Bender
G.O.A.T.
As a delayed knee-jerk reaction (oxymoronic, I know) to threads wondering "what if pros swapped racquets?", I created this thread to list out current racquet specs used by the Big 3 (or at least the most recent specs I can glean from the internet), and what I think it means for their games.
First, the specs:
Federer (RF97A)
Head size: 97 sq in
Length: 27 in
Strung Weight: 366 g / 12.9 oz
Strung Balance: 31.5 cm / 9 Points HL
Stiffness: 68
Swingweight: 340
String Pattern: 16 x 19
Strings Main: Wilson Gut 16G @ 27.5 kg / 60 lbs (varied by surface / conditions at Federer's request)
Strings Cross: Luxilon ALU Power (cannot confirm if Rough anymore) 16L @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (varied by surface / conditions at Federer's request)
Source: @MattCrosby (link)
Nadal (AeroPro Drive Original)
Head size: 100 sq in
Length: 27 in
Strung Weight: 339 g / 11.96 oz
Strung Balance: 33.8 cm / 1 Points HL
Stiffness: 65
Swingweight: 365
String Pattern: 16 x 19
Strings Main: Babolat RPM Blast 15G @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (fixed regardless of surface / conditions)
Strings Cross: Babolat RPM Blast 15G @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (fixed regardless of surface / conditions)
Source: @cyanide43 (link)
Djokovic (PT113B)
Head size: 95 sq inches
Length: 27.10 inches
Strung Weight: 353 grams / 12.45 oz
Strung Balance: 32.4 cm / approx 6 Points HL
Stiffness: 60
Swingweight: 360
String pattern: 18×19
Strings Main: Babolat VS Gut 17G @ 29 kg / 64 lbs
Strings Cross: Luxilon ALU Power 16L @ 28 kg / 62 lbs
Source: tennisnerd (link)
Observation 1: Federer's racquet has the highest static weight ("STW") and the lowest swingweight ("SW") amongst the three
What this tells us?
What this tells us?
What this tells us?
What this tells us?
First, the specs:
Federer (RF97A)
Head size: 97 sq in
Length: 27 in
Strung Weight: 366 g / 12.9 oz
Strung Balance: 31.5 cm / 9 Points HL
Stiffness: 68
Swingweight: 340
String Pattern: 16 x 19
Strings Main: Wilson Gut 16G @ 27.5 kg / 60 lbs (varied by surface / conditions at Federer's request)
Strings Cross: Luxilon ALU Power (cannot confirm if Rough anymore) 16L @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (varied by surface / conditions at Federer's request)
Source: @MattCrosby (link)
Nadal (AeroPro Drive Original)
Head size: 100 sq in
Length: 27 in
Strung Weight: 339 g / 11.96 oz
Strung Balance: 33.8 cm / 1 Points HL
Stiffness: 65
Swingweight: 365
String Pattern: 16 x 19
Strings Main: Babolat RPM Blast 15G @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (fixed regardless of surface / conditions)
Strings Cross: Babolat RPM Blast 15G @ 25 kg / 55 lbs (fixed regardless of surface / conditions)
Source: @cyanide43 (link)
Djokovic (PT113B)
Head size: 95 sq inches
Length: 27.10 inches
Strung Weight: 353 grams / 12.45 oz
Strung Balance: 32.4 cm / approx 6 Points HL
Stiffness: 60
Swingweight: 360
String pattern: 18×19
Strings Main: Babolat VS Gut 17G @ 29 kg / 64 lbs
Strings Cross: Luxilon ALU Power 16L @ 28 kg / 62 lbs
Source: tennisnerd (link)
Observation 1: Federer's racquet has the highest static weight ("STW") and the lowest swingweight ("SW") amongst the three
What this tells us?
- A high STW and (relatively) low SW is fantastic for maximising racquet head acceleration / whippiness (increasing topspin / pace) compared to the opposite, reflex netplay / finesse shots, and absorbing pace—all things Federer is known for. A high STW prevents the entire racquet from being deflected by incoming pace; more so if most of the weight is towards the receiving end of the racquet of course. But when the mass is tilted towards the handle it also prevents the hand itself from being jerked around by an incoming ball—ideal for reflex volleys and returns. It is a fantastic compromise between using raw, unadulterated mass for power and the manoeuvrability of something much lighter.
- STW is too often erroneously equated with how hard a racquet is to swing. To a certain extent that must be true, but there is more at play here than pure mass when it comes to how difficult a racquet is to swing—enter Observation 2:
What this tells us?
- To put it (very) simply, SW is the perceived weight of the racquet when it is actually swung. A racquet with high SW feels more sluggish to swing than a racquet with a lower SW.
- What isn't mentioned in the stats is how Nadal's racquet manages to be the lightest to hold yet the heaviest to swing—almost all of the added weight is at 12 o'clock at the tip of the racquet. The practical effect is that this transforms a racquet that is very light and whippy in stock form into a sledgehammer / Mjölnir / baseball bat, which makes sense if you've ever seen Nadal hit in real life.
- This may also explain why Nadal's groundstrokes have arguably been the most powerful on tour in terms of energy exerted on the ball, but also why historically his forehand has been prone to hitting short when rushed, while his backhand has not been susceptible. When you have only one hand on a sledgehammer racquet, without superhuman strength it is difficult to move the racquet fast enough at short notice because all that mass in the head means that the racquet will resist the movement. His racquet is difficult to start moving but difficult to stop once it does start moving, so every stroke has to be timed like a pendulum. With two hands however, the racquet is easier to "force" into position.
- This may also explain why Nadal prefers to return serves from so deep behind the baseline. It's harder to take a half swing at a ball as traditionally taught when the racquet is leaded the way it is. Standing further back allows Nadal to take back the racquet and buys him time to get the racquet moving, creating immense power from deep behind the baseline.
- This issue with head-heavy racquets can be fixed at recreational levels by locking the wrist (which you will be very familiar with if you've seen an old dude with a 110 sq inch snowshoe play tennis at your local park), but even at a modest amateur level (NTRP 4.0+) this will lead to wrist problems as the higher racquet head speeds required will stress the wrist. I have a suspicion Del Potro's wrist injuries may have something to do with this, but at this point this is just speculation.
- "Nadal will be useless with a wooden racquet / Pro Staff 85-90": it won't be optimal of course but wooden racquets will not pose as big a challenge to Nadal as is commonly thought, at least on sheer weight alone. The significantly smaller headsize might, but Nadal is actually one of the cleanest hitting players on tour considering his steep swingpath, meaning that if given enough time he should have no difficulty connecting with his shots. The Pro Staff 85 / 90 will be even easier as their respective sweet spots (especially the 90 since the K-Factor iteration) have been deceptively huge, with wider string spacing than what exists in Nadal's AeroPro Drive. What should be considered is the decrease in twistweight ("TW") that comes with smaller head sizes, and whether they will have a pronounced effect on Nadal’s groundstrokes, which I hope to cover in due course.
- "Nadal's game is only possible because he uses feather-light space age snowshoe racquets": as established, Nadal's SW is very high. To look solely at the STW of Nadal's frame and conclude it's easy to swing is disingenuous. This meme is not unfounded, but it is an exaggeration.
What this tells us?
- On its own, not much. Larger and smaller head sizes have pros and cons so it's what’s valued by the player that should be considered. A 100 sq in racquet is more stable than a 90 sq in racquet is on off-centre hits, but that advantage is compromised by a loss of control.
- To balance this loss of control, racquet companies experiment with string spacing (the gap between each string) and string patterns to see if they can find a balance. With the AeroPro Drive for eg, the string spacing is actually quite dense to make up for the loss of control. But string spacing and patterns (and even beam widths) have far more influence on how a ball behaves than raw head sizes or beam shapes do. This is why Wilson’s Spin Effect racquets were pushed as maximising spin (verifiable), while Babolat's "Aero beam" as seen in the AeroPro Drive is seen as gimmicky, and maybe why the Pure Aero now comes with a more open stringbed than the AeroPro Drive that preceded it.
- Currently, the “ideal” head size for a balance of control and power is 95-98 sq in, so Djokovic and Federer’s choice to use frames that fall within this range makes sense. Why? Because a 95 sq in racquet has almost as much point-and-shoot control as a 90 does, whilst providing a bit more power and stability. In other words, Federer and Djokovic get “free” control and accuracy while having to earn power, while Nadal gets “free” stability / power and has to earn control, explaining why Nadal historically is patchy with depth control while Djokovic has been sublime.
What this tells us?
- Here’s something interesting. A dense string pattern is fantastic at lowering launch angles (the angle a ball leaves the racquet), controlling depth when deflecting / absorbing incoming pace, and directional control.
- What are Djokovic’s strengths? Controlling depth, deflecting / absorbing incoming pace, and changing directions—Djokovic’s racquet is perfectly suited to enhance this part of his game.
- When Djokovic changed frames in 2018, he moved from an 18x20 string pattern in a sub-length racquet to an 18x19 string pattern in plus length racquet. Together with the adjustment period, Djokovic had a weaker ROS and directional control, but got power, spin, and reach.
- Fedal's racquets have 16x19 string patterns. The RF97A has wide string spacing, providing a higher launch angle and spin, but relatively poor directional control. So it makes sense that Fedal hit up the middle with heavy topspin or backspin against Djokovic. As neither heavy topspin nor knifing slices are shots a denser string pattern can help deal with, this causes problems for Djokovic. OTOH, this is one reason why Fedal are so good at dealing with low slices and hitting winners off high balls—they have easier access to spin.
Last edited: