Lead tape placement qns

[steve728]

Originally Posted by xFullCourtTenniSx

Yep. That's pretty much it right there. Though I would also recommend trying lead at 3&9 instead of at 12. Try both, but one setup at a time. I find that with lead at 3&9, you get more power, but at 12 the racket really goes through the air better. Placing lead at 12 isn't exactly depolarizing your racket, but it's not a bad thing to experiment with.

Sorry, I can't edit my posts yet. I guess my questions above go to this. Does this suggestion mean we really shouldn't mix the two setups at all....or simply just to try each setup separately to see the effects of each?

[JackB1]

When you guys speak of adding weight at 7" above the butt end of the handle, is that the spot just above where your hands would be?
And why is that better than adding it near the butt end?

[Meaghan]

Originally Posted by JackB1

When you guys speak of adding weight at 7" above the butt end of the handle, is that the spot just above where your hands would be?
And why is that better than adding it near the butt end?

It adds stability. If you think of the vibration or shock from the ball on thie strings resonating down the racket then weight at the top of the handle should reduce the shock and vibration of the frame before meeting the hand.

Im sure i couldve explained that better ha!

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by Meaghan

It adds stability. If you think of the vibration or shock from the ball on thie strings resonating down the racket then weight at the top of the handle should reduce the shock and vibration of the frame before meeting the hand.

Im sure i couldve explained that better ha!

Meaghan........you used to always recommend adding lead just above the buttcap. Did you recently switch to the "top of the handle" and which do you like better?

[Meaghan]

Originally Posted by JackB1

Meaghan........you used to always recommend adding lead just above the buttcap. Did you recently switch to the "top of the handle" and which do you like better?

Jack I always advocated weight top of handle as I thought thats where it had the best affect IMO. Like the posts from xFCTx I was just refering to polarised and depolarised customisations to show that there was a choice.

I started reading J cauthen posts first and tried that and liked the affect Then I read travlerajm who advocated extreme polarisation and tried that but could never come to terms with it. I, like Travlerajm went on to adding weight top of handle and 12" a mix of both theories. It worked great with the OPT and in an extreme version the LM Rad but not so with the heavier pro staffs.
I dont have any weight on the kps88 as it seems to have the weight distribution im looking for.

[lenderbender]

Awesome posts!

just two things though,

1. has anybody found that they get a massive bulge from the lead tape at 7inches? suppose it would help to start off with a more headlight racket to minimize the amount you have to add there?

2. What exactly is the weight range of SW2? say 340s 350s+ ?

cheers

[Meaghan]

Originally Posted by lenderbender

Awesome posts!

just two things though,

1. has anybody found that they get a massive bulge from the lead tape at 7inches? suppose it would help to start off with a more headlight racket to minimize the amount you have to add there?

2. What exactly is the weight range of SW2? say 340s 350s+ ?

cheers

I had 20g top of handle spread over a few cm it did bulge a little but i have a 1HBH and it didnt affect me. Must have been a slightly heavier lead too.
It had more affect on an even balance racket making it more HL (ie the LM Rad went from 2or3pts HL to 9pts HL and had a greater affect due to the amount of weight placed there as its such a tinny frame. I added about 10g to 10 &2 and it worked a dream. The SW would have been 350 or so.
I think SW2 when travlerajm was discussing it was in the high 300s.
If you have a spare week or so get the threads up! A lot of posts unfortunately have been deleted tho.

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by lenderbender

Awesome posts!

just two things though,

1. has anybody found that they get a massive bulge from the lead tape at 7inches? suppose it would help to start off with a more headlight racket to minimize the amount you have to add there?

Wouldn't 7 inches up be about where your top hand would end (on a 2HBH)? I just put both my hands on a ruler and it measured about 7 inches. So just go a bit higher so the lead is ABOVE where your top hand would be. Then you won't feel the lead. I dont think a little higher than 7 inches would matter that much?

[Meaghan]

Originally Posted by JackB1

Wouldn't 7 inches up be about where your top hand would end (on a 2HBH)? I just put both my hands on a ruler and it measured about 7 inches. So just go a bit higher so the lead is ABOVE where your top hand would be. Then you won't feel the lead. I dont think a little higher than 7 inches would matter that much?

In that general area is fine IMO.
I did one racket it was a grip size 2 leaded it up then added a normal grip until it reached the lead then added a replacemnt grip over it all to make it a grip size 4 without any worries about it sticking out.
Thats all OK if you have a small grip to customise!

[lenderbender]

Originally Posted by Meaghan

I had 20g top of handle spread over a few cm it did bulge a little but i have a 1HBH and it didnt affect me. Must have been a slightly heavier lead too.
It had more affect on an even balance racket making it more HL (ie the LM Rad went from 2or3pts HL to 9pts HL and had a greater affect due to the amount of weight placed there as its such a tinny frame. I added about 10g to 10 &2 and it worked a dream. The SW would have been 350 or so.
I think SW2 when travlerajm was discussing it was in the high 300s.
If you have a spare week or so get the threads up! A lot of posts unfortunately have been deleted tho.

well at the moment i'm using a lm rad and what i've done is stuck a chunk of blue tac (xD) into the holes in the bottom and lead tape from like the top of the silver ridge down to 3/9 on both sides. Weighing in at about 335g (with 17g strings, was 340 with 16g i think dodgy scale probably).

Is the aim of leadtape at 7 to maximise ploughthrough? If it is to reduce shock I think the blue tack is doing its job quite well

Just did a search -> 'SW2 is defined as a swingweight above 360, and is in the 'Maximum Spin Zone.' The 'Maximum Power Zone' is in the 350-360 range, according to TravlerAjm, but at that SW your spin will start to seriously lose out.'

For refernce i've copied what was in the link:

"The problem is likely that you placed the lead too low in the hoop (I presume that you centered the hoop weight at the 3&9 position, giving you a SW of about 350). A swingweight between 350 and 360 is in the max-power zone, where it's hard to generate spin, but easy to hit with power. To get into the heavy ball zone, you need to get your swingweight up to 365 or more. E.g., Nadal's swingweight is about 370.

Try shifting the 15 grams of hoop lead upward so that it is only in the top half of the hoop, centered at about 24" from the butt. Then when you test it, if it is overpowered, add a gram or so more. And if it is underpowered, then subtract a gram or two.

Also, you'll need to learn how to let the racquet do the work by using a high backswing on groundstrokes. You can't wrist the ball with a swingweight that high." -TravlerAjm

Gonna have to take into account this customization when i get my next racket ~~ looking at youtek rad pro which is probably a v. good starting platform for juicing to SW2. PST hmm gonna have to start some arm strengthening exercises

Originally Posted by JackB1

Wouldn't 7 inches up be about where your top hand would end (on a 2HBH)? I just put both my hands on a ruler and it measured about 7 inches. So just go a bit higher so the lead is ABOVE where your top hand would be. Then you won't feel the lead. I dont think a little higher than 7 inches would matter that much?

cheers for pointing that out, was too lazy to get my ruler out lol.

[AutoXer]

My PC is not high enough to know of such things as lead tape.

[Ross K]

Can't quite figure out how to customize your racquet?!... Well then, you need a diagnosis from Doctor Lead Tape!...



He'll make your frame better in no time at all!





R.

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Originally Posted by TennisTypeR

xFullCourt, just another question. Have you ever played with the kblade tour? Does it have any special counter weights as mentioned on the ProStaff Tour? I find the stock version kind of light and whippy is it wise to put lead tape at 3&9? THanks so much!

Sorry. Stopped at the nBlade 98, nBlade Oversize, and [K]Blade 98. I'd love to try the tour out though. Sadly nobody I know has one.

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Originally Posted by steve728

First, to all, this has been an enjoyable and informative thread!

Second, to xFull (Dr. Lead Tape) or anyone else, I have a few follow up questions. If I put 2 grams at 12 o'clock, but also put 2 grams at 9 o'clock and 2 grams at 3 o'clock, is this essentially the same as "putting lead all around" the hoop? Does this negate any benefit of either the depolarized or polarized set up? Or does it give you some of the benefits of each? I'm counterbalancing these weights with lead in the handle, which is mostly on the grip 7" above the buttcap, in order to maintain HL balance. If it's okay to keep lead at all three places on the hoop (4 grams total at 9 and 3 & 2 grams at 12). Would this make it a primarily depolarized set up with a little more racquet head speed and spin? Any proper proportion for this kind of set up, such as putting 3 grams at 9 and 3 o'clock with 1-2 grams at 12 o'clock? Or is it just better to stick with one set up and sacrifice a little? I guess I kinda want it all! A bump up in swing weight, stability, and spin, while maintaining maneuverability and minimizing the increase in static weight.

BTW, for some reason, putting lead just at 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock wasn't great for me. Hasn't been good for me with any racquet I've tried. Maybe because the sweet spot moved?

Unfortunately, I'm trying to figure this out with as little tinkering as possible because I have Head CAP grommets and would love to be able to hide the lead under them before the grommets get too flared to re-use.

I'd stick to one setup, then once completed with that setup, add lead as necessary to fix any problems not yet already solved. So I'd depolarize it, then add lead at 12 if necessary.

I've polarized a racket heavily, then added a little lead at 3&9 to increase torsional stability. It worked perfectly.

A depolarized setup with give you extra spin anyways if you have enough lead at 3&9. You probably won't notice it until you hit about 6 or 8 grams total. The idea is to get the racket up to your ideal swingweight range. If you've added all the mass you needed but can still add weight, either keep adding to the same places, or place it at 12 until it feels perfect (since that adds the most swingweight with the least increase in mass).

And yes, lead at 10&2 will raise the "sweet spot" a little, as does placing lead at 12, but at least contact is still in line with where the lead is placed, so it isn't as noticeable. That's why I generally like sticking to lead at 3&9 or across the top of the hoop.

And if you want to keep maneuverability, I say stay away from lead at 12 as much as possible. You can still put it there, but refrain from using excess lead there, since as I said before, it will result in the racket being more difficult to precisely control, which is the key to hitting your best shots (and trick shots) under conditions where you shouldn't be able to. Federer's racket head control is better than anyone else's I've ever seen, and we know what he can do with the ball, even on the full stretch.

[TennisTypeR]

Originally Posted by xFullCourtTenniSx

Sorry. Stopped at the nBlade 98, nBlade Oversize, and [K]Blade 98. I'd love to try the tour out though. Sadly nobody I know has one.

Hey thanks for your reply, its ok though. haha Anyone here has experience and may like to share?

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Originally Posted by steve728

Sorry, I can't edit my posts yet. I guess my questions above go to this. Does this suggestion mean we really shouldn't mix the two setups at all....or simply just to try each setup separately to see the effects of each?

I suggest trying each separately until you understand what each setup will do for you. From there, pick the one you liked best, go as far as you can with it (as far as you feel is improving your game), then you can mix in a little from the other setup. Don't try to merge both setups together 50/50. I've tried and failed epically. A 13.5 ounce super polarized racket with mega weights at 3&9 didn't play nearly as well as I expected. You'll notice that the setup you prefer will give you what you want in the end anyways. Both give power and spin, just in different ways and different amounts. Torsional stability isn't exactly given to a polarized racket though so in the end I think most polarized rackets should have some lead at 3&9 anyways for stability unless they racket was already very stable. (I used a RDS003, which isn't really that stable to begin with, especially when polarized to such a degree.)

Originally Posted by Meaghan

It adds stability. If you think of the vibration or shock from the ball on thie strings resonating down the racket then weight at the top of the handle should reduce the shock and vibration of the frame before meeting the hand.

Im sure i couldve explained that better ha!

It also makes it feel more maneuverable since there's plenty of heft right above your hand. Same idea as a polarized racket adding racket head speed from the whippy kind of effect, only it's closer to your hand so it's easier to control.

Also, lead in the buttcap (unless placed several inches above the buttcap location) does nothing aside from add a feeling of heft in your hand (since there's more weight in the area where you hold it). It will make it a slightly more solid pivot point (good for polarized rackets), but overall it doesn't do that much overall to performance. Power on a racket comes from the mass that is close to and behind the ball at contact. That's why the depolarized racket has more power - the counterweight is closer to contact than for a polarized racket. A depolarized racket places all/most of the weight as close to contact as possible without making it too unwieldy, which generally results in most of the weight being near the center of the racket.

Originally Posted by Meaghan

I had 20g top of handle spread over a few cm it did bulge a little but i have a 1HBH and it didnt affect me. Must have been a slightly heavier lead too.
It had more affect on an even balance racket making it more HL (ie the LM Rad went from 2or3pts HL to 9pts HL and had a greater affect due to the amount of weight placed there as its such a tinny frame. I added about 10g to 10 &2 and it worked a dream. The SW would have been 350 or so.
I think SW2 when travlerajm was discussing it was in the high 300s.
If you have a spare week or so get the threads up! A lot of posts unfortunately have been deleted tho.

I had 14 grams and it's not even noticeable.

Swingweight2 depends on the player. I've already explained how to find it. Pros have it at around 370. For rec players, 350 might be well into swingweight2 already.

Originally Posted by JackB1

Wouldn't 7 inches up be about where your top hand would end (on a 2HBH)? I just put both my hands on a ruler and it measured about 7 inches. So just go a bit higher so the lead is ABOVE where your top hand would be. Then you won't feel the lead. I dont think a little higher than 7 inches would matter that much?

It differs from player to player. If I used a two handed backhand, I would prefer the lead tape to be a little higher up. Sadly, this raises the swingweight quite noticeable. If you could settle for a monster forehand and having your backhand being mainly driven by your left hand (like it should) to get the weight through the ball, you should be fine. Though yes you should experiment with it a little higher up to see how it works. But I think the result would be slightly detrimental to your forehand and serve, unless you can manage that swingweight. If you can, totally go for it! It will give you more power!

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Originally Posted by TennisTypeR

Hey thanks for your reply, its ok though. haha Anyone here has experience and may like to share?

Honestly, I doubt it does have that counterweight built in though. Like I said, the ProStaff Tour was meant for Sampras. The counterweighting was meant for Sampras' depolarized setup.

The [K]Blade Tour is more of a finished product racket (already has the weight distributed correctly, not overly favoring one position over others).

If it feels too whippy, I would suggest depolarizing it with some lead at 3&9 and counterbalance weight around the top of the handle, just like a standard depolarized setup. That'll make it feel more like a solid bat that can really smack through the ball.

I'd recommend leading it up with 10-12 grams, evenly distributing it at 3&9 and above the handle. This means 5-6 grams up at 3&9 and 5-6 above the handle (or top of the handle under the grip tape). From there, if that's not enough, add more to the head 1 or 2 grams at a time. If it feels too heavy, then remove some of the lead at 3&9 and move it to the counterbalance point until you feel like you've got it swinging in sync with your arm (you'll know the feeling; it's like the racket feels perfect in your hand when swinging it and on the court if follows your hand and arm perfectly like an extension of it). It takes a bunch of trial and error to find the exact perfect setup, but once you get there it's worth it (until your racket goes out of production).

[ahile02]

Originally Posted by xFullCourtTenniSx

For adding the 15 grams, you can go either way with that actually. 9 grams at the head or handle, it doesn't really matter. 9 at the head will produce more power, while 9 at the handle will be more manageable.

And you're right about the difference between depolarized and polarized, except that polarized doesn't necessarily straight out give more power. It gives more racket head acceleration. That can essentially equate to more power as power/force is generated from either (or both) increases in mass or velocity/acceleration. I'd prefer to keep it at polarized means more racket head speed (if you know how to use it right). Also, the control problem isn't as big of a factor as I might make it sound. Higher racket head speeds (especially at the tip) can be used to create more spin on the ball, resulting in more control. Your ability to accurately control the racket head at high speeds will surely go down, but as long as you use spin to give you margin it's going to be fine (but don't be too surprised if a few don't go your way, but with the spin it generates you'll get plenty of margin so you won't notice 99% of the times where it happens).

And 10&2 and 11&1 will give still give power/plow through and increased racket head speeds, though I prefer to stick to one side and go all out in that direction. But if you were going to do that, I suggest 10&2 since it doesn't reduce your racket head control as badly but will give you noticeable more momentum in the head. If you go to 11&1 you might as well put a strip of lead across the top of the hoop. I don't personally advocate a bunch of 3-5 inch strips at 12 to polarize a racket, I prefer a long strip that can actually be as long as 15 inches across the top of the hoop so the center of mass won't be raised as much and the racket won't become more difficult to control. Some people prefer it that way, and I'm not saying you shouldn't do it. Try it, it might work for you, but it doesn't work for me.

It all depends on what you need from adding weight. Sometimes it's not as straightforward as wanting more power. You might want more pop, but are want a hint more spin on your shots than a 3&9 setup will give, and are willing to sacrifice a little pop to get there. In that case, yes go for 10&2.

If you want more pop on your serves, I recommend lead at 3&9 unless you might want to get a little added spin and kick on you spin serves as well, then 10&2 might be more appropriate. I've never personally experimented with 10&2 but it should add more spin than a 3&9 setup although you will probably lose a little stability and power (probably not a noticeable loss though unless you add a lot of weight). Personally, a polarized setup messed with my serve the most. Granted the amount of spin and kick I got on slice and kick serves was truly amazing, but it was difficult to really control it and stay as consistent as I liked with it. Occasionally I'd get too much lift and send it long, or too much spin and send it short or into the net (but with a giant explosion off the court). Granted, I didn't stick with the racket and practice with it as much as I should have, which probably would've fixed the problem, but from an immediate racket switch standpoint, it was simply too erratic. Now, for groundstrokes, I don't think I missed a single topspin stroke long or into the net. I easily ripped the ball 2-4 feet over the net and had them all safely drop on or inside the baseline with no problem and had insane amounts of kick on them. My friend could actually consistently pull off drop shots with so much spin they landed next to the net and died on the bounce, if not going back into the net. And he ran me around all over the court using heavy spin to generate sharp angles to both sides of the court. Depolarized setups are great for people that love to use heavy spin or those who look to add more spin to their games (and want to play with heavy spin). Playing flat with this racket is meaningless (and maybe risky as well, though I wouldn't know). So for serves, you'd really have to put some more spin on them to control them. You can still hit everything very quickly through the court, but you need to use more spin to control it and gain back the accuracy you lose. In the end though, you can hit just as hard, if not harder than before, but with much more spin and safety. You just won't get nearly as much pace as a depolarized racket. I mean, you can still hit flat groundstrokes and flat serves with plenty of pace, but it's not where the racket really shines for me. If you're going to specialize in that, might as well depolarize your racket.

When using a depolarized setup on serves, I could still generate plenty of spin (same if not more than usual) to drop second serves consistently into the court deep with the same amount (sometimes more) of action and kick. The only difference was that those second serves were moving through the court at least 10 mph faster. My friend tried serving to me with one of my depolarized rackets and me using the polarized racket, and I couldn't even push the ball a foot in front of me. The ball was just so heavy, AND it came in faster than normal. A big server playing with a depolarized racket doesn't really have to worry much about holding serve. They just bomb a big first serve, then finish off whatever floater comes back. It's part of the reason Sampras had such an easy time on serve. Maybe 20% of the reason. His racket was heavier than most, and as such (with the spin and pace he generated) people had a difficulty keeping their racket stable and plowing through the ball at contact. Playing with a depolarized racket, most first serves were service winners and most second serves were essentially slightly slower first serves with more kick (compared to me using my regular racket).

Actually though, if you made contact around where 10&2 is, you'd get more plow through than with a 3&9 setup. Most people generally make contact at 3&9 though. Nate said pros generally hit higher up on the stringbed (hence the placement of Federer's string savers), but I doubt that. Pictures and slow motion videos at contact show that the pros still hit almost exactly in the center aside from a few shots where they'll hit it closer to the top (intentionally or accidentally I'm not sure).

And generally I read a lot, paid attention in physics when we learned about force, conservation of momentum, and so on (stuff that can be applied to rackets), and I actually experiment a lot with racket customization. I have 2 heavily depolarized rackets at 13.8 ounces that generate tremendous amounts of power, 1 polarized racket at 12.5 ounces (without overgrip) that generates tremendous amounts of spin, 1 lightly depolarized racket at 12.9 ounces that has a lot of power and slightly increased spin, and 3 slightly depolarized K90s (that I'm testing out to decide if I'll switch to this setup or not; 2.5 grams under the bumper) that are more comfortable during swinging and generate a little more racket head speed and spin/lift. My dad also uses a heavily depolarized racket (that he personally made through months of trial and error to slowly add and remove weight until he found the perfect setup) weighing in at around 13.3 ounces.

And one final word, if you polarize a racket, the more weight you add, the less you'll notice the inconsistencies of the racket, but you can easily fix that with practice time.

Oh, and the bit about adding weight 7 inches above the buttcap came from a John Cathen I believe. It wasn't my idea. I tried it out and it worked beautifully (solved the problems I had with depolarizing a K90 because originally I was reluctant to put weight under the grip fearing bulkiness under the leather, which wasn't even noticeable). Here's a step by step of how to depolarize your racket.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showp...64&postcount=1

His ideas differ slightly from mine, but he's probably got more experience in the subject. Then again, that might be why he's seen as such a crazy person to some people. That, or his nonstop ranting about concepts people don't understand because he doesn't explain them or their benefits too well. But he has a pretty solid grasp of what he's doing as well... Though he seems to change his racket setups far more than most people, and he goes nuts when a pro (like Federer) doesn't full on fit 100% into his beliefs of racket setups. When he found out Federer's racket wasn't as heavily polarized as he thought it was, he freaked out and went on a rampage.

Excellent stuff man, thanks alot. But I thought you said polarized frames give more spin? Right there you said depolarized frames are great for people who use heavy spin. Thanks!

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by xFullCourtTenniSx

It differs from player to player. If I used a two handed backhand, I would prefer the lead tape to be a little higher up. Sadly, this raises the swingweight quite noticeable. If you could settle for a monster forehand and having your backhand being mainly driven by your left hand (like it should) to get the weight through the ball, you should be fine. Though yes you should experiment with it a little higher up to see how it works. But I think the result would be slightly detrimental to your forehand and serve, unless you can manage that swingweight. If you can, totally go for it! It will give you more power!

So putting lead 7" from the end is only for players with a 1HBH? Why would moving it up maybe 1" make it that much different? Also, why would that RAISE the SW since the weight is closer to the center? Would I be better off putting the weight just above the buttcap and also at 3/9? What do you recommend?

Also, wouldn't the ultimate in depolarising a racquet be to just add all the weight at the throat?

[ace0001a]

Ok in after skimming through the posts so far, I'm starting to think information overload...granted I think I just need to read up more on racquet customizing techniques. So specific to myself, I have a collection of Head Radicals and obviously the post 1998 ones have all gradually become lighter. So if I wanted to make one of the newer ones feel like the older classic ones in heft and swing weight, where would be the best places to put lead tape and how much of it?