Head Heavy, is this correct?

Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by blubber, Aug 28, 2006.

  1. blubber

    blubber Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    380
    I was reading some tennis mags at Barnes and Noble and in Smash they had a little article about how **** customizes the racquets of Sharapova, Roddick, Agassi, and Davenport. According to the article all of the above players have **** balance their racquets head heavy or slightly head heavy. Is this right?
     
    #1
  2. thebosher

    thebosher New User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    98
    Location:
    Northeast USA
    yes it is correct
     
    #2
  3. mikky

    mikky New User

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    14
    They most likely do, but it's whats best for them...
     
    #3
  4. vinnier6

    vinnier6 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    1,378
    if you could generate the racquet head speed that they do and also do it with the accuracy that they do, then you too could have a head heavy balance....
     
    #4
  5. AUGUSTA

    AUGUSTA New User

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    34
    good question, blubber. I also noticed the article. TW and this message board lead you to think the better the player, the more head light the racquet. I hope more people comment on this.
     
    #5
  6. vinnier6

    vinnier6 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    1,378
    the pros listed are all baseliners...heavy hitting baseliners usually prefer a head heavy balance to put pace on the ball...
     
    #6
  7. AJK1

    AJK1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,219
    I decided to change to a 2pt HL balance and it feels so much better than 8-12 HL on other racquets i've used. I've heard most pros are never over 2 or 3 pts HL.
     
    #7
  8. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Actually, the data show that the better the player, the more head heavy the racquet:

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=116457
     
    #8
  9. Topaz

    Topaz Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Messages:
    6,782
    Wow, I'm kind of surprised by this...I always assumed that the pros played head light racquets.

    I thought head heavy racquets were automatically put in the 'tweener category?

    I use a LM 5 (very head heavy), and I was considering going to something more balanced but also was hedging against since I've had good success with this racquet.
     
    #9
  10. FormerPro

    FormerPro New User

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    38
    Rodick's frame is headlight...

    and I talked to his brother today at the Open about his frame. He is not using the Cortex system, nor do his frames have his signature on them like the new version that is offered at retail.
     
    #10
  11. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    The pros all use HL racquets, but they are much more HH than you would expect. Agassi for example, is at 12.7 oz. and a 13.0" balance point. It's 4 pts HL, but that's still very HH compared to any stock racquet of that weight.
     
    #11
  12. chess9

    chess9 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,274
    Location:
    1.d4
    Travelerajm:

    I really think you should put this into English for the kids and lesser mortals. You SEEM to be saying a head heavy racket, like a Hammer, is the way the pros weight up their sticks, BUT you are actually saying about 4 pts. head light is what they are doing. Right? :)

    I don't think the message is getting across to some of the newbies. :)

    Something else. A lot of these folks should not be playing with head heavy racquets if they have any lingering shoulder, wrist, or elbow problems, IMHO. And, kids should be slow to lead up their racquet, i.e. do it gradually, it at all.

    -Robert
     
    #12
  13. thomas martinez

    thomas martinez Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,135
    Location:
    New York
    What you commonly see for balances on the men's side is at a quick guess without averaging all the data I've taken through the years, is between 30.7-31.6 cm for the balances. The big difference is swingweight. Many players use a heavier swingweight compared to stock, some slightly more, some absurdly more like Murray. His is the highest I've ever recorded. Though in his case, he has a higher balance to go with that, 32 something cm. Marat, he's a 31 something balance, but a swingweight not that far off from stock. Doesn't necessarily mean the better the player the higher the balance. Or the higher the swingweight. A guy on the rise like Verdasco, last I took some data from him, his frames wihtout string or overgrip were about 320g in weight and a 31 something balance if I remember right,b ut a low swingweight. Then there are some other madmen like Gaudio who have a beefy static weight, one of the highest on tour, a low balance sub 31 cm, but a high swingweight.
     
    #13
  14. ashpookie

    ashpookie Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    170
    The book Technical Tennis says that "most professional players prefer heavy, head heavy racquets". The book also says that head heavy racquets reduce shock to the arm.
     
    #14
  15. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,828

    This really explains why so many loved the ground stokes of the Maxply but it sucked to serve with lol
     
    #15
  16. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    According to Jura's data, this is correct as long as you are referring to unstrung balances. The average strung balance is about 12.6" (32.0 cm), with the average strung weight about 12.5 oz. (355 g).
     
    #16
  17. thomas martinez

    thomas martinez Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,135
    Location:
    New York
    A strung BP in the end means little. Especially if a player is trying out a different type of string. So yes, those are of course unstrung. And again, your theories and postulates do not account for swingweights.
     
    #17
  18. Z-Man

    Z-Man Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    Let's get something straight: Other than Moya and maybe a few others, almost all pros use frames that are balanced headlight, meaning the balance point is closer to the handle than to the head. They may have weight added to the head to make the frame less headlight, but they still don't get into head-heavy territory. Plus, they counterweight some of that head weight with added weight in the handle.

    So although it's correct to say they have their frames customized to be less headlight, they are not by any means head heavy. An example of a head-heavy frame would be a TT Bandit or one of those butterfly nets your grandmother uses.
     
    #18
  19. Belafonte

    Belafonte New User

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    77
    does this nearly head heavy, but still head light still go for one handers on tour? i think i remember only two handers being mentioned
     
    #19
  20. tennissavy

    tennissavy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,839
    I have held vaidisova's racquet and Haynes' racquet. Both were VERY headlight in balance.
     
    #20
  21. Steve Huff

    Steve Huff Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,263
    Tom, so a player like Gaudio has nearly all the weight at the ends (handle and head), wheres Verdasco has more weight in the handle and shaft. Players like Murray must use a very heavy (static weight) racket. With Murray, I'm not surprised. He gets his racket speed from his long arms and long swing. Verdasco--a shorter, more compact, more wristy swing. Tom brings out a good point that many overlook, and that's about where the weight is placed along the length of the racket.
     
    #21
  22. Roforot

    Roforot Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,196
    I've also read through Technical Tennis and it is an interesting and useful resource. In brief, you gain more power and less shock by adding weight to the head... however, this may be offset by a decrease in swing speed especially in the serve. So there's a happy medium for which you can serve well, and swing and not be late, but also have stability/less shock.
    The pros have tremendous racquet head speed so they can afford to use a higher swingweight if they like.

    It is important to also consider the cons to leading up the head and Racquetresearch is a good site to look through. They recommend heavy racquets but as headlight as possible. One concern is that if you try to force/muscle a stroke (esp. serve) you can overload a muscle and cause injury.

    Some of Traveljam's posts on polarization are also helpful. I did not consider that aspect of the racquet, but found afterwards that I really prefer polarized racquets, especially for serving.
     
    #22
  23. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,828

    Yea but then the non-polarized are way more stable on ground stokes, how can we wing lol:rolleyes:
     
    #23
  24. Topaz

    Topaz Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Messages:
    6,782
    Okay, very interesting stuff...it is making more sense to me now.
     
    #24
  25. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    In general, yes. But it would be interesting to compare the specs for all the pros and see if there is any significant difference between 1hb and 2hb player racquet specs. I might tackle that when I have some spare time and energy.
     
    #25

Share This Page