Does head heavy suit flat hitters better?

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by DoctorBackhand, Feb 14, 2013.

?

Which kind of player benefits from HH rackets?

  1. Flat hitters

    7 vote(s)
    21.9%
  2. Junk ballers

    6 vote(s)
    18.8%
  3. Serve n volleyer/ chip n charger

    6 vote(s)
    18.8%
  4. heavy topspinner

    13 vote(s)
    40.6%
  1. DoctorBackhand

    DoctorBackhand Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    New York
    I was looking some old TW reviews today on Google (got really bored). I was looking mostly at the old Wilson hammer rackets, namely the 6.2, 5.8, and 5.3, and a common thread across all of the reviews was that the play testers had difficulty hitting heavy spin with these rackets. The more head heavy the rackets was, the more pronounced this seemed to be.

    So, to break the monotony of this board, I pose this question to you: Upon reading the reviews of these rackets, do you feel that HH is better suited to flat hitters (and old school serve and volleyers while we're at it since volleys scored kind of high on these reviews)?

    http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Reviews/53OS/53OSReview.html
    http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Reviews/58/58Review.html
    http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/reviews/h62/h62review.html
    http://tenniswarehouse.com/Reviews/H52/H52Review.html
     
    #1
  2. 1980

    1980 New User

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    I, for one, do believe that to be true. If anything they aren't as conducive to hitting a heavy spin ball because they are harder to generate good racquet head speed with. Head heavy racquets also have a solid plow through feeling that you just don't get from the lighter frames. As to serve and volley? I don't know. The best serve and volley players all seem to use head heavy racquets, that's not to say they couldn't do just as well with an aeropro drive. I think that comes down to sheer ability more than anything. It would make sense that head heavier racquets might not be pushed around as easily at the net. They definitely have a stable feeling about them.
     
    #2
  3. DoctorBackhand

    DoctorBackhand Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    New York
    I've noticed that about them. It makes it much easier to volley (the few times I actually choose to go to net) when the racket doesn't get pushed back by the ball.
     
    #3
  4. sportlerin

    sportlerin New User

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    74
    I don't know about flat hitting, but I would say head-heavy racquets do not benefit volleyers. Unless you develop your technique to suit the racquet.

    In my experience with head-heavy racquets, I always found them much more susceptible to getting snapped back by the ball. Or rather, the wrist got easily snapped back. With a head-light racquet, the weight is at the base where you're gripping it, this makes it much more stable when stationary.

    THis has been my experience, and I would think the laws of physics support it as well.
     
    #4
  5. tball

    tball Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    782
    They benefit hitters who generate power by the rotation of the torso (as opposed to those who arm the ball, or use wrist). They also favour those who rely on crushing serves to win points, and on intercepting ball mid-air on approach shots. (Not so good at the net, since they are slow to maneuver). -- All traits of the old school of tennis.

    Those racquets, however, can be successfully adopted to "modern" game.
    When counter-balanced in the buttcap, they create extreme polarization.
    They feel quite different from uniformly weighted racquets, and can produce surpising amounts of power and spin.
     
    #5
  6. DoctorBackhand

    DoctorBackhand Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    New York
    That's a pretty interesting take on it. I was hoping to get these kinds of answers.

    So can you explain to me why not many of the higher level players on this board don't take to HH rackets? I don't normally like using pros as examples of things, but if they use rackets that are weighted more towards the head (thinking Sampras specifically), why don't we use more head weighted rackets. It seems like a much better alternative to that swingweight 2 concept.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2013
    #6
  7. lstewart

    lstewart Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Messages:
    346
    I have fairly classic strokes... do hit topspin, but with old school form. I've experimented alot with adding weight to frames the past couple of months. I've found my flat to topspin groundstrokes (as well as my serve) got better as I added more weight at 12. I was making the racket more head heavy by doing this. At some point it got to be too much, and shots were sailing long. I did not find it benefited volleys. I eventually arrived at a system I am using, and the rackets are a little head heavy, but not too much so.
     
    #7
  8. DoctorBackhand

    DoctorBackhand Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    New York
    Which frames? For discussion purposes.
     
    #8
  9. TennisCJC

    TennisCJC Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,277
    Carlos Moya played a HH racket and he hit tremendous topspin. Rafa Nadal's racket is around 3-4 points HL but more HH than most pros and he hits tremendous top.

    Venus and Serena Williams hit moderate top to flat and they play with even or HH rackets.

    So, I think it depend more on style and swing pattern than type of racket.

    Personally, I think HH rackets suck and would not use one.
     
    #9
  10. tball

    tball Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    782
    It is easier to play with HL racquets. Sure, lacking power, compared to HH racquet, but easier to hit all kinds of shots, on the run or stetched out, easier to direct the ball from side to side and control depth -- overall resulting in a more consistent game (with fewer spectacular killer shots perhaps).

    Most people start there, and start adding weight to the head and handle as their strength impoves -- to gain more power -- until they reach a natural stopping point. Some will end up HH, some with end up Even, some will go for the racquets which are extremely HL. This is no universal advantage to any particular setup: you'll gain in some areas, lose in others.

    HH setups have their pluses, but they are not overwhelmingly better than anything else. Some people can benefit (big servers, big back-swingers). Yet for some people/styles of play they can even be disastrous.
     
    #10
  11. Power Player

    Power Player G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,761
    Location:
    On my iPhone
    My racquets are 1-2 pts HL and I prefer it. I hit with a lot of topspin, and it seems to help with that.

    The main advantage of this balance is you can use lighter racquets and still plow the ball.
     
    #11
  12. pkshooter

    pkshooter Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    588
    Location:
    In front of the TV
    Hh sucks for everything
     
    #12
  13. [d]ragon

    [d]ragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,466
    There seems to be this general "HH/even is bad, HL good" consensus. Remember that balance only tells one part of the story. Most HH racquets are also very light

    IIRC, Nadal's frames are fairly even, almost HH (or used to be)
     
    #13
  14. DoctorBackhand

    DoctorBackhand Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    New York
    I noticed. I was hoping that if people didn't have anything constructive to say, they would simply avoid posting useless clutter in this thread. Hopefully we can discuss something that isn't usually talked about here.

    Anyway, heavy top spinners seem to be ahead in the poll. I wonder why?
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2013
    #14
  15. Irakli

    Irakli Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2010
    Messages:
    110
    Can't agree more. :)

    Irakli
     
    #15
  16. Relinquis

    Relinquis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,336
    Location:
    On the courts; hard & clay ...
    3 points head light is not head heavy.

    i'm not sure that Sampras' stick was head heavy. i know it was heavily leaded, but am not sure the balance was head heavy. Anyone know for sure?!

    The only benefits i can see for head heavy sticks is for those who cannot (or don't want to) generate racquet head speed on their own and need a pendulum effect to benefit from the extra swing weight.. Or.. those who want a lighter static weight stick but still decent swing weight.
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013
    #16
  17. lstewart

    lstewart Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Messages:
    346
    Doctor, I've taken the head Radical Team and weighted it. It is a fairly flexible 102 head frame with a standard strung weight of 10.3. I'm adding weight in both the head with lead tape, and the handle. Actually taping nickels just above the grip, and have three wraps of tourna grip. Takes the weight to 12.0 ounces.
     
    #17
  18. matchmaker

    matchmaker Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    4,040
    I don't think Sampras' stick was head heavy. It was close to even balance I remember from someone who posted his specs.
     
    #18

Share This Page