Originally Posted by ben123
i tried it and i have to say it didnt work for me. i didnt like it at all ^^, went straight back to my old setup.
also i dunno which pros u measured and how bc u dunno the sw from every pro. but for example gonzo was a long time top 10 player and his MgR/I is nowhere near 21. aswell as nadal is rank 1 and his MgR/I is not even 20,1 its a bit lower. ferrer MgR/I 20,4... and i could measure a lot more pros like this. i just dont want to count more lol
(i measured their MgR/I's with the "perfect" sw of 360 and juras specs)
The MgR/I method only works if you take the time to tune it precisely for your stroke. That is - if your optimum MgR/I vlaue for your stroke is 20.9, then 21.0 will feel difficult to control. So will 20.8. It only works if it's spot on. For me, I always take the time to tune my racquet against a wall -- this is because small variations in grip position for different racquets mean that I can't always get the effective MgR/I value accurate enough without on-court tuning.
Also, please keep in mind that my method for estimating swingweights is not that accurate, because the SW can vary a lot for a given mass and balance. Sometimes my estimate is high, sometimes it is low, and sometimes it is accurate. This creates a lot of noise in the data, but even so, averaged out over 100 players, the estimates are accurate enough to give the trends.
Also, players like Nadal, who use full western grips, seem to be able to control the ball just fine with very low MgR/I values. For players like Ferrer, who I don't have accurate swingweight data for, it cannot be assumed that the MgR/I value is accurate (but it's probable that it is reasonably close).
I should point out that the smaller subset of data that includes measured swingweights from Greg Raven gave an even more distinct advantage to players in the 20.6-21.0 MgR/I range, with less noise. This can be easily verified by anyone who plugs in the numbers.