Adding weight to handle area, does it really make a racquet more maneuverable?

bkpr

bkpr

Rookie
Hi all.

I've read a lot about adding weight to the handle to make a racquet more head light, and doing so make it feel more manueverable. But does it actually make it more maneuverable? So far in my searches, I haven't seen any explanation as to why this would be true.

I figure that seeing you hold, support, move the entire racquet with your hand and wrist, especially at net, that adding any weight to anywhere would make a racquet less maneuverable because you now have an extra XX grams to wield. Even if you put the weight right at the bottom of the butt cap, below your hand level, you still need to hold and move all the weight around.

Am I wrong in this logic?

I'm wondering this because my BLX Blade 98 strung with overgrip weighs 340g/12oz and works out to 3pts headlight. I'm interested in making it more agile at net somehow (other than working my wrists and arms at the gym, which I'm doing currently). So more pts headlight would theoretically do it, but I'm skeptical that increasing total weight would help in agility.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated :)
 
bkpr said:
Hi all.

I've read a lot about adding weight to the handle to make a racquet more head light, and doing so make it feel more manueverable. But does it actually make it more maneuverable? So far in my searches, I haven't seen any explanation as to why this would be true.

I figure that seeing you hold, support, move the entire racquet with your hand and wrist, especially at net, that adding any weight to anywhere would make a racquet less maneuverable because you now have an extra XX grams to wield. Even if you put the weight right at the bottom of the butt cap, below your hand level, you still need to hold and move all the weight around.

Am I wrong in this logic?

I'm wondering this because my BLX Blade 98 strung with overgrip weighs 340g/12oz and works out to 3pts headlight. I'm interested in making it more agile at net somehow (other than working my wrists and arms at the gym, which I'm doing currently). So more pts headlight would theoretically do it, but I'm skeptical that increasing total weight would help in agility.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated :)
Click to expand...

You are 100% correct...adding weight will not make a frame more maneuverable, although some I'm sure will argue that it will make it seem more maneuverable. Perception is reality to some.
 
I see it in the same light, in that you still have to move a certain amount of mass. However, a HL racquet is beneficial for volleying due to a higher recoil weight.
 
It absorbs and trajects the ball easier due to more weight in the shaft rather than the hoop. Simple laws of physics and dynamics.
 
Deodorant said:
It absorbs and trajects the ball easier due to more weight in the shaft rather than the hoop. Simple laws of physics and dynamics.
Click to expand...
I see. Because it's head light, it has more of a trampoline effect, where as head heavy is more solid and absorbing?

Also, *chuckle* at Deodorant as a user name :)
 
Last edited:
Deodorant said:
It absorbs and trajects the ball easier due to more weight in the shaft rather than the hoop. Simple laws of physics and dynamics.
Click to expand...

I don't get this. The way I understand it is that the weight in the hoop determines the characteristics of how the ball and racket collide at impact. More weight in the head means the racket moves less and the ball more, making the racket more stable and the ball easier to direct. So for a solid volleying racket you want plenty of weight in the hoop.

However, as you increase the weight in the hoop only, the racket will become more head-heavy, increasing the leverage (torque) on your wrist and elbow and making it harder to keep the racket-head up while volleying. So if you add weight to the handle, making the racket more head-light, you decrease this leverage and it will be easier to keep the racket in a proper volleying postion. So even though you increase the overall weight of the racket by a couple of grams (who cares anyway, most of the time you will be holding the racket with two hands...), the racket will not only feel more manoeverable, it will objectively be more manoeverable while volleying because of the reduced torque on your wrist and elbow. That's my understanding of this issue.
 
bkpr said:
I'm wondering this because my BLX Blade 98 strung with overgrip weighs 340g/12oz and works out to 3pts headlight. I'm interested in making it more agile at net somehow (other than working my wrists and arms at the gym, which I'm doing currently). So more pts headlight would theoretically do it, but I'm skeptical that increasing total weight would help in agility.
Click to expand...

While the others are discussing the physics of frame balance, I'd like to look at this from a different angle. Presumably, you want a more maneuverable frame because you're not able to execute your volleys quickly enough in a lot of situations. Nine times out of ten, consistently struggling to get the racket into position at net is due to poor technique rather than the racket's weight. Most likely, you're swinging too much at your volleys, and a swinging volley takes a lot longer to execute than a punch/block.

Take a look at this video of the Bryan brothers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KkOqCFyrgYg#t=316s. They're doing a drill where both are at net but both opponents have time to set up and drill groundstrokes at them (forcing them to do reflex volleys). Note how short the volley motion is; the harder the ball is hit, the less they move their rackets. Often, they simply put the frame directly in front of the ball and just direct it (not even a punch; just a slight push).

You can change the balance all you like, but you'll get much better results if you work on your volley technique.
 
spaceman_spiff said:
You can change the balance all you like, but you'll get much better results if you work on your volley technique.
Click to expand...
You are right that I need to work on my technique; so far I've only had two coaching lessons on forehand and backhand volley so am in the very early stages of this stroke. However I was more curious about the science/logic behind the claims of a more maneuverable racquet despite adding weight to the handle than hoping this would help me significantly in my game. It's something that's been kinda bugging me for some time now.

Thanks for the video too, it's great!

As an aside, the more time I spend in this forum the more I realise the answers to many questions asked comes down to working on technique and gaining experience, say, in match play. I like the truth in this and it's simplicity :)
 
bkpr said:
You are right that I need to work on my technique; so far I've only had two coaching lessons on forehand and backhand volley so am in the very early stages of this stroke. However I was more curious about the science/logic behind the claims of a more maneuverable racquet despite adding weight to the handle than hoping this would help me significantly in my game. It's something that's been kinda bugging me for some time now.

Thanks for the video too, it's great!

As an aside, the more time I spend in this forum the more I realise the answers to many questions asked comes down to working on technique and gaining experience, say, in match play. I like the truth in this and it's simplicity :)
Click to expand...

Oh, I definitely understand the curiosity about the logistics of it all. I just wanted to leave that to the others to discuss.

Another good video to watch is this highlight compilation of Pat Rafter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN6iDbtJxs8. It shows a lot of good examples of the compact motion in action in singles. If you can adopt a similar motion on normal volleys and the super-compact motion (shown in the other video) on the reflex volleys, you'll be able to handle pretty much any racket at the net. (Then, any tinkering with balance will just be down to personal taste.)
 
Technique is always important, although proper volley stroke is much much easier than other tennis strokes.

From my experience, if you take two racquets with same SW:
a) racquet heavier more headlight
b) racquet lighter less headlight
Then racquet b will feel more sluggish on some volley strokes, most notably on high backhand volley. Reason is maybe that on most volleys your swing is very compact, basicly you just stiffen up wrist at the right time.
 
Great videos, Spaceman! And of course you're absolutely right that proper technique with a compact motion is key to hitting a good volley, and that someone with good form can hit a good volley with any racket.

A key component of good volleying technique (at least the way I was taught on the grass courts Down-Under), is to always keep the racket head roughly pointing upwards and at least higher than your hand holding the handle. You can see Pat Rafter doing this every time. With overswinging, dropping the racket head is probably the most common error made in volleying. Now, a headlight balance makes it easier to maintain this upright position of the racket, especially when you have some mass in the head to help with stability.
 
How 'bout this - when you add weight to the handle, the racquet's balance point moves closer to where your hand is holding it. That image really clarifies the idea of the change in leverage needed to move the racquet around in a hurry. Since this added weight is under the players hand, it doesn't create much of any extra burden to maneuver the head around for volleys.

Yes, there's no substitute for solid technique and efficient movement, but think about when you simply choke up on a racquet (hold it an inch or two further up the grip). That places your hand closer to the frame's balance point without altering the racquet itself, yet it facilitates much easier maneuvering.

Careful though; there is such a thing as too much HL balance in a racquet (HL = head-light). If a frame without "enough" stability in the hoop is tuned to a balance that's extremely HL, that can make the racquet feel twitchy and unpredictable. That feeling will vary from one player to the next, depending mostly on personal tastes in racquet behavior.
 
Just found this Racquet Research webpage which has some stuff of headlight-ing a racquet:

Should Your Racquet Be Head-Heavy or Head-Light?

In the formulas, the key variable is r (the mass center radius, or the distance from the axis of rotation to the balance point). Head-light balance means that r is small. When r is small, r2 will be tiny, and the key coefficient in the formulas, Mr2/I (which, as astute students will note, is equal to r / q because q = I / Mr) in the formulas for Torque and Shock, will be small, which is good. The linear velocity of the mass center is critical, and when the mass center is close to the hand (small r), its linear velocity (v) in rotation will be smaller than when it is distant. A distant mass center goes much faster in rotation -- remember the carousel at the playground? So head-light is the smart choice. Head-light (low r) with a high sweet spot (high q) is the really smart choice for reducing the risk of tennis elbow. That means a racquet with a large handle end weight (~5 ounces). This handle end weight customization produces significant improvement: check this.

An important additional benefit of head-light balance is that Moment is less, so the racquet is easier to position for volleys and returns, and is not so heavy to hold up all afternoon. Moreover, with a low Moment, the Torsion from impact will be small, so the racquet will be easy on the elbow. Head-heavy racquets, on the other hand, increase the risk of tennis elbow because of their high Moment and high Torque (therefore high Torsion), their high Elbow Crunch, and their high Shock.
Click to expand...

Lots of interesting stuff for the tennis-nerd to read on that site :)
 
.




find a 10lb weight and epoxy-glue a 20inch long carbon fiber rod to it. hold the the weight while keeping the carbon fiber rod standing upright above the weight. begin your volley motion. now turn the contraption over and hold the opposite end (the rod) while the weight is above the carbon fiber rod. begin your volley motion.

both will require you to hold approximately 10lbs, but which one will require more work? which would most likely cause you to tear a forearm ligament?




.
 
Last edited:
But in that experiment you're changing the headweight, not just the balance. A more similar comparison would be still holding the rod end of the device, but changing the CF for lead.
 
I read this analogy on the board some time ago and I thought it made things pretty clear.

Think of a HH balance like swinging a hammer or an axe. Most of the weight is near the tip, making it harder to get into motion and pinpoint a target, but yields great power on contact.

On the other hand would be a screwdriver or a lever type device. Weight is in the tail end and if you were to swing it around it would feel noticeably more whippy (more maneuverable) than the hammer. This is HL balance.
 
bkpr said:
Hi all.

I've read a lot about adding weight to the handle to make a racquet more head light, and doing so make it feel more manueverable. But does it actually make it more maneuverable? So far in my searches, I haven't seen any explanation as to why this would be true.

I figure that seeing you hold, support, move the entire racquet with your hand and wrist, especially at net, that adding any weight to anywhere would make a racquet less maneuverable because you now have an extra XX grams to wield. Even if you put the weight right at the bottom of the butt cap, below your hand level, you still need to hold and move all the weight around.

Am I wrong in this logic?

I'm wondering this because my BLX Blade 98 strung with overgrip weighs 340g/12oz and works out to 3pts headlight. I'm interested in making it more agile at net somehow (other than working my wrists and arms at the gym, which I'm doing currently). So more pts headlight would theoretically do it, but I'm skeptical that increasing total weight would help in agility.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated :)
Click to expand...

Putting weight does not make it more manoeuvrable, no matter where it is placed.

It is adding weight in the grip of a underweight racquet, to meet your desired weight while keeping it as manoeuvrable as possible.

"lite" racquets are perfect for customisation.
 
marlinspike said:
But in that experiment you're changing the headweight, not just the balance. A more similar comparison would be still holding the rod end of the device, but changing the CF for lead.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting changing the carbon fiber in both instances or just when one is holding the rod?
 
bkpr said:
Hi all.

I've read a lot about adding weight to the handle to make a racquet more head light, and doing so make it feel more manueverable. But does it actually make it more maneuverable? So far in my searches, I haven't seen any explanation as to why this would be true.

I figure that seeing you hold, support, move the entire racquet with your hand and wrist, especially at net, that adding any weight to anywhere would make a racquet less maneuverable because you now have an extra XX grams to wield. Even if you put the weight right at the bottom of the butt cap, below your hand level, you still need to hold and move all the weight around.

Am I wrong in this logic?

I'm wondering this because my BLX Blade 98 strung with overgrip weighs 340g/12oz and works out to 3pts headlight. I'm interested in making it more agile at net somehow (other than working my wrists and arms at the gym, which I'm doing currently). So more pts headlight would theoretically do it, but I'm skeptical that increasing total weight would help in agility.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated :)
Click to expand...

??????? blx 98 should be 11.5-11.6 oz strung with overgrip - I understand production variances but this is off big time!

You sure you also didn't put on head tape or something? Maybe heavy dampener?

Adding weight can't make your racket more maneuverable per-se, but adding weight to the handle (leather grip) can increase longitudinal stability considerably and not reduce maneuverability by much. So you basically will get a better, more stable volley with less effort that can make for faster volleying. The rest is up to your technique.
 
Last edited:
Anton said:
??????? blx 98 should be 11.5-11.6 oz strung with overgrip - I understand production variances but this is off big time!
You sure you also didn't put on head tape or something? Maybe heavy dampener?
Click to expand...

I have a rubber band dampener and two Yonex SuperGrap overgrips (over the original grip); they don't have 4 1/2 sizes here in Malaysia so I've increased a 3/8 grip up to fit my hand. I've also inserted some thin cardboard strips under the outer overgrip (heh) to recreate the beveled edges as two overgrips pretty much rounds out the handle.
 
bkpr said:
I have a rubber band dampener and two Yonex SuperGrap overgrips (over the original grip); they don't have 4 1/2 sizes here in Malaysia so I've increased a 3/8 grip up to fit my hand. I've also inserted some thin cardboard strips under the outer overgrip (heh) to recreate the beveled edges as two overgrips pretty much rounds out the handle.
Click to expand...

I see, that explains the weight. Yea, not much you can do from here except try adding leather grip (which by the way will make bevels more pronounced so you may not need to use those cardboard strips)
 
paulorenzo said:
Are you suggesting changing the carbon fiber in both instances or just when one is holding the rod?
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is the more accurate analogy is in both youre holding it by the rod, but in one example the rod is light and in the other the rod is heavy. The OP isnt reducing the weight of the head, he's increasing the weight of the handle.
 
kaiser said:
I don't get this. The way I understand it is that the weight in the hoop determines the characteristics of how the ball and racket collide at impact. More weight in the head means the racket moves less and the ball more, making the racket more stable and the ball easier to direct. So for a solid volleying racket you want plenty of weight in the hoop.

However, as you increase the weight in the hoop only, the racket will become more head-heavy, increasing the leverage (torque) on your wrist and elbow and making it harder to keep the racket-head up while volleying. So if you add weight to the handle, making the racket more head-light, you decrease this leverage and it will be easier to keep the racket in a proper volleying postion. So even though you increase the overall weight of the racket by a couple of grams (who cares anyway, most of the time you will be holding the racket with two hands...), the racket will not only feel more manoeverable, it will objectively be more manoeverable while volleying because of the reduced torque on your wrist and elbow. That's my understanding of this issue.
Click to expand...
My understanding too.
 
Only up to a point.

Added weight is added weight. As you add more weight your arm will have to work more. You may gain a little bit of maneurability for flicking motions, but for regular full swings, your arm will feel the weight and your swing will be slower.

To put it another way, you may gain some manuerability with headlight balance when your racquet motion involves more movements in the ends compared to where the center of gravity is located (like you are using a lever). You will not see much advantage when the center of gravity is moving as much as the ends (as you do in the fulll motion).

It really all depends on what is more important to you.
 
Last edited:
Anton said:
Yea, not much you can do from here except try adding leather grip (which by the way will make bevels more pronounced so you may not need to use those cardboard strips)
Click to expand...

I'm interested in your leather grip idea, but where in my hierarchy of three grips would you recommend to put it?

  1. Instead of the original grip, in spot #1, although I would think I'd still need at least one overgrip.

  • Over the original grip, in spot #2, maybe not needing an overgrip at all.
  • Over the first overgrip, in spot #3, but I think this would be too thick, and definitely lose the bevels. I don't think you're suggesting this one :)
 
I've read a lot about adding weight to the handle to make a racquet more head light, and doing so make it feel more manueverable............

i dont know that adding any additional weight would make to create head-lightness based on new heavier overall weight would increase maneuverability. i doubt it. perhaps an overall lighet racket with equaivalent or greater head-lightness woudl very well be more maneuverable.
 
i have found on ground strokes that a heavy overall/relativly head-heavy rackets can maneuver the ball quicker from baseline to baseline. my assumption here is that the heavier end on a heavy racket can last-second change ball direction with a shorter stroke than lighter rackets.
 
bkpr said:
I'm interested in your leather grip idea, but where in my hierarchy of three grips would you recommend to put it?

  1. Instead of the original grip, in spot #1, although I would think I'd still need at least one overgrip.

  • Over the original grip, in spot #2, maybe not needing an overgrip at all.
  • Over the first overgrip, in spot #3, but I think this would be too thick, and definitely lose the bevels. I don't think you're suggesting this one :)
Click to expand...

Spot#1 - Get thick leather so you'll only need one overgrip
 
Instead of theorizing on philosophy, why don't you do an experiment? Put weight on the handle and see how it hits. I can come up with explanations why it'd reduce maneuverability, and I can come up with explanations why it'd increase it. Ultimately, they're educated guesses until shown otherwise.
 
Adding weight wont make it more maneuverable, but at any given weight, the more headlight, the more maneuverable. So if you have a racquet that weighs, say 320 grams, and you have ten grams of lead tape, the order in terms of maneuverability from least to most would be adding the lead to 12 oclock < 3and 9 oclock < throat < handle.
 
It's probably important to also take into account how a racquet can feel much more familiar for a player when its balance is near to whatever that player is accustomed to using on the courts. I've always used racquets in the neighborhood of 9-10 pts. HL, but even a frame that's a little light for my taste will feel "wrong" if it's only balanced at around 4-5 pts. HL.

I also support the idea of experimenting, but just as long as you do it in some fashion that's easy enough to undo if it doesn't turn out very good. When I add weight to a handle, I like to put lead tape under my overgrip, but you can also put it under a replacement grip, etc.

As for results, I picked up a couple of LM Prestige mids a few years ago - I just wanted to try them out - but they were borderline useless for me in their stock layout. They came to me at well over 12 oz. (I like hefty frames), but with only around 6 pts. HL balance. After adding lead to the handles and taking the heft of those racquets up to 13.4 oz with 11 pts. HL balance, they were night-and-day easier for me to play with despite the added mass.

The most interesting change in their behavior turned up for me when I took them to the net. With the extra HL balance, I went from being helpless up there to being surprisingly quick under fire - I actually re-balanced one and compared it to the other in stock layout. Not quite fast enough for my heaviest doubles action with all that beef on board, but it was initially hard to believe just how much better I got on with those frames after tuning.
 
My take on adding weight to make it more maneuverable is that they racquet weighs more so you get stronger over time moving around more weight which makes it feel more maneuverable compared to the lower weight when you weren't as strong.

These days I'm playing with stuff that's more even-balanced. I think that I'm going to eventually wind up with a full polarized setup.
 
funny question.. is there a limit to how you can customize your racquet, say if you play tournaments?

i'm not a tournament player, but the question was something i always wondered. i enjoy HL racquets, and preferably play with racquets 4pts HL and up.. since my dad works at a machine shop, i was thinking about maybe making him cut out a custom butt cap for my Donnay X-series racquet.. possibly a butt cap that weighed more than 10g's to make it more HL if necessary.
 
I think that silicone is a far more popular approach to adding weight to the handle as it has some dampening properties. Though a steel buttcap would be interesting.

I understand that you can't add silicone to some handles because they don't have a trapdoor or they aren't hollow.
 
Adding weight makes it heavier, (of course) but sometimes adding weight to the handle makes it easier to swing.

For example, with head heavy rackets, I sometimes feel I have to work harder to initiate the service swing. Add a little amount of weight to the handle, and that sluggish feeling is gone. Add a little more weight, and it feels sluggish again due to too much increase in mass.
 
movdqa said:
My take on adding weight to make it more maneuverable is that they racquet weighs more so you get stronger over time moving around more weight which makes it feel more maneuverable compared to the lower weight when you weren't as strong.

These days I'm playing with stuff that's more even-balanced. I think that I'm going to eventually wind up with a full polarized setup.
Click to expand...

are you also changing to "full-modern" stroke as you are changing specs?
 
I went to semi-western about four years ago so I guess you could say that I'm half-modern. The polarized setup is to get the swingweight that I want with minimum weight. My current setup gives me the swingweight that I want but at 13 ounces. I think that I can get it at about 346 grams. But I'd need something more stable than the YT Prestige - the IG prestige looks like it would fit the bill.
 
UCSF2012 said:
… with head heavy rackets, I sometimes feel I have to work harder to initiate the service swing. Add a little amount of weight to the handle, and that sluggish feeling is gone. Add a little more weight, and it feels sluggish again due to too much increase in mass.
Click to expand...

This is interesting, as I feel a bit sluggish also sometimes (I'm sure it's my fitness/stroke level though). I will experiment with some lead under the overgrip, maybe replace my cardboard strips with lead tape strips to keep the bevels :)
 
gameboy said:
Only up to a point.

Added weight is added weight. As you add more weight your arm will have to work more. You may gain a little bit of maneurability for flicking motions, but for regular full swings, your arm will feel the weight and your swing will be slower.

To put it another way, you may gain some manuerability with headlight balance when your racquet motion involves more movements in the ends compared to where the center of gravity is located (like you are using a lever). You will not see much advantage when the center of gravity is moving as much as the ends (as you do in the fulll motion).

It really all depends on what is more important to you.
Click to expand...
this is pretty much it.
 
marlinspike said:
What I'm saying is the more accurate analogy is in both youre holding it by the rod, but in one example the rod is light and in the other the rod is heavy. The OP isnt reducing the weight of the head, he's increasing the weight of the handle.
Click to expand...

yeah of course, you're right. i guess i should have said i was contributing to the talk regarding mechanics of a headlight racquet vs a more even-balanced or head heavy racquet for volleying and not necessarily the topic adding weight to the buttcap, which is what the OP was about. i was just providing an exaggerated example that a headlight racquet will be easier on your wrist than a head heavy one during a volley motion. and generally i've found that adding weight to the buttcap of a racquet made it easier to maneuver at net.
 
movdqa said:
I went to semi-western about four years ago so I guess you could say that I'm half-modern. The polarized setup is to get the swingweight that I want with minimum weight. My current setup gives me the swingweight that I want but at 13 ounces. I think that I can get it at about 346 grams. But I'd need something more stable than the YT Prestige - the IG prestige looks like it would fit the bill.
Click to expand...

do you have any videos of your swing?
 
No. I don't own a video camera - just a digital camera that will take a short video clip. I am planning on getting a video of my serve soon - I'd need my opponent at my next match to take the video.

Like many players that have transitioned grips, I have different swings for different grips (I can go eastern or semi-western for different shots).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tennis.yellow.balls
Decrease Swing Weight
Replies
31
Views
19K
jersey34tennis
jersey34tennis
M
adding weight along handle and racket loses plowthrough
Replies
19
Views
4K
ATP100
A
S
more head light doesn't necessarily mean more maneuverable
Replies
24
Views
2K
corners
C
matchpoint9
Adding weight at the handle = more power?
Replies
5
Views
1K
matchpoint9
matchpoint9
The_Racketeer
What makes a racquet maneuverable?
2
Replies
50
Views
8K
TennisHound
TennisHound
Back
Top