Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Willie
Your 18x18 looks right to me...8 and 10 shared, skip 9. I think I would have tried finding pictures of Gonzalez with this racquet and attempted to count the patteren. But I'm pretty sure you have it right.
Let us know how it plays.

I did find some Gonzales pictures where I was able to count the pattern, as well as that 1969 advertisement for the Spalding Smasher. However, they both had a 16 mains x 18 crosses pattern. Looking at my racket, 16 x 18 didn't look right for it, so I wondered why. So, using the 1969 ad, I counted the total number of string holes. It had 54. Well, like I said earlier, my racket has 64 string holes. So I wondered if my racket had a larger head to account for the extra string holes, but it looked like a standard size head to me. But just to make sure, I did the math on it, along with the math on the Davis wood racket (which I know for a fact is a standard size head), and they were the same  and I don't mean "the same" in a rough sense, I mean
exactly the same, out to the 5th decimal place. That surprised me. Here is the math for both of them, measuring just the string bed area on both of them (inside of the hoop):
TAD Davis Professional:
8 3/16" Width x 10 5/8" Length = 8.1875" x 10.625" =
9.40625" average diameter =
69.49 in.^2 area
Spalding Smasher:
9" Width x 9 13/16" Length = 9" x 9.8125" =
9.40625" average diameter =
69.49 in.^2 area
So apparently, Spalding went with a tighter pattern while leaving the head size the same, by the time they made the models like mine with the "S" in the throat piece.
The closest thing I could find for a picture to go by was
this Chemold Rod Laver model, which has a similar shape to the Spalding Smasher, and 60 total string holes. It has an 18x18 pattern. And just for the hell of it, I checked out a Wilson T2000, which also has a similar shape to the Spalding Smasher, and it was 18x18 as well. So that's what I went with.
I'll probably hit with it tonight, assuming it doesn't rain.