Forget RDC flex, it's all about top of the frame

[maxpotapov]

This is what I think makes a racquet elbow-friendly (in terms of flex): the way it bends or flutters in the upper hoop. Especially when hit higher in the stringbed (which happens quite often in the modern game).

Case in point:

Head Graphene Instinct Rev, 59 RDC is the lowest of all Graphene racquets, but the hoop is too rigid to bend, like in the rest of Graphene line. I'll look for something else for my kid to play.

Volkl PB 10 Mid had too much flutter in the top, they fixed it in Organix 10 Mid and reviewers noticed it's not as soft or silky smooth anymore. Same 59 RDC.

Yonex Ai 98: on of the product highlights is "YONEX knows that many players catch the ball at the top of frame." Probably the most arm friendly racquet of all with wide "aerodynamic" beams.

I remember a high-speed hi-res video of Federer's forehand (like 1000 fps) where it's captured how shockwave goes through the hoop of his white PS90, as it deforms and vibrates quite badly. I bet you won't be able to see it with RF97A

I understand that racquet engineers come from "stability is good for performance" stand point (hence the wide sweet zone of PS97), but lack of deformation and vibrations of the frame is really not healthy or enjoyable by all who play for fun.

I wish they use Flex Infinity machine in TW University,
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=413315

 

[ART ART]

@maxpotapov: 100% agree with you.

BTW ... are you saying that Federer rackets are much more flexible in the hoop, than those they sell in the retail market ?

 

[maxpotapov]

All I know is K90 was much less muted than next iterations, and I myself could feel its hoop flex and hear it flutter on some mishits. Almost wooden response and sound. I would not be surprised if Federer used paintjobs ever since K90, judging by how PS90 hoop went in waves in that high-speed capture.

 

[TimothyO]

I've noticed this with the Graphene Prestige S. On paper its low flex indicates an arm friendly frame. But I develop wrist pain after playing with it (some searches reveals others have experienced the same thing). During a hitting session it has a weird combination of feel... not really harsh, sort of crisp...the real issue arises over time. At first it took a day or two of hitting with it. Now it happens after 20 minutes or so but not with other frames. Which is too bad because I really like the frame.

Meanwhile my Pure Storms and Pro Staff 95s feel great and never cause wrist problems. I should note that all of these frames are modded to the same weight, balance, and SW.

 

[maxpotapov]

Let me put it this way: for the lack of flex points in the racquet frame, shock wave will "distort" your arm, where wrist and elbow are the only flex points. Holding the racquet very loose adds hand/fingers to the equation.

By the way, remember how flex points used to be what differentiated Head pro stocks from retail frames of the same mold?

 

[LapsedNoob]

Seems to me my V1 is pretty rigid at the top but still quite comfortable.

 

[jelle v]

So HEAD was right all along with the HEAD Flexpoint concept? :shock:

 

[heninfan99]

I think RDC is a good general guide. I hit with a Babolat that felt really stiff and looked up the RDC, it was over 70. I hit with a very flexible LM Prestige mid and it turned out to be RDC 63. Pretty good guide. I tend to like racquets that have an RDC of 65-67 best. Flex in the throat of the racquet feels noticeable.

 

[TimothyO]

I think RDC is a good general guide. I hit with a Babolat that felt really stiff and looked up the RDC, it was over 70. I hit with a very flexible LM Prestige mid and it turned out to be RDC 63. Pretty good guide. I tend to like racquets that have an RDC of 65-67 best. Flex in the throat of the racquet feels noticeable.

I think that RDC is like other frame specs such as swingweight: it's just one factor that needs to be considered in the context of other factors.

For example, beam shape, thickness, and construction/layup seems as important as RDC flex value in describing a frame's comfort level and actual, functional flex on court. RDC measures flex in a specific (and important) area of the frame. But it doesn't meaure flex throughout the frame and under conditions that mirror ball impact in the hoop.

 

[KYHacker]

This is what I think makes a racquet elbow-friendly (in terms of flex): the way it bends or flutters in the upper hoop. Especially when hit higher in the stringbed (which happens quite often in the modern game).
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=413315

I agree that how the racquet handles hits higher in the stringbed is teh primary issue, but I don't think the stiffness of the upper hoop is the criteria. I have found that the stiffer the hoop, the more comfortable hits are when they are higher in the stringbed provided that the frame flexes enough through the throat and near the handle. If that long "bend" can be felt on a well hit and a less than well hit ball, I have generally found the frame to be comfortable and arm friendly. Frames that flex equally along their distance and which are dead in the upper hoop are the ones that bother my wrist, elbow, and shoulder.

 

[maxpotapov]

Frames that flex equally along their distance and which are dead in the upper hoop are the ones that bother my wrist, elbow, and shoulder.

Exactly, dead in the upper hoop, that's how it feels.

 

[maxpotapov]

So HEAD was right all along with the HEAD Flexpoint concept? :shock:

Well, they should've added a couple more holes to make it work, at 10 and 2 o'clock

 

[maxpotapov]

Seems to me my V1 is pretty rigid at the top but still quite comfortable.

Even when hit higher in the stringbed?

 

[LapsedNoob]

Even when hit higher in the stringbed?

Yes. I have never felt a jarring shot with this racquet.

Too muted, yes at times, but it does not feel uncomfortable anywhere.

The racquet has an oddball taper compared to most. The beam is thick at the top and handle and thinner in the lower hoop.

 

[torpantennis]

Exactly, dead in the upper hoop, that's how it feels.

I feel many racquets are less dead in the upper hoop, if you add a bit of lead at noon. Lead there also seems to add comfort on those balls hit high up in the hoop.

Aren't most all pros using lead at noon nowadays?

 

[maxpotapov]

I think that RDC is like other frame specs such as swingweight: it's just one factor that needs to be considered in the context of other factors.

For example, beam shape, thickness, and construction/layup seems as important as RDC flex value in describing a frame's comfort level and actual, functional flex on court. RDC measures flex in a specific (and important) area of the frame. But it doesn't meaure flex throughout the frame and under conditions that mirror ball impact in the hoop.

I know what the next big thing in the "racket science" will be: the art of flex. Imagine marketing campaign that shows how racquet goes through complex deformation on impact compared to competitor's "frying pan" that transfers the shock wave without any loss -- straight to the arm. Racquet that you can feel and enjoy versus racquet that's dead or just meh on impact.

I mean, they need to invent something in order to sell next gen frames and there's a limit how much more stable/rigid/strong you can make a racquet frame. Head Graphene generation and new Wilson's flagship models reached this limit in my opinion.

Vantage Bastcore was an interesting attempt to market flex. And, by the way, if the racquet has limited resource due to its elasticity (much like synthetic strings) - it is good for business, right? HEAD Flexpoint was a brute force approach to the problem but now we have finer technologies to use and market.

 

[heninfan99]

Yeah. It's just a chunk of info, one of many but a very key bit of info.

I think that RDC is like other frame specs such as swingweight: it's just one factor that needs to be considered in the context of other factors.

For example, beam shape, thickness, and construction/layup seems as important as RDC flex value in describing a frame's comfort level and actual, functional flex on court. RDC measures flex in a specific (and important) area of the frame. But it doesn't meaure flex throughout the frame and under conditions that mirror ball impact in the hoop.

 

[Power Player]

I think that RDC is like other frame specs such as swingweight: it's just one factor that needs to be considered in the context of other factors.

For example, beam shape, thickness, and construction/layup seems as important as RDC flex value in describing a frame's comfort level and actual, functional flex on court. RDC measures flex in a specific (and important) area of the frame. But it doesn't meaure flex throughout the frame and under conditions that mirror ball impact in the hoop.

Agree, that is why I find the vibration frequency chart to be a good resource.

 

[Power Player]

I know what the next big thing in the "racket science" will be: the art of flex. Imagine marketing campaign that shows how racquet goes through complex deformation on impact compared to competitor's "frying pan" that transfers the shock wave without any loss -- straight to the arm. Racquet that you can feel and enjoy versus racquet that's dead or just meh on impact.

I mean, they need to invent something in order to sell next gen frames and there's a limit how much more stable/rigid/strong you can make a racquet frame. Head Graphene generation and new Wilson's flagship models reached this limit in my opinion.

Vantage Bastcore was an interesting attempt to market flex. And, by the way, if the racquet has limited resource due to its elasticity (much like synthetic strings) - it is good for business, right? HEAD Flexpoint was a brute force approach to the problem but now we have finer technologies to use and market.

Yep but to get people from stiff frames to soft ones, you need tech that retains the direct ball off the stringbed that stiff frames provide, as they make the game easier in that regard (easier depth, point and click type power).

No way some random player (the majority of players) who uses a stiff babolat is going to switch to a flexy frame just for better feel, and give up that free depth and power. We all know that's not going to happen.

 

[maxpotapov]

Yep but to get people from stiff frames to soft ones, you need tech that retains the direct ball off the stringbed that stiff frames provide, as they make the game easier in that regard (easier depth, point and click type power).

No way some random player (the majority of players) who uses a stiff babolat is going to switch to a flexy frame just for better feel, and give up that free depth and power. We all know that's not going to happen.

I still remember how I first tried green and silver Prestige 600. The feel, the sound... I just want people to enjoy hitting the ball with the racquet, that's all. Hitting that's sweeter than winning

 

[Power Player]

I still remember how I first tried green and silver Prestige 600. The feel, the sound... I just want people to enjoy hitting the ball with the racquet, that's all. Hitting that's sweeter than winning

I hear you, but thats not going to sell frames (outside of some of us here) as we know.