tom_asdelonge182
Semi-Pro
would plow through be the feeling that you get when you feel the weight from the racquet do the job for you?
would plow through be the feeling that you get when you feel the weight from the racquet do the job for you?
Wow, so if you drive a Mini Cooper and you want to plow through a Hummer in a head-on collision, you should just step on the gas and drive even faster right into the Hummer? Amazing........I guess I should just switch to a 5 oz. racquet and swing for the fences then. :-?
The Hummer doesn't even have to be moving. What happens to a Mini Cooper travelling at 100mph when it slams into a solid cinder block wall?Dont use physics for an excuse for why you dont know what you are talking about.
The faster the mini-Cooper goes, the more potential for damage on the Hummer. It may get scrunched just the same either way, but if a mini-Cooper hits a car at 200 mph, even a Hummer is going to get damaged.
If the Hummer is rolling at 2 mph and just bumps into the mini-Cooper, the mini-Cooper may be unharmed as well.
The simple formula for force is (Mass * Acceleration)
And in tennis we are not talking about the difference between a Hummer and a Mini-Cooper, we are talking about objects that are in some cases have a less then 10% difference in mass.
So it's more than reasonable that if you can get a lighter racquet around faster, you can put just as much force on it as you could a heavier racquet that you had a tougher time getting around. (due to poor technique, etc.....)
The mini cooper and the hummer scenarios are all off.
The cars are of different CONSTRUCTION.
IF we were to design both of the cars using the same material, but different in weight, the scenario would be more valid.
And, BTW, I agree with Jarvier. That's a much more valid scenario.
Edit: Why not visit www.wreckedexotics.com for some bike-through-a-car pictures? That's plow-through by an object that's only about 15% the weight of a car, but hitting it at "warp speed".
My bicycle weighs about 21 pounds and it's from the 1980s so maybe bicycles are lighter today. I'd assume at least 3K pounds for a car. Not sure how you came up with 15%.
^^
I mean motorbike ....
The Hummer doesn't even have to be moving. What happens to a Mini Cooper travelling at 100mph when it slams into a solid cinder block wall?
If a lighter racquet can put just as much power on the ball as a heavier racquet just by swinging faster (all else being equal) then why are almost all lighter racquets stiffer and thus inherently more powerful? Oh yeah, it's because swinging faster cannot make up for the lack of mass, thus, they also have to make the racquet much stiffer to compensate for the lack of mass in producing power. Otherwise, a 9 oz. racquet with a stiffness of 50 will have very little power no matter how fast you can physically swing it. Your arm just can't swing that much faster or else the pros wouldn't add lead tape to their racquets to increase their swingweight while knowing how important racquet head speed is. You also lose control when you swing too fast, thus, a heavier racquet gives you controllable power.
BTW, you obviously don't know physics because we're not talking about F=ma here, we're talking about p=mv. Yes, I do have a degree in mechanical engineering from an Ivy League university.
Other people are talking about lighter racquets giving faster swings. I'm saying that even a lighter racquet will not allow you to swing the racquet fast enough to compensate for the lack of mass.You are assuming that lighter racket means faster swings - it doesn't - lighter racket will mean faster reaction, but the max speed at the point of impact can be greater with heavier or differently balanced stick. For example the (flat) serve velocity is almost entirely dependent on racket head velocity at the point of impact, yet very fast serves can be had from very heavy frames. Research on details is still ongoing.
P.S. Not even in ivy league does engineering degree make you a tennis gear dynamics specialist...though I'm surprised it's not helping you come up with better arguments either.
The Hummer doesn't even have to be moving. What happens to a Mini Cooper travelling at 100mph when it slams into a solid cinder block wall?
If a lighter racquet can put just as much power on the ball as a heavier racquet just by swinging faster (all else being equal) then why are almost all lighter racquets stiffer and thus inherently more powerful? Oh yeah, it's because swinging faster cannot make up for the lack of mass, thus, they also have to make the racquet much stiffer to compensate for the lack of mass in producing power. Otherwise, a 9 oz. racquet with a stiffness of 50 will have very little power no matter how fast you can physically swing it. Your arm just can't swing that much faster or else the pros wouldn't add lead tape to their racquets to increase their swingweight while knowing how important racquet head speed is. You also lose control when you swing too fast, thus, a heavier racquet gives you controllable power.
BTW, you obviously don't know physics because we're not talking about F=ma here, we're talking about p=mv. Yes, I do have a degree in mechanical engineering from an Ivy League university.
Huh? I'm guessing you have no idea what "v" means.Ummm, ya. p=mv doesnt exactly help your argument either. (did they teach you what the v stands for in your Ivy League college??)
Now you are throwing brick walls into it. The material and it's ability to withstand force is a major factor here that does not apply to your argument.
Otherwise I might as well mention how if you throw a penny off of a tall building it could go right thru someone's skull.
Nobody is debating that if you swing two racquets at the same speed, the heavier one will hit the ball somewhat further.
But the common sense observation is that not eveyone can swing the heavier racquet at the same speed, and anyone who's went out and gotten the k90 but doesnt have good form experiences what NBM mentioned, the ball isnt going to go anywhere.
So the point is that you go find the racquet with the most mass that you can handle.
Otherwise what the heck is your point? That we should all go out and buy k90's because they are the heaviest and produce the most power?
And since speed doesnt matter at all, perhaps I dont even have to swing my k90. I can just sort of block everything and hit incredible shots, more so then my 10oz racquet. (in reality they will both produce the same result, they wont do anything if you dont move them)
Other people are talking about lighter racquets giving faster swings. I'm saying that even a lighter racquet will not allow you to swing the racquet fast enough to compensate for the lack of mass.
explain to us why most lighter racquets also tend to be stiffer? Could it be to compensate for the lack of mass?
According to some people here, all you need to do is to swing the lighter racquet faster to compensate for the lack of mass. If that were the case, there would be no need to make lighter racquets also stiffer, with wider beams, and thus, more powerful.
And, no, research on basic fundamental physics (mechanics) is not ongoing. Issac Newton already figured it all out over 300 years ago.
Heavy racquets can give you faster serves because the greater mass transfers more mometum to the ball, provided you can maintain your racquet head speed. The greater mass can also offset a slightly lower swing speed and still produce bigger serves. I can serve huge with heavy racquets like the PS 6.0 85 and the PS Tour 90. It's much harder for me to pound flat serves with lighter racquets even though I can swing them faster.
A heavier racquet will plow through the ball better than a lighter racquet will, all else being equal. End of story.
Well, those two racquets aren't exactly equal other than weight are they?Which one would you say will plow through the ball better - 11oz 10 points head heavy racket or a 12 oz 10 points headlight racket?
Huh? I'm guessing you have no idea what "v" means.
This is a thread about plow through. I have no idea why you are talking about "force", "acceleration", and how "far" you can hit the ball.
A heavier racquet will plow through the ball better than a lighter racquet will, all else being equal. End of story.
You still haven't answered why lighter racquets tend to be stiffer, have wider beams, and are more inherently powerful than most heavier racquets if all one needs to do is to swing the lighter racquet faster to generate the same power as the heavier racquet.
There is no substitute for weight. That's why they classify boxers by weight classes and not by how fast they can swing their arms. A heavyweight boxer swinging slower will pack more plow through in his punch than a featherweight boxer swinging his arm faster.
Well, those two racquets aren't exactly equal other than weight are they?