Anyone else use the TWU Racquet Performance Analysis tool? Thoughts?

[time_fly]

In case you aren’t familiar, here is a link to the tool I am talking about. It lets you visual the “Racquet universe” and search for racquets looking at plots of 9 different characteristics versus swing weight. Those characteristics are Power, Power Zone Size, Swing Speed, Spin, Plow-through, Shot Speed, Launch Angle, Shot Distance, and Flight Time. There are various parameters you can tweak, including simulated customizations.

The tool provides some interesting insights, but I also find things that make me wonder how realistic it is. For example, if I compare the regular Pure Aero 2019 versus the Plus version, the regular one is the same or “better than” the Plus in all areas, including plow-through, spin, shot speed, etc. Which I don’t find to be the case in real life. In fact, the Phantom 93P 14x18 measures almost identically in all characteristics to the Pure Aero Plus which I find mind-blowing. The Dunlop Srixon CX 200 puts up more spin than the regular Pure Aero 2019. Etc.

So I’m not sure if the data is so theoretical to be useless in real life, or if observations made on-court about racquets like the Pure Aero having more spin than almost all other racquets are false when objectively measured.

 

[bigdaddy]

In case you aren’t familiar, here is a link to the tool I am talking about. It lets you visual the “Racquet universe” and search for racquets looking at plots of 9 different characteristics versus swing weight. Those characteristics are Power, Power Zone Size, Swing Speed, Spin, Plow-through, Shot Speed, Launch Angle, Shot Distance, and Flight Time. There are various parameters you can tweak, including simulated customizations.

The tool provides some interesting insights, but I also find things that make me wonder how realistic it is. For example, if I compare the regular Pure Aero 2019 versus the Plus version, the regular one is the same or “better than” the Plus in all areas, including plow-through, spin, shot speed, etc. Which I don’t find to be the case in real life. In fact, the Phantom 93P 14x18 measures almost identically in all characteristics to the Pure Aero Plus which I find mind-blowing. The Dunlop Srixon CX 200 puts up more spin than the regular Pure Aero 2019. Etc.

So I’m not sure if the data is so theoretical to be useless in real life, or if observations made on-court about racquets like the Pure Aero having more spin than almost all other racquets are false when objectively measured.

Doesn’t make sense to me either! Nothing can compare with playing with a racquet. My grandson has an old Vcore tour f and I played with it today. The power lever is rated low but I hit the ball solid with it. I say pick out a racquet that I think looks good and okay with it.

 

[SinneGOAT]

Accurate to a point, but I think there are some things that could be explained more. The “power” category is I believe based on the swingweight and static weight rather than head size or stiffness, but it’s hard to gauge how they say what is more “powerful”

 

[socallefty]

It seems to be based entirely on specs. Racquet manufacturers would tell you that the way they distribute the weight, the dampening materials they build in, the variances in rigidity at different parts of the frame, the changing beam shape at different parts of the racquet, the distance between strings in the center/top etc. also all have a lot to do with how a racquet performs beyond its specs for static weight, SW, balance, beam width, stiffness RA, head size, number of main/cross strings etc. I think it is good to look at it and the strings database as loose guidelines, but it should not be used too literally otherwise.

 

[time_fly]

The next oddity I found in there today is that the Phantom 93P (18x20) produces slightly more spin than the Phantom 93P (14x18) in their analysis.