatorpro]

Lighter rackets require you to swing faster because there is less mass. I could go into a bunch of explanations about why, using kinematics, but I'm not. Basically, the more massive the racket, the more energy it can impart on the ball. Lighter rackets have to compensate for the lack of mass by being stiffer to impart more energy, and that leads to tennis elbow etc, but that's another topic.

A players racket that is relatively stiff and containing lots of mass will be very powerful. If swung at the same velocity, the players racket will outpace the tweener, unless the tweener is significantly stiffer. The mass of the ball will also have less affect on the deceleration of the racket after impact if the racket is hefty (this also has to do with tennis elbow)

There are actually so many factors to all this, but basically, if one has sound mechanics, a players racket is better.

 

[james_R]

An interesting discussion and one that has been relevant to me recently. I tried some 'tweener' frames but have found the most power from a Dunlop HM200G, with even balance and high mass in the head area. With good preparation I can hit much more powerfully off the ground and in particular the serve compared with lighter racquets. I also agree that higher mass tends to smooth things out and thus help you towards better stroke production as you can 'feel' the racquet more. Low mass racquets seem to 'twist' or wobble on impact. So even with a faster swing, chances are with the same effort with light vs heavier frames the control is reduced and quality of shot poorer. I dont think heavier frames by themselves make you play better, but if willing to persue them and get around the initial difficalty of weight, you they can help you to improve.

 

[b.]

Well, like clever people on this board already have said - the heaviest one can handle. Red and green being equally important.
I misjudged my abilities and bought LM Prestige. Maybe it is a specimen (head) heavier that average, or whatever. On the first week I was very happy with it. But it was better than average week for me. Later I noticed lack of power. Not so much in a ball speed as in a slower head. Since I liked racquet in general, I stripped CAP grommets a bit, and now I like it better. Feelwise - I now feel the ball better, because ball used do bounce of heavy head like it was the wall (I am exaggerating to make a point). Now the bounce "shock" is unmasked.

After it I bought RDX500. I still didn't have a chance to try it properly - working hours, bed weather, a dusk of tennis season. I have emotional issues with Yonex, since it was the longest my racquet of choice. Just like Silent Bob noted in "Best Racket Company" thread under point 2.

From a brief trial, it was a good choice. Now I have a luxury option to choose between two good racquets according to wishes.

And maybe it will keep me from "Benjamin syndrome" :wink: !

Sorry, Brent. I didn't mean to be pretentious. I am just trying to be clear when communicate to a large group of people. It's different then talking to "epsilon surrounding" frieds.

 

[Jay34]

to use a "players racquet" correctly you need the strokes..thats why they're called players racquets.

 

[b.]

Good strokes, of course.

But good strokes are one thing, strenght another, and player's racquets are wide group.

This summer I wached one very nice girl's training, ranked on WTA. I can lift her with all equipment using one hand, but on the court she would kick my behind with eyes closed.

She HAS player's strokes and everything, but she can not play with LM Prestige. (She tried).

I almost have player's strokes, and can play with LM Prestige if I play more frequently. Well, I can play with LM P. now, but it was more convenient to cut s.w. a bit.