Pro Swingweight List

Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by travlerajm, Dec 24, 2006.

  1. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    These pro swingweights have been calculated from Jura's list using a formula that takes into account mass, balance, head size, string tension, string gauge, string type, the typical weight distribution of players frames, and the typical locations for lead tape customization. The constants for the formula were calibrated using known measured player swingweights as reference points. So these figures are essentially just interpolation between know data points.

    If any pro stringers can contribute additional known pro swingweight measurements, please contribute them in this thread, and I will take them into account to refine the formula to make the list more accurate.


    The results have been rounded to the nearest 5 kg-cm^2.

    moya 430
    mantilla 395
    patience 390
    knowle 390
    kiefer 390
    benneteau 385
    kuerten 385
    ventura 380
    koubek 380
    soderling 380
    robredo 380
    agassi 380
    ferrer 375
    sluiter 375
    sanguinetti 375
    grosjean 375
    ginepri 370
    andreev 370
    mathieu 370
    nadal 370
    sanchez 370
    gaudio 370
    canas 370
    sargsian 370
    wawrinka 370
    saretta 365
    serra 365
    monaco 365
    massu 365
    karlovic 365
    luczak 365
    vliegen 360
    bhupathi 360
    saulnier 360
    garcia-lopez 360
    roger-vasselin 360
    rusedski 360
    martin 360
    volandri 360
    woodbridge 360
    blake 360
    burgsmuller 360
    bjorkman 360
    davydenko 355
    mahut 355
    carlsen 355
    schuettler 355
    squillari 355
    haenel 355
    mirnyi 355
    nieminen 355
    nestor 350
    horna 350
    acasuso 350
    rochus,o 350
    ancic 350
    beck 350
    johansson 350
    devilder 350
    tipsarevic 350
    gonzalez 350
    arthurs 345
    llodra 345
    malisse 345
    wessels 345
    djokovic 345
    stepanek 345
    tursunov 345
    brian, b 345
    spadea 345
    tsonga 345
    ullyett 345
    di pasquale 340
    clement 340
    melzer 340
    brian, m 340
    srichaphan 340
    zimonjic 340
    black, w 335
    behrend 335
    schalken 325
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2006
    #1
  2. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,378
    Location:
    England
    Nice idea!

    Not sure how correct they are but if they are all good then yeh, that's some pretty useful info. :)
     
    #2
  3. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    Except for the guys at the extremes with weird balances (like Schalken and Moya) most of these should be accurate to within 5 kg-cm^2.

    Gaudio and Soderling probably have the frames that would "feel" heaviest because they have both very high static weight and high swingweight.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2006
    #3
  4. sypl

    sypl Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Messages:
    395
    Coo, for a guy with a low swingweight, Srichaphan sure can put some mustard on the ball.
     
    #4
  5. Sagittar

    Sagittar Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,692
    Location:
    center of the world
    guys but where is federer , safin , roddick , hewitt , nalbandian , murray .............. ??
    the list is great but anybody knows a tip about those rest ?
     
    #5
  6. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    I think Travlr concluded a while ago that Safin's swingweight was around 370.
     
    #6
  7. Sagittar

    Sagittar Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,692
    Location:
    center of the world
    Thnx man ..
     
    #7
  8. AJK1

    AJK1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,219
    I may be wrong, but they seem rather high.
     
    #8
  9. Nextman916

    Nextman916 Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,122
    I thought i heard somewhere the Moyo played with his PD almost stock?
     
    #9
  10. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    I think babolat makes a special pure drive for the moyo. I think it's got less static weight and such...
     
    #10
  11. Richie Rich

    Richie Rich Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,274
    i remember people saying it was based on the babolat soft drive with tons of lead in the upper hoop. really head heavy but not too heavy static weight wise. kind of like a hammer set up.
     
    #11
  12. PurePrestige

    PurePrestige Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    516
    Travelr concluded Safin's SW is 370?
    Didn't Thomas Martinez or someone say that his SW was actually only 15 pts higher than the stock Prestige Classic? As in like, 350? Hm?
    Somebody's wrong here, and if Thom is the one customizing Safins frames and says it, I think I believe him?
     
    #12
  13. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Dear PurePrestige, this is david aames's (I think that was his name, but I'm not sure) quote regarding Marat's racquet: "His frames start out lighter than a retail Prestige. However, with the addition of lead tape, a custom molded handle, etc, it ends up close to stock spec (330g/315mm), only with a swingweight 15 units higher than the average retail Prestige. Add strings, overgrip, and pads, and your right around 353g."

    From what I can deduce is that Safin's unstrung swingweight is around 338 (323+15). But, I think Safin's strung swingweight is still to be debated.

    Furthermore, I think I made a mistake in saying that travlr claimed that Safin's swingweight was 370. If you search for the thread, travlr said that he overestimated the swingweight, and that he estimates it to be around 360.
     
    #13
  14. Fedace

    Fedace Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    23,292
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    These swingweight seem awfully high to me. How does anyone swing a racket with 340 swingweight, amateur's rackets are in 320-330 range for even the so called player's frames. Swingweight of 340 is heavier than most Wood rackets. Wouldn't their arms fall off or get injured and how do they volley with that kind of swingweight, it seems impossible.:confused:
     
    #14
  15. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    Thomas was the source of my info for Safin. Thomas gave me his unstrung swingweight of 335. That puts his strung swigweight at about 365.
     
    #15
  16. p0w3r

    p0w3r Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    513
    Location:
    New York City
    they are pros. we are not.
     
    #16
  17. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    No, their arms do not fall off. Just like Columbus didn't fall off the edge of the Earth. And volleying is much easier with high swingweights due to the added stability. And wood racquets typically had swingweights of about 450, so modern pros are using much lower swingweights than that.

    A swingweight of 325 is not stable enough to handle the pace and spin of the modern pro game. Pros with swingweights lower than 345 tend to have poor rankings.

    So pros need to add weight to the hoop. Some pros with swingweights in the 345-355 range can still use their own strength to generate racquet head speed, but they need to counterweight in the butt to control the power.
    Pros with SW in this range tend to have decent rankings.

    Above 350, the swingweight is too high to swing with a "recreational style" swing. But if you use a high backswing and let the potential energy of the racquet do the work (like almost every pro does), then power is easily generated. Above 350, almost all pros are at SW2.

    Pros in the 355-365 range are in the max power zone. These pros either use very low-powered string tensions (like the doubles specialists) or combine high tension with flexible frames (like Blake). Otherwise, they would have too much power. But pros with SW in this over-powered range tend to have poor rankings.

    Players in the 365-385 range are in the optimal range for control. Above 360, counterweighting in the butt no longer reduces power, but weight in the hoop now can be used to reduce power (which has the added benefit of further increased stability). The power level at mid tension is about the same as it would be at 325, but the racquet is much more stable, so that your shots are not dependent on the incoming pace or spin. So control is much higher. Also, it is much easier to generate pace on the serve, since the max-power SW for serves is about 370.
    Pros with SW in this range tend to have the best rankings.
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2006
    #17
  18. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Personally, I can't play with a racquet with swingweight below 340 or static weight of below 345g. Maybe it's coz I grew up playing with heavy racquets. The plow through effect and the stability that heavier racquets provide are just some of the benefits that I find worthy of wielding a heavy frame. Heavy racquets just let you swing through the ball naturally without applying violent strokes or excessive force. My prestiges are currently around 360g, and I like them.

    However, like other things in tennis, it's all a matter of preference.
     
    #18
  19. p3k

    p3k Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    404
    no personal attacks and just my opinion but the numbers are too high... I held racquets of Beck and Hrbaty and I can assure you that they are 100% nowhere near 350, 325 rather...
     
    #19
  20. tennis playa

    tennis playa Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    187
    All of the above is pure b.s. A top pro generates his/ her power from timing. ( if anyone remember johan kreik they'll know what i'm tyalking about) it really isn't anything more scientific than that. yes there will always be a lot conjecture about service speed, raw power etc but don't forget that these guys have been playing since single figures in age, they've been drilled mercilessly in stroke production weight transferrance etc. there's no big secret, there's no mystery. the pro's have gotten to their high levels through hard work and reps. no one was born with the ability to play tennis, yes they may have a certain degree of innate ability which had to be nutured and yes they were given the opportunity to learn the game and thats the extent of it, anything else is the result of coaching and hard work. ultra light rackets, 'set ups' strings don't make players don't make great players, talent plus hard work, and maybe toss in a little luck along the way, thats what makes a successful player.
     
    #20
  21. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    It's possible that Beck's is lower... His weight and balance are 12.5 oz and 12.5" (similar to stock player's racquet). However, all of the confirmed swingweight measurement data that I have for other pros suggests otherwise.
     
    #21
  22. PurePrestige

    PurePrestige Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    516
    As far as SW2 and Pros using low powered strings and/or high tension.


    I was just wondering what your opinion of Federer is Traveler? I mean to say he is using SW2 or somewhere between 350-365 I think would be fair.
    B
    ut Natural Gut mains at such a low tension? How does that fit in exactly. I suppose the Alu Rough crosses are quite a stiff string and provide the power to temper it.
    But I guess the SW2 with the Power of gut tempered by stiff crosses leads him to have a very decent pro ranking.
     
    #22
  23. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I think Fed's swingweight is probably around 370-375 based on his other specs that we know.
     
    #23
  24. federermcenroeagassi

    federermcenroeagassi Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    that is impossible, he strings in the high 40's! if you're theories are right about lead and SW's, then most pro's should be stringing at at least 60 lbs to control their rackets, but i dont see that happening from jura's lists and other sources of info for stringing... im sorry trav, i support all your research and stuff, but i dont think you're near correct for all these guesses at SW...
     
    #24
  25. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    The list posted here is based on calculations that have been calibrated using known pro swingweights as reference points (e.g., Blake, Nadal, Stepanek, Safin). The formula suggests Fed's swingweight is about 360 if we assume that ART ART's specs lifted from the French Open are correct.

    And Fed's tension is actually not that far away from the max-power tension for his setup (he often strings in the low 50s).

    The reason I think that his swingweight is higher than 360 is that Fed seems to have more stability against big serves and more spin than is possible for a 360 SW (since 360 would be in the max-power zone). His racquet must therefore be more polarized than the typical pro. So 370 is still my best guess.
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2006
    #25
  26. Greg Raven

    Greg Raven Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    618
    Location:
    Apple Valley, CA
    This is all very interesting, but it seems to me to be an utter waste of time to calculate swing weights, and then to draw conclusions based on these calculations. I understand that there are some known data points, but in the end, most of this is pure speculation, given a sheen of respectibility by a formula of unknown accuracy and/or relevance.

    As far as i can tell, this is little more than saying one can guess the swingweight of a pro by looking at the way he hits, and/or the way the ball comes off his strings. I gotta tell you, I string for a WTA player, and when you watch her hit, it seems as if she's Oscar Wegener in female form -- she slowly reaches the racquet out to the incoming ball, and seems to impart the lightest of touches on impact. Yet, she gets tremendous ball speed and action. She appears to be crushing the ball effortlessly. The punch line is that she does this with stock Babolat Pure Storm Team racquets, with swingweights anywhere from 304 to 316. I hit with plenty of guys who use heavier racquets and take bigger swings, yet don't get the effect that she does.
     
    #26
  27. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416

    Which WTA player? I'd like to add her to my list of reference points to help test the formula.

    By the way, the trends of swingweight vs performance for the ATP men are exactly the same as the trends for WTA players. The optimal swingweight is the same (players in the 365-385 range have the best rankings), with players in the over-powered 355-365 range doing poorly, and players below 345 also with poor rankings.
     
    #27
  28. Duzza

    Duzza Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    6,315
    Location:
    Melbourne, VIC, Australia
    Amazing truly amazing. Add me in with SW: 318 :lol:
     
    #28
  29. federermcenroeagassi

    federermcenroeagassi Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    i am speechless to that...
     
    #29
  30. federermcenroeagassi

    federermcenroeagassi Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    that seems very logical, i just dont think its that high... meh maybe im wrong (well, probably), but i still dont believe that his SW is that high :)
     
    #30
  31. PurePrestige

    PurePrestige Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    516
    Ehh.. I mean. Federer could have a simple swingweight such as, I dunno, approaching 360. But 370's id say is pushing it. As for Fed having more stability.

    Well..maybe the fact that Federoar uses a midsize has to do with it. I mean a smaller headsize gives him more torsional stability, maybe, allowing him to have an equally polarized racquet while not having too terribly high of a swingweight.
    Hmm
     
    #31
  32. McGee

    McGee Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    157
    It is obvious that the projected SW's are more than "guessing" or looking at a player by the way the ball comes off the strings. Good info travelerajm and I appreciate the effort that you have made. I am sure that somebody will have an example of some "wta pro" that they work with that seems to use a SW below the norm but that does not make the initial information incorrect. Actually it seems to confirm that most pros use SW's higher than recreational players and "open" level players. What is the big surprise? If the pros used SW's in the mid 320's like I do than I would be amazed. Greg Raven I am impressed that you work with a strong player using a stock Pure Storm.....but what does that have to do with the OP?
     
    #32
  33. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I should mention that the average static weight for ATP players with swingweight 365-385 is 355g. For WTA players in that swingweight range it is about 320g (almost an ounce less). With the lower static weight, the women can still serve with plenty of pace while getting the benefits of a high swingweight.

    My mixed doubles partner is a 4.5 player in her late 50s and playing better than ever, and serving harder than ever, with a customized O3 Silver (SW 365, 10.8 oz.).
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2006
    #33
  34. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    Greg,

    This is far more than just speculation. I could just as easily plot MR^2 vs performance (which I have) and get the same result because swingweight scales with MR^2. Then there would be zero speculation because it gives us weight and balance combos that translate to optimum performance. It is not difficult to correlate these MR^2 values with the associated SW value based on reference data because it turns out (to my surprise) that almost every modern pro seems to customize his racquet similarly, regardless of swingweight.
     
    #34
  35. mileslong

    mileslong Professional

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,396
    Location:
    newport beach, california
    these weights are too high. you dont take the actual weights of pros rackets that a stringer verifies then put it in some formula and then claim that these are the actual weights. that makes no sense whatsoever, this is pure speculation and without question swing weights are high...
     
    #35
  36. Duzza

    Duzza Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    6,315
    Location:
    Melbourne, VIC, Australia
    Didn't travler say that Pro's frame's are all distributed near enough the same, in comparison to the frames we buy on stock? So this way the measurements are accurate enough to agree with one another.
     
    #36
  37. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    All I am doing, really, is interpolation of the data. The results are as they are simply because I don't have a single verified example of a known measured pro swingweight that is lower than the curve predicted by the formula.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2006
    #37
  38. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    The real PC600 had a SW around 335 +15 = SW 350 unstrung?
     
    #38
  39. mctennis

    mctennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,426
    I agree. Especially with all the racquet companies going lower in actual weight of their racquets.
     
    #39
  40. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    I don't really know what the real swingweight for the retail PC600 is. I just went to the TW website and got that bit of information from there. They had the PC600's swingweight noted as being 323. So, that's why I added 15 to 323; therefore, equaling 338.
     
    #40
  41. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    You don't have an education do you? It is called math dumy
     
    #41
  42. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Are you 1hbh or 2hbh?
     
    #42
  43. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Those aren't real PC600,
     
    #43
  44. crazylevity

    crazylevity Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    So now TW is selling fake goods???;)
     
    #44
  45. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Well...this is rather a difficult question for me to answer. :(

    I started off tennis with a one-handed backhand. Through practice, I got my backhand to be my stronger side. Back then, I used a stock Instinct XL with a leather grip (this racquet was the ultimate thing for the one-hander :) ). But, I was not happy with my forehand side. It seemed like every forehand lacked pop and accuracy. That's when I decided to give my spare LM Prestiges a try (I have a mid and a MP).

    With the Prestiges, I really didn't feel like hitting one-handers. So, I weighed them with some lead tape in the hoop, and now I'm hitting two-handed backhands (watching Safin play kinda inspired me :p ). I like the buttery feel of the prestiges, and my forehand has better accuracy with these frames.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2006
    #45
  46. BabolatFan

    BabolatFan Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    790
    Location:
    East Coast
    Travelerajm, sorry if I missed some info but is Safin's stick towards even balance?
     
    #46
  47. morten

    morten Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,331
    bulls... Federer is max 330
     
    #47
  48. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Wow we have about the same racket history lol, IMO the LMIXL needs weighting in the head, or a soft high powered string for lower levels.

    What I recomend is that you re-weight you LMIXL so that it has SW2 take off the grip and just put a thin over grip and put lead in the butt cap so that you keep a balance of 10pt HL

    The lead should go from 9-12-3 so that it wraps the top half, and then try a Roger type stringing setup, this is for a 1hbh.

    As for the PC600 I put a simular lead lay out with more lead at 12 with a SW2 and no weight at the handle so that the racket is 6pt HL and this is for 2hbh.

    Just amazing I am very happy
     
    #48
  49. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Where is your evidence, Roger on his own site says Priority mod his rackets with weight, I guess you are calling Roger and Priority a liar LOL
     
    #49
  50. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Thanks for the good info! I'll try your suggestions as soon as I get some new bumper grommets for the Instinct (I broke them).

    As far as my LM Prestige Mid, yesterday I put around 7.5g at 12. I have yet to test it though.
     
    #50

Share This Page