TWU twisweight data is useless, let's make a Briffidi users TW data base!

[AMGF]

I bought the Briffidi SW1 tool with the TW adapter. I tested most of my racquets and none actually fit the TWU data. The SW will match most of the time and is easily within the margin of error considering we all use different strings. But the twistweight is way off but not constantly off. What I mean is it not off by a constant factor. Some high tw on TWU reads lower than lower tw frames. It is all over the place.

I've asked how the professor measures the tw for the database but I haven't got an answer. Others like Irvin have over the years and never had an answer. I believe the tw in the database is extrapolated and definitely not measured.

I suggest that every Briffidi users chime in with their actual measured twistweight numbers in order to help each other make better buying decisions when considering tw. So I'll start with a few of my own but will add more with times. I would also appreciate if anyone from TW would explain how the tw are measured in the TWU database and if extrapolated just come clean and maybe start using the Briffidi in the future for more reliable data.

Babolat PureAero+ 2023, TWU-tw: 14,7 Briffidi: 14,0
Babolat PureStrike VS: TWU-tw: 14,6 Briffidi: 14,0
Prince TextremeBeast Pro LB, TWU-tw: 14,9 Briffidi: 13,3
Tecnifibre Tfight 305RS, TWU-tw: 15,8 Briffidi: 14,6
Yonex Vcore Pro: TWU-tw: 14,8 Briffidi: 13,8


More info on the Briffidi here! The complete TWU database here!

 

[Wheelz]

TW should buy a Briffidi.

 

[Znak]

I bought the Briffidi SW1 tool with the TW adapter. I tested most of my racquets and none actually fit the TWU data. The SW will match most of the time and is easily within the margin of error considering we all use different strings. But the twistweight is way off but not constantly off. What I mean is it not off by a constant factor. Some high tw on TWU reads lower than lower tw frames. It is all over the place.

I've asked how the professor measures the tw for the database but I haven't got an answer. Others like Irvin have over the years and never had an answer. I believe the tw in the database is extrapolated and definitely not measured.

I suggest that every Briffidi users chime in with their actual measured twistweight numbers in order to help each other make better buying decisions when considering tw. So I'll start with a few of my own but will add more with times. I would also appreciate if anyone from TW would explain how the tw are measured in the TWU database and if extrapolated just come clean and maybe start using the Briffidi in the future for more reliable data.

Babolat PureAero+ 2023, TWU-tw: 14,7 Briffidi: 14,0
Babolat PureStrike VS: TWU-tw: 14,6 Briffidi: 14,0
Prince TextremeBeast Pro LB, TWU-tw: 14,9 Briffidi: 13,3
Tecnifibre Tfight 305RS, TWU-tw: 15,8 Briffidi: 14,6
Yonex Vcore Pro: TWU-tw: 14,8 Briffidi: 13,8


More info on the Briffidi here! The complete TWU database here!

Great idea! One variable I would eliminate for comparison's sake is either making this list an unstrung twistweight or strung. Because I do get a slight variation using mine

 

[gold325]

I have a Briffidi SW1 and have looked at Twist Weight (by spinweight - swingweight method) - but are any of you finding serious or even any real utility in this measurement within the same model of racquet? Example matching 3 Blade 98s.

Also how will get use users to standardize the string? Atleast TW will do "almost" the same string for all racquets. @Znak - Unstrung is the only real option IMO if this "project" takes off.

 

[happyandbob]

I scraped all of the tennis racquet data from the racquet compare tool and put it into a spreadsheet. I added column called "briffidi TW" that is editable by anyone if it helps to compile the info.

Tennis Racquet Reference

Sheet1 Update: 3.14.23,Source: https://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/compareracquets.cgi,Note: Racquet lengths are rounded to whole numbers on the source website. Brand,Racquet (TW Website),Racquet (Corrected),Head (in),Head (cm),Length (in),Length (cm),Weight (oz),Weight (gm),Balance (in)...

docs.google.com

 

[Grafil Injection]

Good idea. I suggest measuring for the most famous rackets first if possible, then you can compare the Briffidi figures to the TW to see if they make reasonable sense. E.g. for RF97, PS97, PAero, PDrive, MAX 200G, PS85 etc. I suppose it would make most sense if the sticks were un-modded and near stock weight and balance too.

 

[AMGF]

Great idea! One variable I would eliminate for comparison's sake is either making this list an unstrung twistweight or strung. Because I do get a slight variation using mine

I have a Briffidi SW1 and have looked at Twist Weight (by spinweight - swingweight method) - but are any of you finding serious or even any real utility in this measurement within the same model of racquet? Example matching 3 Blade 98s.

Also how will get use users to standardize the string? Atleast TW will do "almost" the same string for all racquets. @Znak - Unstrung is the only real option IMO if this "project" takes off.

Yeah for sure unstrung would be even better. I will add the unstrung tw for these. Racquets when I restring.

 

[AMGF]

I scraped all of the tennis racquet data from the racquet compare tool and put it into a spreadsheet. I added column called "briffidi TW" that is editable by anyone if it helps to compile the info.

Tennis Racquet Reference

Sheet1 Update: 3.14.23,Source: https://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/compareracquets.cgi,Note: Racquet lengths are rounded to whole numbers on the source website. Brand,Racquet (TW Website),Racquet (Corrected),Head (in),Head (cm),Length (in),Length (cm),Weight (oz),Weight (gm),Balance (in)...

docs.google.com

Great idea! I will add my measurements to your list.

 

[Shangri La]

One possible issue with TW's twistweight measurement is that I think they randomly take one sample and do the measurement which can be way off. I've said this before, they need to take one racquet that measures close to average specs to make the twistweight numbers more meaningful.

 

[AMGF]

One possible issue with TW's twistweight measurement is that I think they randomly take one sample and do the measurement which can be way off. I've said this before, they need to take one racquet that measures close to average specs to make the twistweight numbers more meaningful.

The difference of 1 tw is huge. Nothing to do with the sample. Measuring the tw without the SW1 is a tough task. You need to build a rig and depending on the balance the rig has to extend introducing lots of variation.

The fact the professor never disclosed how he measures the tw over the years and the fact the data don’t match the SW1 measurements at all make me believe that it was guesswork. Maybe involved some formulas and lots of good intentions, but nowhere close to real measurements.

TWU swingweight data matches SW1 measurements. We know this part is legit. They probably use a RDC machine for that. So the problem is not with the odd out of spec sample.

 

[Ryebread]

One possible issue with TW's twistweight measurement is that I think they randomly take one sample and do the measurement which can be way off. I've said this before, they need to take one racquet that measures close to average specs to make the twistweight numbers more meaningful.

IIRC they take a specific number of sticks and use the average

 

[AMGF]

Anyone has Briffidi TW for Pure Aero 98?

 

[Soundbyte]

Anyone has Briffidi TW for Pure Aero 98?

13.55 was what my PA98 measured

 

[ls206]

Is it worth getting results for unstrung racquets as well?
Racketpedia has twistweight measurements but I assume they're for an unstrung racquet. It would be interesting to see how the Briffidi results compare to theirs.

e.g. https://www.racketpedia.com/blog/babolat-pure-aero-vs-2020/2/

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Is it worth getting results for unstrung racquets as well?
Racketpedia has twistweight measurements but I assume they're for an unstrung racquet. It would be interesting to see how the Briffidi results compare to theirs.

e.g. https://www.racketpedia.com/blog/babolat-pure-aero-vs-2020/2/

This would be an interesting data set for interested gearheads.

Based on unstrung vs strung TW’s for my four 360+ Prestige Mids and four 360+ Prestige Pros, the average increase in TW post-stringing with 1.25 poly measured on my SW1 with TW adapter is ~0.6.
1) Mid 11.8 —> 12.35
2) Pro 12.9 —> 13.5

If my measurements above are correct, then the PA98 being a 98sq in frame should have an increase in TW post stringing of around 0.7. The Racquetpedia unstrung TW of 9.5 surely can’t be right. I’ve playtested the PA98 and it very much feels like a 13.5 TW frame as per @Soundbyte ’s data point above.

 

[gutfeeling]

Fwiw I measured my EZ and PA 98s using the Briffidi TW adapter and got 13.5 and 14.2. Both were ~ 324 grams and 32.6 cm strung with SW of 318 and 324. Makes sense since the PA definitely feels like it has more weight in the head.

 

[WYK]

I bought the Briffidi SW1 tool with the TW adapter. I tested most of my racquets and none actually fit the TWU data. The SW will match most of the time and is easily within the margin of error considering we all use different strings. But the twistweight is way off but not constantly off. What I mean is it not off by a constant factor. Some high tw on TWU reads lower than lower tw frames. It is all over the place.

I've asked how the professor measures the tw for the database but I haven't got an answer. Others like Irvin have over the years and never had an answer. I believe the tw in the database is extrapolated and definitely not measured.

I suggest that every Briffidi users chime in with their actual measured twistweight numbers in order to help each other make better buying decisions when considering tw. So I'll start with a few of my own but will add more with times. I would also appreciate if anyone from TW would explain how the tw are measured in the TWU database and if extrapolated just come clean and maybe start using the Briffidi in the future for more reliable data.

Babolat PureAero+ 2023, TWU-tw: 14,7 Briffidi: 14,0
Babolat PureStrike VS: TWU-tw: 14,6 Briffidi: 14,0
Prince TextremeBeast Pro LB, TWU-tw: 14,9 Briffidi: 13,3
Tecnifibre Tfight 305RS, TWU-tw: 15,8 Briffidi: 14,6
Yonex Vcore Pro: TWU-tw: 14,8 Briffidi: 13,8


More info on the Briffidi here! The complete TWU database here!

I believe Dave Crawford of TW University uses a Babolat RDC. TW has several of them in their possession.
There are a few videos and photos of him with one, both in the wild and on TW university.
However, according to Irwin, the Babolat RDC is only accurate to within 6% or +/- 1 Kgcm^2 on twistweight.
Though many will argue this is unusable, Dave takes several readings. If these are averaged the margin would decrease noticeably.

 

[AMGF]

I believe Dave Crawford of TW University uses a Babolat RDC. TW has several of them in their possession.
There are a few videos and photos of him with one, both in the wild and on TW university.
However, according to Irwin, the Babolat RDC is only accurate to within 6% or +/- 1 Kgcm^2 on twistweight.
Though many will argue this is unusable, Dave takes several readings. If these are averaged the margin would decrease noticeably.

The TWU twistweight numbers are nowhere close to the Briffidi. I asked how they get their tw numbers and they didn’t answer.

I think TWU should just buy a Briffidi and use that for the tw number from now. Because whatever they’ve been using doesn’t work.

 

[WYK]

I'm not sure the numbers need to be more accurate. Those inclined to ruminate upon twist weights will likely already have their own swingweight machines.

 

[AMGF]

I'm not sure the numbers need to be more accurate. Those inclined to ruminate upon twist weights will likely already have their own swingweight machines.

1- I doubt it. These machines are somewhat expensive.
2- When shopping for a frame an accurate value for tw is important. Especially at higher levels of play.
3- TWU’s tw values are nowhere close to being accurate. Not at all.

TWU does a great job on everything else. They should just acknowledge the tw measurements were scientific guesswork and rectify it. Or if they truly believe their methodology is better than Briffidi then they should do a test between both methods, that would be interesting. But the fact Briffidi matches theoretical tw numbers for known objects makes me believe TWU won’t go there.

 

[HitMoreBHs]

1- I doubt it. These machines are somewhat expensive.
2- When shopping for a frame an accurate value for tw is important. Especially at higher levels of play.
3- TWU’s tw values are nowhere close to being accurate. Not at all.

TWU does a great job on everything else. They should just acknowledge the tw measurements were scientific guesswork and rectify it. Or if they truly believe their methodology is better than Briffidi then they should do a test between both methods, that would be interesting. But the fact Briffidi matches theoretical tw numbers for known objects makes me believe TWU won’t go there.

This is the stellar aspect of the Briffidi SW1. The inventor @bfroxen has videos demonstrating and verifying the precision and accuracy (1g test!) as well as linearity of the SW1. All done using cylindrical rods of calculated swingweight.
No mainstream swingweight machine manufacturer has ever provided such robust verification of their devices.

I believe that in a decade, we will probably understand twistweight values in the same way that we understand swingweight values today. For this to happen, reliable twistweight numbers are needed for racquets. The SW1 with twistweight adapter is the most practical, efficient and accurate device for such a purpose on the market today.

(I accept that not everyone is a gearhead and cares to know and understand such things. But then, you’d not be hanging out here!)

 

[Aussie-pro]

Any Briffidi TW measurements for the Vcore Pro 97D or Percept 97D?

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Racquet	Twistweight (TWU)	Twistweight (Briffidi)
HEAD 360+ Prestige Mid	13.3	12.4
HEAD 360+ Prestige Pro	14.2	13.5
HEAD Auxetic 1.0 Prestige Tour	14.7	13.5
HEAD 360+ Prestige S	Not available	14.6
HEAD Auxetic 2.0 Prestige MP-L (2023)	14.2	14.4*

*credit @dr. godmode

 

[aaron_h27]

For anyone matching their frames do you just go by the number or still tweak based on court? I hate having rackets with different twistweights as my control suffers when the TW is too low. I don't have the TW adapter but I do have the SW1 machine. Is it possible to match my frames accurately using the swingweight/spinweight method?

 

[dr. godmode]

For anyone matching their frames do just go by the number or still tweak based on court? I hate having rackets with different twistweights as my control suffers when the TW is too low. I don't have the TW adapter but I do have the SW1 machine. Is it possible to match my frames accurately using the swingweight/spinweight method?

Yeah for matching purposes it should be close enough.

 

[ChrisJR3264]

Twist weight is useless. Focus on your footwork and hitting the sweet spot.

Sometimes strings - stiff and dead polys may not be for you.

If you feel the need to add weight to 3 and 9 - experiment. Too many folks get hooked on specs

 

[aaron_h27]

Yeah for matching purposes it should be close enough.

Thanks, btw I love your youtube channel lol, I'm planning to make some tennis videos soon you are one of my inspirations, haha.

 

[dr. godmode]

Thanks, btw I love your youtube channel lol, I'm planning to make some tennis videos soon you are one of my inspirations, haha.

Thanks! Send me when they are ready hommie

 

[AMGF]

Twist weight is useless. Focus on your footwork and hitting the sweet spot.

Sometimes strings - stiff and dead polys may not be for you.

If you feel the need to add weight to 3 and 9 - experiment. Too many folks get hooked on specs

Swingweight, weight and balance all are as well. Focus on your game not the equipment.

However, once you get to a certain level and you start playing better players, you might reach a point where you want your equipment to complete your game.

At some point your tw will become important. Up until the Briffidi, we had no way to measure tw. So everyone kinda went by feel. Now we can measure it.

Twistweight is a really important spec and definitely can make or break a racquet. Is this still the racquet forum or is it now « the forget the racquet and focus on your footwork » forum?

 

[ChrisJR3264]

Swingweight, weight and balance all are as well. Focus on your game not the equipment.

However, once you get to a certain level and you start playing better players, you might reach a point where you want your equipment to complete your game.

At some point your tw will become important. Up until the Briffidi, we had no way to measure tw. So everyone kinda went by feel. Now we can measure it.

Twistweight is a really important spec and definitely can make or break a racquet. Is this still the racquet forum or is it now « the forget the racquet and focus on your footwork » forum?

From my experience talking to folks : they hone in on gear too much and still have the same results while switching or constantly adding weight.

I don’t see the worth dropping money into a swing weight or twist weight machine. We’re not pros. Lead and copper tape 1/4 strips are available and quite cheap. Experiment with it sure.

Demo rackets that fit your game.
Yes it’s the racket section. But switching rackets or playing with specs/customization too much won’t make you a better player. Focus on fundamentals instead of constantly switching.

 

[AMGF]

From my experience talking to folks : they hone in on gear too much and still have the same results while switching or constantly adding weight.

I don’t see the worth dropping money into a swing weight or twist weight machine. We’re not pros. Lead and copper tape 1/4 strips are available and quite cheap. Experiment with it sure.

Demo rackets that fit your game.
Yes it’s the racket section. But switching rackets or playing with specs/customization too much won’t make you a better player. Focus on fundamentals instead of constantly switching.

Yeah but when trying to demo a racket that fits your game, don’t you think the tw is an important information to have?

Aren’t you curious to know the final specs when you are done experimenting with lead?

I agree 100% about not switching equipment all the time. I think the off season is the best time to test equipment and mid-season equipment changes is risky and certainly not the best idea.

Also as a coach I can beat probably 100% of my students with an off the wall Walmart racquet. A good racquet won’t make a bad player turn into Federer. And Federer would double bagel me with that Walmart frame. That is not the point.

The point of this thread was/is just a FYI that TWU data regarding tw is absolutely useless and people should absolutely not consider any tw data from TWU to make demo choices (for those that looks up tw numbers). If people don’t understand or don’t care about tw then they can carry on. I wouldn’t even expect them to read a thread about tw in the first place.

All that being said, tw really has quite a large impact on how a racquet behaves wether people care about the number or not.

 

[ChrisJR3264]

Yeah but when trying to demo a racket that fits your game, don’t you think the tw is an important information to have?

Aren’t you curious to know the final specs when you are done experimenting with lead?

I agree 100% about not switching equipment all the time. I think the off season is the best time to test equipment and mid-season equipment changes is risky and certainly not the best idea.

Also as a coach I can beat probably 100% of my students with an off the wall Walmart racquet. A good racquet won’t make a bad player turn into Federer. And Federer would double bagel me with that Walmart frame. That is not the point.

The point of this thread was/is just a FYI that TWU data regarding tw is absolutely useless and people should absolutely not consider any tw data from TWU to make demo choices (for those that looks up tw numbers). If people don’t understand or don’t care about tw then they can carry on. I wouldn’t even expect them to read a thread about tw in the first place.

All that being said, tw really has quite a large impact on how a racquet behaves wether people care about the number or not.

No I never cared about twist weight.
Just swing weight.

 

[brooksgbanks]

No I never cared about twist weight.
Just swing weight.

Then this thread is definitely not for you. Feel free to find or start a thread on swingweight measurements of various racquets and and maybe make some positive contributions there.

 

[aaron_h27]

I'm finding that anything less than 13 is too unstable. (Using briffidi TW adapter) I personally like around 13.5-13.6. What twistweight values do you guys like? Djokovic is at 16!!

 

[Conrado85]

Estou descobrindo que qualquer coisa menor que 13 é muito instável. (Usando o adaptador briffidi TW) Eu pessoalmente gosto de 13,5-13,6. Quais valores de twistweight vocês gostam? Djokovic tem 16 anos!!

14,3-15,3 is fine...

 

[aaron_h27]

14,3-15,3 is fine...

Are you using the briffidi TW adapter to measure? or TWU list?

 

[Conrado85]

Are you using the briffidi TW adapter to measure? or TWU list?

I use TWU list, with lead tape to adjust TW and SW for my preferences.

 

[Hawks9451]

All racket measured specs are nearly or totally useless because of quality control issues. TWU measures a single model, which is pretty pointless--averaging multiple samples would be equally useless. Laying up graphite is complex. Small changes in weight/distribution massively affect things like twist weight.

TWU is as effective as the forum highlight function. All of these racket stats are, unless you're measuring and matching individual frames, just a maze to encourage consumer obsession. Why else would a store put resources into it?

 

[AMGF]

All racket measured specs are nearly or totally useless because of quality control issues. TWU measures a single model, which is pretty pointless--averaging multiple samples would be equally useless. Laying up graphite is complex. Small changes in weight/distribution massively affect things like twist weight.

TWU is as effective as the forum highlight function. All of these racket stats are, unless you're measuring and matching individual frames, just a maze to encourage consumer obsession. Why else would a store put resources into it?

For most manufacturers quality control is decent enough that TWU data is reliable for weight/balance and swingweight. Twistweight is total waste of bytes on TWU website.

The string choice makes quite a bit of a difference. TWU should specify string type and gauge for their measurements (maybe they do, but I don’t think I ever saw it).

So no, chances are that your frame is not going to be bang on with TWU, but close enough to make an educated choice. When players get to a point that TW is an important thing to consider, Briffidi data is the only way to go.

 

[Irvin]

In defense of TW Professor I recently strung 29 frames (only 2 different but similar 16x19 models.) The weight, balance, and SWs were fairly close on all rackets but the TWs varied 1.6 kgcm^2 using the SW1 with the new TW adapter. I was shocked.

 

[AMGF]

In defense of TW Professor I recently strung 29 frames (only 2 different but similar 16x19 models.) The weight, balance, and SWs were fairly close on all rackets but the TWs varied 1.6 kgcm^2 using the SW1 with the new TW adapter. I was shocked.

Was the variance of 1.6 for the same model or between the two models? Was that measured on Briffidi?

You know that even if all other specs were the same TW could still be different between two models just like two similar weighted and balanced frames could have different swing weight.

But if there was 1.6 difference between the same model with similar strings, that is a huge difference and horrible quality control.

 

[Irvin]

Was the variance of 1.6 for the same model or between the two models?

Both. The 2 models are very similar frames and the was only 1 or 2 really odd readings.

Was that measured on Briffidi?

Yes, using the newer TW adapter where the racket stands upright instead of up side down. I have both adapter but like the newer model best.

You know that even if all other specs were the same TW could still be different between two models just like two similar weighted and balanced frames could have different swing weight.

I’m not so sure that can happen, but if it did 1.6 points is way off.

But if there was 1.6 difference between the same model with similar strings, that is a huge difference and horrible quality control.

10 Rackets were strung with ALU full bed, 10 with NXT full bed, and 9 with ALU/NXT hybrid.

 

[AMGF]

Both. The 2 models are very similar frames and the was only 1 or 2 really odd readings.

Yes, using the newer TW adapter where the racket stands upright instead of up side down. I have both adapter but like the newer model best.

I’m no so sure that can happen, but if it did 1.6 points is way off.

10 Rackets were strung with ALU full bed, 10 with NXT full bed, and 9 with ALU/NXT hybrid.

Thanks for the info! Does this mean that TWU is now using Briffidi for their tw measurements?

Wondering if racquet companies are even considering tw in their quality control. 1.6 is a lot. A 13tw vs 14.6tw is huge in terms of feel and stability.

 

[aaron_h27]

Thanks for the info! Does this mean that TWU is now using Briffidi for their tw measurements?

Wondering if racquet companies are even considering tw in their quality control. 1.6 is a lot. A 13tw vs 14.6tw is huge in terms of feel and stability.

Yeah thats a huge difference...wtf

 

[aaron_h27]

Tecnifibre Tempo Iga - 13.7 TW unstrung

14.4 TW strung with Poly Tour Pro 1.20

TWU has it listed as 14.98 which it would be pretty close to that if I used a 1.30 gauge string.

 

[aaron_h27]

This would be an interesting data set for interested gearheads.

Based on unstrung vs strung TW’s for my four 360+ Prestige Mids and four 360+ Prestige Pros, the average increase in TW post-stringing with 1.25 poly measured on my SW1 with TW adapter is ~0.6.
1) Mid 11.8 —> 12.35
2) Pro 12.9 —> 13.5

If my measurements above are correct, then the PA98 being a 98sq in frame should have an increase in TW post stringing of around 0.7. The Racquetpedia unstrung TW of 9.5 surely can’t be right. I’ve playtested the PA98 and it very much feels like a 13.5 TW frame as per @Soundbyte ’s data point above.

0.7 sounds right for unstrung to strung for a 98 sq inch frame. Wonder if its more with a 100 sq inch frame.

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Racquet​	Weight(g)​	Balance Point (cm)​	Swingweight​	TW (Briffidi)​	TW (TWU)​
Wilson Blade 98 v8 16x19 (Strung 1.25 Poly) - 1	323​	33.0​	323​	12.85​	13.3​
Wilson Blade 98 v8 16x19 (Unstrung) - 1	306​	32.0​	293​	12.31​
Wilson Blade 98 v8 16x19 (Unstrung) - 2	308​	31.6​	292​	12.16​
Wilson Blade 98 v8 16x19 (Unstrung) - 3	306​	31.7​	288​	12.04​