Players who play mostly from the baseline play well using power racquets, a lot of Pure Drives/Aero are used by pros. Nadal, Tsonga, Benoit Paire, Jack Sock, Sofia Kenin, and other pros seems to prefer power racquets over more control oriented racquets. If you are a baseline player, don’t you want to hit deep into the court? Also angles aren’t that sharp from the baseline so a power racquet is a good fit. If one likes to serve and volley like Federer or the Bryan brothers, I can see a case for a control racquet. So why get a control racquet if you are a baseline player? If you play mostly from the baseline why not learn to use a power racquet like the pros? Why use a low powered racquet from the baseline?
Why use a control racquet if you are a baseline player?
- Thread starter flargosa
- Start date
guilhermefdc
Semi-Pro
That’s a very good question - speaking for myself, I have no issues generating power and depth for my shots (not a lot of effort involved). Playing with an APD or an Extreme makes me uncomfortable because my shots frequently go long - I have to put a lot of spin to make them fall and ball tend to end up not deep enough and easy to attack. Control racquets also makes it easier to change directions and attack with angles rather than just power.
That’s the long answer. TLDR version: my technique is limited and I feel uncomfortable with power frames.
That’s the long answer. TLDR version: my technique is limited and I feel uncomfortable with power frames.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
The pros aren't really playing with those rackets, they are just painted that way. I would describe the pros rackets as all control, when compared to those sticks you buy off the shelf, all weighted up.
ATP Tour racket specifications database -
These are some racket specifications from the past and present ATP players. This database is meant as a reference point for customization.
impactingtennis.com
I think they use the old models painted to look like the new ones. I know Nadal and Tsonga uses the old Pure Aero painted to look like the current models, it's weighted up but probably still a power racquet. I think the Williams sisters also use a power racquet, with an oversize 100+ head size.
mxmx
Hall of Fame
It's difficult for me. I gain easy power on the forehand especially. Sometimes too much in the sense that a control frame does what it says, give control. So a more powerful frame is just overkill.
The problem for me comes with the serve. It's harder for me to create easy power with a control frame. I use a standard blade cv 98...my strings are solinco (I think tour bite, grey in color)
The problem for me comes with the serve. It's harder for me to create easy power with a control frame. I use a standard blade cv 98...my strings are solinco (I think tour bite, grey in color)
weelie
Professional
Are we now talking about pros or us old hacks?
For me, maybe 4.0, The RF97 has plenty of power. I've only played it with gut mains. Baseline players should choose gut, as it is powerful... or poly as it is spin?
Bryans play with Babolats now, don't they? Getting old, needing extra power? Or getting old, cashing in?
Pros traditionally hit with heavier rackets. This adds power too. But their opponents also hit with a lot of power, which also is different.
I like to hit out. And an overly powerful frame (most of which hurt my elbow anyway) limits my shot. Maybe better for match results, though. So it's always a compromise, choosing the frame and the strings that balance in a way you want.
For me, maybe 4.0, The RF97 has plenty of power. I've only played it with gut mains. Baseline players should choose gut, as it is powerful... or poly as it is spin?
Bryans play with Babolats now, don't they? Getting old, needing extra power? Or getting old, cashing in?
Pros traditionally hit with heavier rackets. This adds power too. But their opponents also hit with a lot of power, which also is different.
I like to hit out. And an overly powerful frame (most of which hurt my elbow anyway) limits my shot. Maybe better for match results, though. So it's always a compromise, choosing the frame and the strings that balance in a way you want.
Last edited:
tennis347
Hall of Fame
I prefer the feel and control of the Blade v7 98 16 x 19 over a stiff powerful frame and I play mainly from the baseline at the 4.0-4.5 level. There's a reason why the Blade is widely used in the Men's and Women's game at the pro level. It's all about reliability and consistency with the feel!
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
No one on the tour plays with the blade you have, this is discussed in this thread and every month or so on the forums. Pros get power from poly strings, they don't need power from a racket. Ok, I understand Serena plays with a 100 inch head, but it's not for power, it's a huge hammer that weighs more than some men's sticks. I will agree that some WTA players play with actual stock frames not leaded up much.
Control is a fluid quantity. Any frame with the right string and tension can be a control frame. I don't think you can compare a pros frame to what you get off the shelf very easily. As has been mentioned, many times they are not the same frame at all, and even when they are, the customization done to them can make them play quite differently than something off the shelf.
tennis347
Hall of Fame
I hear you but its the same frame mold but modified specifications.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
How does everyone define control frame?
I don't think any pros play with a power frame, they are all control to me based on weight and the goal, no one training for professional tennis needs more power, they need control, that's what the poly string revolution did, it didn't provide the power, it provided the spin control to keep the ball in play. The trend is for pro rackets to go lighter, but are they power frames?
I think of power sticks as the 100 inch ones used often by older players or the pure drive insanity used to rocket launch balls into the fence by 4.0 players.
My definition is probably too extreme though, maybe every frame that isn't Wilson RF, Vcore pro, Pro staff, pure strike, Head 360 pro, Prestige, is a power frame?
I don't think any pros play with a power frame, they are all control to me based on weight and the goal, no one training for professional tennis needs more power, they need control, that's what the poly string revolution did, it didn't provide the power, it provided the spin control to keep the ball in play. The trend is for pro rackets to go lighter, but are they power frames?
I think of power sticks as the 100 inch ones used often by older players or the pure drive insanity used to rocket launch balls into the fence by 4.0 players.
My definition is probably too extreme though, maybe every frame that isn't Wilson RF, Vcore pro, Pro staff, pure strike, Head 360 pro, Prestige, is a power frame?
Unforgiven79
Rookie
From what I know, all pro's basically use control-oriented frames since they can deploy enough power from their own trained arm (see why PT57A is so popular among endorsements with Head and sometime even with other brands).
If they need some extra power from the frame, they get it from extra mass weight (e.g. Federer, Murray) in the range of 350g unstrung.
They do NOT get it from stiffness - indeed pro sticks are in the 58-65RA range, retail stickes are in the 65-72 range. I guess PD is the stiffest in both compartments.
They do NOT get it from poly strings - if they wanted, they would still use the old multi-strigs (well, in fact many pro's use multi's on hybrid stringbeds)
The Williams sisters use 104 Blade models, but the Blade is a pure control-oriented racquet, so the OS is just to help with counterpunching , as neither is a mobility monster.
If they need some extra power from the frame, they get it from extra mass weight (e.g. Federer, Murray) in the range of 350g unstrung.
They do NOT get it from stiffness - indeed pro sticks are in the 58-65RA range, retail stickes are in the 65-72 range. I guess PD is the stiffest in both compartments.
They do NOT get it from poly strings - if they wanted, they would still use the old multi-strigs (well, in fact many pro's use multi's on hybrid stringbeds)
The Williams sisters use 104 Blade models, but the Blade is a pure control-oriented racquet, so the OS is just to help with counterpunching , as neither is a mobility monster.
TennisHound
Legend
You mad bro?
I think with the game becoming more a baseline game pros are looking for more power. Federer switched to a larger head size for power. Nadal if I remember correctly added some weight for more power as well. Serena Williams uses an extended, head heavy, and oversized head racquet. I’m pretty certain for power not control. I may be wrong with Serena’s racquet but I think it’s head heavy
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Serena, because she is superhuman, she just lives large in all ways. I mean she has to be strrrrrong.
Anthony Kirk
New User
As I progress with my own tennis game I find that control and stability is what I want. Played with RF97s for the last 5-6 years, before the RF97s I was using lower weight racquets in the form of Wilson Hammer.
While the RF97 is definitely a good stick, I would seriously doubt its the same stick that RF uses. I wish I could get ahold of one that RF uses and compare them side by side and hit with them both. Anyway what I've found more and more as my game improves is I want to generate my own power and have the ability to swing out, but I also want to be able to touch a ball into the corner. Now that's not saying the power racquets have no place, they definitely do and I'm sure when I get older and can no longer generate my own power as well as I want I'll be looking at them.
So to answer the OP, why use a control racquet if your a baseline player? Even when base-lining you want control, and eventually you will have to come into the net. Power racquets IMO make for some bad habits or lazy play due to the free power. But it all depends on the user.
While the RF97 is definitely a good stick, I would seriously doubt its the same stick that RF uses. I wish I could get ahold of one that RF uses and compare them side by side and hit with them both. Anyway what I've found more and more as my game improves is I want to generate my own power and have the ability to swing out, but I also want to be able to touch a ball into the corner. Now that's not saying the power racquets have no place, they definitely do and I'm sure when I get older and can no longer generate my own power as well as I want I'll be looking at them.
So to answer the OP, why use a control racquet if your a baseline player? Even when base-lining you want control, and eventually you will have to come into the net. Power racquets IMO make for some bad habits or lazy play due to the free power. But it all depends on the user.
McGradey
Hall of Fame
I'm putting this theory to the test soon
Happily using the Blade 98 for the past 4 months now, but for a long time, I've been unable to shake the thought that a Pure Aero would suit me perfectly. A buddy works in a shop and offered to let me use a PA demo soon.
Me = big serve, heavy topspin FH, 2HBH. Like to hit my forehand as often as possible. Play a lot of doubles, I have a reliable overhead but my volleys otherwise are weaker than my groundies. I like to push people back and mix in slices or drop shots.
I don't plan on switching away from the Blade, but I will post in here after I hit with the PA!
Happily using the Blade 98 for the past 4 months now, but for a long time, I've been unable to shake the thought that a Pure Aero would suit me perfectly. A buddy works in a shop and offered to let me use a PA demo soon.
Me = big serve, heavy topspin FH, 2HBH. Like to hit my forehand as often as possible. Play a lot of doubles, I have a reliable overhead but my volleys otherwise are weaker than my groundies. I like to push people back and mix in slices or drop shots.
I don't plan on switching away from the Blade, but I will post in here after I hit with the PA!
Last edited:
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Here are my results with this theory:
I use a Vcore Pro HD 18x20 full natural gut strings.
I get more topspin, a bigger serve, slicier slices with a one handed backhand, pinpoint volleys, half volleys, and lobs than the players I play with that use Pure Aero's and Pure Drives. They are mostly baseliners and overhit a ton. Now, the Pure Strike users aren't.
The people that get more topspin and better pinpoint shots than me that I play with are all 5.0 and older, they use old head prestiges, older pure strikes, one uses a head radical, one a Yonex dr 98, a handful of classic pro staffs and so many Blades Blades Blades. Not a lot of open string patterns.
In other words, it's not the racket, it's the player and the technique that matters. I think a racket might make a 5% bonus difference in power or spin, like pure aeros or pure drives, but if a high level player was forced to use them, it might limit their ability to hit control/precise shots. Also I echo the lazy habits power sticks can create along with overhitting volleys.
I use a Vcore Pro HD 18x20 full natural gut strings.
I get more topspin, a bigger serve, slicier slices with a one handed backhand, pinpoint volleys, half volleys, and lobs than the players I play with that use Pure Aero's and Pure Drives. They are mostly baseliners and overhit a ton. Now, the Pure Strike users aren't.
The people that get more topspin and better pinpoint shots than me that I play with are all 5.0 and older, they use old head prestiges, older pure strikes, one uses a head radical, one a Yonex dr 98, a handful of classic pro staffs and so many Blades Blades Blades. Not a lot of open string patterns.
In other words, it's not the racket, it's the player and the technique that matters. I think a racket might make a 5% bonus difference in power or spin, like pure aeros or pure drives, but if a high level player was forced to use them, it might limit their ability to hit control/precise shots. Also I echo the lazy habits power sticks can create along with overhitting volleys.
Holdfast44ID
Semi-Pro
If you gel with a racquet, then use it. What ever you both enjoy using and play better with is all that matters. For me, a control racquet is one that allows more feel to better pinpoint my shots, hit a heaver ball and slice with better accuracy. I've used Pro Staffs primarily but have ventured over to the Babolats (took awhile to adjust) and then back. Tried the Blade V7 98 18x20 for a few months after using the 16x19 for a few months. Am going back to the 16x19 as I play better with it overall. It feels so much easier to use now. Lol
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
dr. godmode
Hall of Fame
Everyone (pros) has a racquet that's at least weighted for power with a high swing weight. For me, many of today's power racquets have really open string patterns which lack consistency. Many PA/PD users on Tour use a previous model that has a denser string pattern (eg nadal). I use a control racquet, vcore 95, because I feel comfortable with it. I've put tons of weight in the hoop so it feels plenty powerful for me. Yes, sometimes I want more forgiveness on passing shots etc, but this racquet gives me confidence to dominate the more points than the times I would use a tweener racquet to a passing winner.
I always thought that Gut is the type of string that gives power while Poly gives easy access to spin.
Modern frames, with bigger head size, give more power.
If the modern RA for pros is higher than that used 20-30 years ago, this again gives more raw power.
So poly strings make it easier to control this power ;-)
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
McLovin
Legend
Here's the thing...you've started your argument with a false statement. Looking at the top 10, you have (and if I didn't get the actual frame correct, forgive me...I'm too lazy to look them all up):
- Djokovic: Old Head Radical mold (not a power frame)
- Nadal: AeroPro Original
- Thiem: Strike (Not a power frame)
- Federer (ignore...all-court player)
- Medvedev: Not sure...is that really a Tecnifibre? Either way...not a power frame
- Tsitsipas (ignore...all-court player)
- Zverev: Gravity or some other Head TK3.14159/OU812 mold...not a power frame
- Berrettini...is he a pure baseliner? The jury is out.
- Monfils: H19 or 22...forget which, but either way, not a power frame
- Goffin: Blade or H19 or H22...but either way, not a power frame.
Sure, on the women's side you have many Pure Drives, Aeros, DR/Ai98s, etc., but on the Men's side, most baseliners use control-oriented frames.
Firepandas
Rookie
I don't know if the rules allow me to post links to outside sites, but Tennisnerd compared the specs of the RF97 to a stick that Federer actually uses. Just some slight differences which probably come from production variation, custom pallet, power pads, and overgrip. Fed is most likely using the RF97 with adjustments and there really isn't a reason to doubt it. This isn't a case where he is "endorsing" a racquet and it actually is just an old mold with a paint job. I would love if more companies did what Wilson did with the RF97.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
True, I made a mistake there. I think I corrected myself, inadvertently, in another post here in this thread saying poly created the spin potential to control the new power game.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
I think that's only worth the risk with the big 3, maybe just the RF. That stick sells. And ends up in the hands of people who shouldn't be using it lol and even despite this they still buy more. RF might be the only one whose popularity can overcome the disconnect there. In other words I see too many 60 year old plus players lugging around the RF and their reaction times on groundstrokes, ugh wow.
sanister
Professional
I think it is more of a personal thing really. I mean Thiem uses 18x20 and generates spin and speed from baseline. I know just one example but I'm sure there would be more. In fact just look above at Mclovin post.
Also, as @tonylg mentioned above, control is poly basically since you can spin the ball to where you want it to go these days.
Also, as @tonylg mentioned above, control is poly basically since you can spin the ball to where you want it to go these days.
sanister
Professional
Yep, I agree, great post!
Not exactly.
There is control, in form of directional + placement.
There is control, in form of higher rpm (spin), which usually requires higher arc and therefore higher safety margin.
There are top pros using #1 and there are ones using #2, so it's not a matter of what is right or wrong.
It's rather a matter what is more efficient on average and what works better for a given person.
To illustrate an example.
Imagine hitting a short CC from baseline, that will land close to service line / side line.
You can do so by having directional control, giving the ball just enough spin to land there, but not too much, so it's not a "sitter". Good luck to your opponent in winning that rally.
You can send there a very heavy top spin, bug it will likely bounce high, so higher probability for your opponent to reach the ball and play it.
On the opposite side, look at clay tennis, where hitting the ball with heavy top spin rules the game.
These are different forms of control.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
TennisHound
Legend
There is a reason Most of the top 10 use control racquets. Sure there are always exceptions, but Cilic regularly beats Struff and Monfils still beats Ramos-Vinolas and Sam Querrey consistently. Djokovic regularly beats everybody. It’s sounds like the OP is struggling with his own game, and for some reason is mad at people who don’t use what he thinks they should.
Last edited:
sanister
Professional
What do you mean not exactly? Different forms of control yes, but control nevertheless. With poly you can spin the ball in using higher margin and use spin for ball placement, as opposed to pin point directional control you get using denser tighter patterns.
Very different form of control.
It's like saying that Medvedev control on HC and Nadal control on clay is same thing.
One would be directional + placement, the other would be spin
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
sanister
Professional
Yes, and I agreed with you about it being different forms of control. I NEVER said it is the same thing like you are suggesting. And it is control though nevertheless, and how a player chooses to utilize that control depends on the player. That is what my point was.
stingstang
Professional
RF97 is way more powerful than a PD! My six one 95’s can also thump a ball harder than a stock PD.
You can put softer, arm friendly strings in a control frame (or lower tension). Something like a PD needs poly.
You can put softer, arm friendly strings in a control frame (or lower tension). Something like a PD needs poly.
3loudboys
G.O.A.T.
Newton's second law of motion states that Force is determined by mass and acceleration. So the faster you swing and the heavier the stick then a greater force is put into the shot allowing for more power. The pros use much heavier rackets on average than us rec players and also swing a lot faster. This combined with pro technique allows them to generate effortless power. For me the mass, balance and technique are the determinants of power not beam width etc at pro level. The top pros mentioned in the thread earlier can generate effortless power with their chosen sticks. I think Andy Murray had the record for the fastest forehand speed using his PT57A. To us that frame supplies no power but with Andy's specs and his swing speed and technique - a monster.
Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk
landcookie
Semi-Pro
Novak and Murray both use control(ish)frames.
Federer's frame would arguably be more powerful than the aforementioned baseline grinders.
In this day and age few pros aren't baseliners. I believe fed considers himself a baseliner first and foremost.
Federer's frame would arguably be more powerful than the aforementioned baseline grinders.
In this day and age few pros aren't baseliners. I believe fed considers himself a baseliner first and foremost.
Injured Again
Hall of Fame
Serena's racquet, the Blade SW104, is about 5 points HL when strung, with a swingweight in the low 340 range due to the 28" length.
rafa_prestige89
Professional
To have control, next.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Ok, I need all of you to help with the vocabulary of tennis then, because otherwise we can't discuss control and power.
Before reading all these posts I thought power meant trampoline like effect, the kind from a stock pure drive or aero. The type of effect when I get one I can't seem to keep the ball in the court very easily. They are lighter rackets and yet the setup somehow launches the ball off the strings more than heavier rackets if those rackets were magically lighter I guess?
I agree that heavier rackets mean they are more "powerful" by the physics definition, but if I am discussing a RF stick or a Vcore 330 for tennis discussion purposes I wouldn't say they are more powerful. When someone says they want a powerful racket it can often be a 60 year old guy who want "free power" from an oversized stick or a pure drive effect.
So, how should we use the word power when it comes to rackets? Yes, a heavy racket produces a heavier ball and that might be more powerful, but the heavy rackets are what I would describe control sticks and the modern wonder-tech sticks like pure drives are power rackets. Andy Roddick might even say his stick had "power" due to the tech, not the weight, similar to Kyrgious who uses a lighter stick to slap-da sheet out of that forehand.
Before reading all these posts I thought power meant trampoline like effect, the kind from a stock pure drive or aero. The type of effect when I get one I can't seem to keep the ball in the court very easily. They are lighter rackets and yet the setup somehow launches the ball off the strings more than heavier rackets if those rackets were magically lighter I guess?
I agree that heavier rackets mean they are more "powerful" by the physics definition, but if I am discussing a RF stick or a Vcore 330 for tennis discussion purposes I wouldn't say they are more powerful. When someone says they want a powerful racket it can often be a 60 year old guy who want "free power" from an oversized stick or a pure drive effect.
So, how should we use the word power when it comes to rackets? Yes, a heavy racket produces a heavier ball and that might be more powerful, but the heavy rackets are what I would describe control sticks and the modern wonder-tech sticks like pure drives are power rackets. Andy Roddick might even say his stick had "power" due to the tech, not the weight, similar to Kyrgious who uses a lighter stick to slap-da sheet out of that forehand.
fuzz nation
G.O.A.T.
This issue comes up around here on a semi-regular basis. You're right - the reference to "power" in a conversation about racquets isn't just one thing. I see three general concepts in terms of racquet power and these ideas don't even factor in string types and tensions. I'm not talking gospel here - just my impressions of different frames and how they've worked for me. We all have a different ideal fit with our gear based on all sorts of things including preferred feel, individual technique, swing speeds, etc.
Some frames make easy power. These are the not-so-hefty rigs with significant stiffness and enough of a head size to make for a rather lively trampoline of a string bed. A moderate swing can send the ball on its way without too much effort when using these racquets. The Babolat Pure Drives and Pure Aeros live here along with several others from different labels. The more extreme versions include the feather-weight oversized racquets.
Some frames are easy hitters, but compared with other racquets having perhaps the same head size and some extra weight, the easy hitters might seem to have governors on their engines. They only produce so much extra "oomph" when swings get faster. So I get the impression that the frame with a little more weight gives me the potential to hit with more power. That's only good or bad depending on what sort of power I need and what I can do with it.
Then there's the idea of a control racquet. This frame may seem a little more "dead" or less responsive compared with something else, but even though this control racquet can seem to have less inherent power, it may also help me to swing bigger and still keep the ball in the court. So although this racquet doesn't seem to be especially powerful, it may give me the stronger capacity to play with more power.
Clarifying the idea or impression of "power" is usually helpful when trying to sort out the finer points of racquet performance and style of play or ability levels.
fuzz nation
G.O.A.T.
I just posted some blathering above in post #43 that also replies to your original post. With all that in mind, two quick thoughts.
Most of the pros have the technique to generate all the power they need (and then some!!) with pretty much any racquet. The popularization of poly strings happened because so many sluggers benefited from a greater aspect of control that they've found with those strings. I think that the balance of "power" and "control" that works for the killers on the tour is different that what works for mere mortals like ourselves... or at least for me
I grew up playing serve and volley style tennis and my game style worked really well with a stiff and powerful frame. I could do serious damage as a pure S&V'er with something like the Wilson ProStaff 6.1 Classic or perhaps the Yonex RD Ti-80. Those racquets could really let me smoke my serves and my volleys were lasers using frames with lots of stiffness and stability (from their higher weight).
But it was pretty tough for me to keep the ball on the court when I started evolving toward more of an all-court game and hitting more from the baseline. I found better control with similarly hefty racquets having greater flex. These still work nicely for me around the net, but they're not quite as devastating as those "more powerful" options, at least in a pure S&V mode of play.
Each of us has a little bit of a different impression of what gives us power or control. I think that labeling racquets as being more of one or the other can create more confusion that it's worth. Just my take.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Interesting, I serve and volley, and have always liked heavy not so stiff frames, although I used the Pure Strike for awhile. Mostly prestige earlier and now yonex vcores. I prefer the control on the volley, not power.
3virgul14
Rookie
I play with the pro stock Blades of a Top50 ATP pro, and they are 326-27g strung with overgrip, packs a lot of power ( leaded around 12` ) , he had Luxilon Alu Soft on them.
I got Pacific Poly Pro on one of the sticks now and it is powerful from the baseline. I have TBHS7T on the others and they are quite control oriented.
So with the same racquet and different string / tension combinations you can get very different styles.
I got Pacific Poly Pro on one of the sticks now and it is powerful from the baseline. I have TBHS7T on the others and they are quite control oriented.
So with the same racquet and different string / tension combinations you can get very different styles.
