Changing my modification - how do you know when you're done?

Muppet

Legend
I had 3g in the butt cap of my Biomimetic 200, 1g at 9:30 & 2:30, 1g at 7&5, .25g at the bottom of the throat for vibration, .5g inside the throat at the balance point, 2g of tape on the bumper guard, and 1g 7" up the handle on the pallet. It felt very comfortable with a large sweet spot, but without good deflection. The hybrid was Kirsch SG 17/Red Devil 1.19 @54/50. The specs were 343g, 8HL 95", 18x20 I don't have the swing weight, but its somewhere close to 325 to 330.

I kept the same strings. The first thing I changed was removing the 1g at 9:30 & 2:30 and in the butt cap I removed 2g. This gave me a very nice pocket and pop sensation, but I wanted less weight in the tip. So I took away half of the tape on the bumper (1g). But it was still too heavy feeling overall. Taking just a .5g piece of putty out of the handle made it feel just right. Good pocketing and pop, but not quite as much as before. And I still have the 1g at 7&5 and .5

In the end, I have a mass of 341g, 8 to 8.5HL with a little smaller, sweeter sweet spot and a little lighter weight. These small adjustments can really change the character of a racquet and they are very easy to do. But how will you know when you've optimized your racquet? For me it's when I find myself gravitating toward improving another racquet.
 
Last edited:

KG32

Rookie
Don’t fall into this MgR/I b******t trap.

First, know what you’re trying to achieve with a modification. Then modify step by step - if you place 2kg of lead in 3 different places it’ll be useless and you won’t be able which place has which effect. Don’t change configuration after just 1h of hitting.

And last but definitely not least - don’t overdo it, simple yet one of the most common mistakes.

If you can, try to find a decent racquet customizer in the area. Not talking about someone working in the shop applying lead tape for clients if they want, but someone who knows what he’s doing. It’s not easy to find someone like that, but if you do, it makes customizing 100 times easier.

Good luck!
 
If you can, try to find a decent racquet customizer in the area. Not talking about someone working in the shop applying lead tape for clients if they want, but someone who knows what he’s doing. It’s not easy to find someone like that, but if you do, it makes customizing 100 times easier.

Good luck!
true words - nothing more can be said about it
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
I had 3g in the butt cap of my Biomimetic 200, 1g at 9:30 & 2:30, 1g at 7&5, .25g at the bottom of the throat for vibration, .5g inside the throat at the balance point, 2g of tape on the bumper guard, and 1g 7" up the handle on the pallet. It felt very comfortable with a large sweet spot, but without good deflection. The hybrid was Kirsch SG 17/Red Devil 1.19 @54/50. The specs were 343g, 8HL 95", 18x20 I don't have the swing weight, but its somewhere close to 325 to 330.

I kept the same strings. The first thing I changed was removing the 1g at 9:30 & 2:30 and in the butt cap I removed 2g. This gave me a very nice pocket and pop sensation, but I wanted less weight in the tip. So I took away half of the tape on the bumper (1g). But it was still too heavy feeling overall. Taking just a .5g piece of putty out of the handle made it feel just right. Good pocketing and pop, but not quite as much as before. And I still have the 1g at 7&5 and .5

In the end, I have a mass of 341g, 8 to 8.5HL with a little smaller, sweeter sweet spot and a little lighter weight. These small adjustments can really change the character of a racquet and they are very easy to do. But how will you know when you've optimized your racquet? For me it's when I find myself gravitating toward improving another racquet.
Wow you have lead every where. I would try to keep the placement a little simpler. You started with a racket you like I assume so I would try to keep the frame just the way you started for the most part which means you must identify what you have to begin with. SW, balance, weight, and MgR/I. And if you are concerned about stability TW. With a goal in mind add lead only to reach those goals. If you want more SW add the mass to 12, and if you want more stability add mass to 3 and 9. Remember any mass you add you must carry around on the court. I would add mass in the handle afterward to meet the balance or MgR/I goals. If you are matching 2 or more rackets it gets a little more complicated because you need them all the same.
 

teekaywhy

Professional
I agree with @Irvin and @esgee48 on this. Modding just to add weight with no idea of what "right" static specs (for you) is like the shotgun approach to hitting a target. I'd start with a racquet with which you play well or at least find comfortable and try to blueprint it with the critical numbers: Static weight, SW, Balance, MGR/I. Do this for unstrung but modded and then strung as you would play on court. If you can't get the static specs or are guessing then your foundation for modding is not established and makes anything thereafter not efficient at best, and at worst, useless.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but I think having a little clearer idea of what you're trying to achieve (metrics wise) will resolve a lot of your questions.
 

KG32

Rookie
Wow you have lead every where. I would try to keep the placement a little simpler. You started with a racket you like I assume so I would try to keep the frame just the way you started for the most part which means you must identify what you have to begin with. SW, balance, weight, and MgR/I. And if you are concerned about stability TW. With a goal in mind add lead only to reach those goals. If you want more SW add the mass to 12, and if you want more stability add mass to 3 and 9. Remember any mass you add you must carry around on the court. I would add mass in the handle afterward to meet the balance or MgR/I goals. If you are matching 2 or more rackets it gets a little more complicated because you need them all the same.
I agree with @Irvin and @esgee48 on this. Modding just to add weight with no idea of what "right" static specs (for you) is like the shotgun approach to hitting a target. I'd start with a racquet with which you play well or at least find comfortable and try to blueprint it with the critical numbers: Static weight, SW, Balance, MGR/I. Do this for unstrung but modded and then strung as you would play on court. If you can't get the static specs or are guessing then your foundation for modding is not established and makes anything thereafter not efficient at best, and at worst, useless.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but I think having a little clearer idea of what you're trying to achieve (metrics wise) will resolve a lot of your questions.

Except for the MGR/I nonsense...
 

teekaywhy

Professional
Except for the MGR/I nonsense...
Hey, 90% agreement is good! Mgr/I is nothing more than circumstantial validation. BUT, it can be a very useful tool in correlating SW and static weight to perceived performance. And at worst, it can give some starting point for target specs.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
Except for the MGR/I nonsense...
LOL So I assume you’re ok with SW, balance, and weight but believe MgR/I is nonsense. Even though MgR/I is nothing more that SW, balance, and weight. The OP and many others have a racket they are very happy with and they add weight all up and down the racket here there and everywhere trying to achieve something. I propose it you want to increase SW put lead at 12 and if you want to stability put weight at 3 and 9. But when you do that you will be throwing off the balance and weight of the racket. MgR/I is nothing more than a ration of balance / inertia for a given mass. Once you find that feel you like it is best to try and stay in the neighborhood.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
Hey, 90% agreement is good! Mgr/I is nothing more than circumstantial validation. BUT, it can be a very useful tool in correlating SW and static weight to perceived performance. And at worst, it can give some starting point for target specs.
I think it is a lot more than that I think it’s answer to everyone’s counterbalance question.

EDIT: The only issue I see if trying to match 2 or more rackets MgR/I. Don’t do that match SW, balance, and weight and the MgR/I takes care of itself.
 

teekaywhy

Professional
I think it is a lot more than that I think it’s answer to everyone’s counterbalance question.

EDIT: The only issue I see if trying to match 2 or more rackets MgR/I. Don’t do that match SW, balance, and weight and the MgR/I takes care of itself.
I think this ties back to the OP's question. How to know why or when the mods are working. I don't think MgR/I is the be all end all of mods but it's certainly useful to validate what you've done or to make sense of the impact one static measurement has.
All good stuff.
 

teekaywhy

Professional
Travlerajm's MgR/I between 20.7 and 20.9. His target was always 21 to be followed by a little tuning. My frames all ended up between 20.8 and 20.9.
That's interesting. My favorite racquets all fall just short of 21 as well. Some in the 20.5 range.
 

KG32

Rookie
LOL So I assume you’re ok with SW, balance, and weight but believe MgR/I is nonsense. Even though MgR/I is nothing more that SW, balance, and weight. The OP and many others have a racket they are very happy with and they add weight all up and down the racket here there and everywhere trying to achieve something. I propose it you want to increase SW put lead at 12 and if you want to stability put weight at 3 and 9. But when you do that you will be throwing off the balance and weight of the racket. MgR/I is nothing more than a ration of balance / inertia for a given mass. Once you find that feel you like it is best to try and stay in the neighborhood.
Well, the month you were born in is also real as it gets, but still zodiac signs and astrology etc is just a steaming pile of nonsense. So yeah, I'm ok with balance, weight and SW and yeah, MGR/I is b******t and every time a beginner is fed some idiotic formulas instead of basic knowledge the tennis community is getting dumber and dumber.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
I think this ties back to the OP's question. How to know why or when the mods are working. I don't think MgR/I is the be all end all of mods but it's certainly useful to validate what you've done or to make sense of the impact one static measurement has.
All good stuff.
I agree but if I add mass to 12 I use MgR/I to get back to the same R/I ratio for the new mass valve what the MgR/I number is does not matter as far as I am concerned.
 
Last edited:

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
I gave up on modding light frames. I could never tell if I got it right, or not, even if I made them close in specs as my favorite frames. It's just easier on my mind knowing I have a racket that is good to go right away without any mods.
 

Muppet

Legend
Wow you have lead every where. I would try to keep the placement a little simpler. You started with a racket you like I assume so I would try to keep the frame just the way you started for the most part which means you must identify what you have to begin with. SW, balance, weight, and MgR/I. And if you are concerned about stability TW. With a goal in mind add lead only to reach those goals. If you want more SW add the mass to 12, and if you want more stability add mass to 3 and 9. Remember any mass you add you must carry around on the court. I would add mass in the handle afterward to meet the balance or MgR/I goals. If you are matching 2 or more rackets it gets a little more complicated because you need them all the same.
I think you've got me wrong here. I've had the Biomimetic 200 for at least 8 years. My favorite racquet has been the MuscleWeave, which is 3g heavier and much further de-polarized. That's why I added weight in the throat and yoke section of the B200. It gives it a more de-polarized feel. As for the weight at 9:30 and 2:30, I wanted to increase the twist weight without dampening too much like 9&3 would. The tape on the bumper and the putty in the butt cap are purely for balance and static weight adjustments. Finally, lead 7" up the handle counterbalances a handle with putty in the butt cap. Now I've removed a little mass and moved some other mass around a little to affect the feel of the string bed and keep the balance I like for this racquet and to match it closer to my Prince Tour 100 Pro. I'm one of those people who analyzes every thing I do. I'm happier this way.
 
Last edited:

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
I think you've got me wrong here. I've had the Biomimetic 200 for at least 8 years. My favorite racquet has been the MuscleWeave, which is 3g heavier and much further de-polarized. That's why I added weight in the throat and yoke section of the B200. It gives it a more de-polarized feel. As for the weight at 9:30 and 2:30, I wanted to increase the twist weight without dampening too much like 9&3 would. The tape on the bumper and the putty in the butt cap are purely for balance and static weight adjustments. Finally, lead 7" up the handle counterbalances a handle with putty in the butt cap. Now I've removed a little mass and moved some other mass around a little to affect the feel of the string bed and keep the balance I like for this racquet and to match it closer to my Prince Tour 100 Pro. I'm one of those people who analyzes every thing I do. I'm happier this way.
Alarms are going off right now in my head. You favorite racket is much more depolarized than the racket you are adding weight to. That tells me the recoil weight or MOI at COM of the MuscleWeave is lower. Here's your problem you can not lower the Recoil Weight of the Biometric 200 by adding weight. Any weight you add increases inertia, and the farther that weight is from the COM the greater the increase so all that mass you add to 12, 3&9, butt cap, under the grip just makes matters worse. The mass you add at the COM is not as bad but it is not going to lower inertia. You were done before you started I'm afraid.
 

KG32

Rookie
I think you're done when you realized YOU missed the shot, not your equipment.

Or is that just blasphemy here?
Oh boy, you were stupid enough to insinuate that in tennis skills and technique might be important and it's not only about equipment and MGR/I+HTML-HIV^2. Some major hate is coming your way I'm afraid
 

teekaywhy

Professional
Oh boy, you were stupid enough to insinuate that in tennis skills and technique might be important and it's not only about equipment and MGR/I+HTML-HIV^2. Some major hate is coming your way I'm afraid
Just out of curiosity, what is your specific issue with the MgR/I ratio anyway? Not gaslighting here, but genuinely curious.
 

Muppet

Legend
Alarms are going off right now in my head. You favorite racket is much more depolarized than the racket you are adding weight to. That tells me the recoil weight or MOI at COM of the MuscleWeave is lower. Here's your problem you can not lower the Recoil Weight of the Biometric 200 by adding weight. Any weight you add increases inertia, and the farther that weight is from the COM the greater the increase so all that mass you add to 12, 3&9, butt cap, under the grip just makes matters worse. The mass you add at the COM is not as bad but it is not going to lower inertia. You were done before you started I'm afraid.
You might be missing the point in my matching of my B200 to my MW200G. The B200 was very flexy and lighter. I found that adding weight in the yoke added weight and adjusted the weight distribution from more polarized to more de-polarized. It also makes the racquet feel stiffer. In stock form the B200 imparted very good topspin, but I still liked my MW200G better and I lucked out because it's easier to add weight to match the B200 to the MW200G. So yes, I willfully de-tuned the B200.

Now with this current modification, bringing the B200 down a little in weight (toward the Prince 100), I can tune it back up a little and keep the apparent added stiffness. I might remove another gram either from the 7" location or from 5:00 & 7:00 if I want to adjust the balance and lose the gram. Please allow me to continue geeking out. If I can't post it here it will buzz around in my head.
 

KG32

Rookie
Just out of curiosity, what is your specific issue with the MgR/I ratio anyway? Not gaslighting here, but genuinely curious.
Out of all wild theories I find it really funny, because it was made up by a guy who can’t play at all (not trying to be rude here) to precisely measure sth that should be super “sciency” and yet he changes specs of his gear every week (talking like 180 degrees changes), his logical reasoning and “experimental” methods are simply nonexistent and it’s generally a really really interesting case. Anyways, this guy comes up with this sciency sounding something and everyone’s repeating it thinking it’s a well known and measured spec. I’m not even mad, that’s amazing :D

But people here are even funnier, everyday someone asks for racquet advice, people see a beginner who can’t even change his own overgrip, but the first thing that comes to mind is to make sure that square root of the distance between his fingers equals to his age divided by moon phases. This forum is a joke.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, before I play my matches, or even go out to practice, I make sure I practice my pythagorean theorem, and refresh my understand on general relativity, sine and cosine this.

Also, on every single one of my strokes, I'm mindful of the relative distance between my playing arm and my non-playing arm to achieve optimal balance. I also make sure my racquet face is precisely open to form a right angle relative to the ground. So the the trajectory of my shots is straight ahead. Now if I want to lob, I make sure my racquet face is opened to precisely 137degrees, relative to the ground.

I also make sure my strings are not deflected more than 2mm between each shot to make sure my stringbed stays consistent.
 
Last edited:

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
Out of all wild theories I find it really funny, because it was made up by a guy who can’t play at all (not trying to be rude here) to precisely measure sth that should be super “sciency” and yet he changes specs of his gear every week (talking like 180 degrees changes), his logical reasoning and “experimental” methods are simply nonexistent and it’s generally a really really interesting case. Anyways, this guy comes up with this sciency sounding something and everyone’s repeating it thinking it’s a well known and measured spec. I’m not even mad, that’s amazing :D

But people here are even funnier, everyday someone asks for racquet advice, people see a beginner who can’t even change his own overgrip, but the first thing that comes to mind is to make sure that square root of the distance between his fingers equals to his age divided by moon phases. This forum is a joke.
Haha. That was funny. You are right, though.
 
Out of all wild theories I find it really funny, because it was made up by a guy who can’t play at all (not trying to be rude here) to precisely measure sth that should be super “sciency” and yet he changes specs of his gear every week (talking like 180 degrees changes), his logical reasoning and “experimental” methods are simply nonexistent and it’s generally a really really interesting case. Anyways, this guy comes up with this sciency sounding something and everyone’s repeating it thinking it’s a well known and measured spec. I’m not even mad, that’s amazing :D

But people here are even funnier, everyday someone asks for racquet advice, people see a beginner who can’t even change his own overgrip, but the first thing that comes to mind is to make sure that square root of the distance between his fingers equals to his age divided by moon phases. This forum is a joke.
People like built-in excuses.

Hey man, what happened in that match, and why do you keep missing balls in practice?
"My McDonalds ratios man, it wasn't right."
 
Top