Head Graphene Radical Rev

Joonas

Semi-Pro
Let me start a new thread instead of hijacking G Radical MP thread where discussion started to wander to Graphene Radical Rev.

I got Graphene Radical Rev yesterday and strung it with my standard Big Hitter Silver 1.25 at 23kg. I ordered the racket because I wanted to see how very light, non-granny racket, with decent swingweight plays for me.

My tennis background in brief: Serve quite big, play aggressive and like to keep points short. Sometimes serve and volley. I can play big and good but also I am a head case and normally fight against my opponent but also myself... My technique is solid and pretty fluid, my head and nerves not. I like to hit fairly flat and at least keep the trajectory low. I am a chronic returner to Prestige MP and recently especially to Graphene Prestige MP with strung and ogd weight 350g and 338sw. I have tried numerous and numerous sticks to find something easier but no luck. Latest attempts: Head XT Extreme Pro, Wilson Blade 98 18x20,Bab strike 18x20, Graphene Radical Pro, Yonex Ai98, six.one 95 16x18 and it goes on and on... I seem to just simply win more with G Prestige. It is a confidence thing but nevertheless the numbers speak themselves.

Graphene Radical Rev is 70g lighter than my Prestige. The sw is 336 as opposed to 338 of my Prestige. Rad Rev feels obviously lighter but no so much. And there is something similar in swing. Balance of my Prestige is 32.3cm and Rad Rev 36.1 cm... But I really did not notice the difference on court that much.

I have tried some ca.300g rackets and always had more or less trouble with my timing, power etc. With Rev that was much less. Much less. I could swing and hit pretty normal. Obviously I could use my wrist and spin more than normally. But I didn't have to fear of over hitting as it started to turn out with Extreme Pro. Forehand was obviously easier than my two handed backhand to adapt to.

I could flatten my strokes much more than with say Pure Drive or Extreme Pro. Reaction shots and defense were easy as the you could really just flick your wrist.

Serves felt pretty easy. No surprise that spin and angles are easy. I felt I also found my big first serve. My regular hitting partner said there were less weight in the serve and strokes in general. And this made me think again... Prestige.

Well this was just the first hour and half with 70g lighter racket than before. So in all fairness I need to give few more sessions before before grapping old trusty Red Head. But do I feel I should bother? It is a good question but I think yes. I should trust that more spin should contribute to more solid game. I never felt fatigue with my Prestige but then again these things creep in you and it is always not easy to recognize. But the biggest reason is this crazy trade off: The Rad Rev plays much heavier, much much heavier than say normal 295g racket. And I want to see could I capitalize this twist. I mean it is 282g strung and og'd!!

I thought and tried at home 10g in the handle. But it somewhat lost the heaviness of swing with counter balancing weight. So at least for now I'll keep it stock.
 
bla bla bla.......My regular hitting partner said there were less weight in the serve and strokes in general. And this made me think again... Prestige......bla bla bla
Regular hitting partner often tends to be the best source of real and objective data. It's interesting that your pal said your shots had less weight with the lighter static weight racquet. This perfectly agrees with the comment of my hitting partner today. I switched from 315g/320SW to 375g/335SW, and my pal said that my shots were much heavier than before.

So it seems like there's some magic in heavy static weight. Looks like it's the magic recipe to the "heavy ball". Swingweight is more related to how hard the racquet is to swing, but with too little static weight it's maybe harder to create the magic heavy ball?
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Regular hitting partner often tends to be the best source of real and objective data. It's interesting that your pal said your shots had less weight with the lighter static weight racquet. This perfectly agrees with the comment of my hitting partner today. I switched from 315g/320SW to 375g/335SW, and my pal said that my shots were much heavier than before.

So it seems like there's some magic in heavy static weight. Looks like it's the magic recipe to the "heavy ball". Swingweight is more related to how hard the racquet is to swing, but with too little static weight it's maybe harder to create the magic heavy ball?
Nah, swingweight about an axis beyond the handle would measure what you guys are looking for. Conventional swingweight does not account for handle weight sufficiently since its measured about an axis 10cm up the handle. TWU did an experiment where they say as much themselves. Basically, just add lead at 12 if all you want is a "heavy ball" at minimal weight.
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
So it seems like there's some magic in heavy static weight. Looks like it's the magic recipe to the "heavy ball". Swingweight is more related to how hard the racquet is to swing, but with too little static weight it's maybe harder to create the magic heavy ball?
If you asked me some time ago I would second this in a whim. But when I watch my coach (ex pro) hitting with 295g and another 18years beginning pro hitting with 304g Blade it just make me think. Those balls are not exactly lacking in "heaviness". And they usually have that safety net spin that I often lack with my heavier 18x20 stick - even if I can match occasionally with the speed of the shot.

And another thing is obviously the serve. True that I serve very good and big with Prestige when I am relaxed. The racket just does the work, you know how it goes. But you probably know also how it goes when nerves kick in? The racket all of the sudden can't do the work as the stiff hand is stopping it. But can that same stiff hand command still the lighter racket and get at least half decent job done?

These are the things that drive me to give this light racket a chance. But i think key would be to just play matches and also accept that some of the big returns, big serves and big hits won't be there and just do the math that are you winning more with easier defence, placement, spin and lesser unforced errors.
 
Nah, swingweight about an axis beyond the handle would measure what you guys are looking for. Conventional swingweight does not account for handle weight sufficiently since its measured about an axis 10cm up the handle. TWU did an experiment where they say as much themselves. Basically, just add lead at 12 if all you want is a "heavy ball" at minimal weight.
Sure, weight at 12 adds most to the swingweight, be it measured from anywhere. But that racquet with weight at 12 will be much tougher to swing, so you end up swinging it slower and producing less momentum. Handle weight OTOH doesn't make racquet that much harder to swing, but it still adds to the swingweight measured from beyond the handle. Chances are high that you will swing the handle weighted racquet almost as fast, creating more effective momentum and a heavier ball.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Sure, weight at 12 adds most to the swingweight, be it measured from anywhere. But that racquet with weight at 12 will be much tougher to swing, so you end up swinging it slower and producing less momentum. Handle weight OTOH doesn't make racquet that much harder to swing, but it still adds to the swingweight measured from beyond the handle. Chances are high that you will swing the handle weighted racquet almost as fast, creating more effective momentum and a heavier ball.
Oh you just don't understand physics, I give up.
 
If you asked me some time ago I would second this in a whim. But when I watch my coach (ex pro) hitting with 295g and another 18years beginning pro hitting with 304g Blade it just make me think. Those balls are not exactly lacking in "heaviness". And they usually have that safety net spin that I often lack with my heavier 18x20 stick - even if I can match occasionally with the speed of the shot.

And another thing is obviously the serve. True that I serve very good and big with Prestige when I am relaxed. The racket just does the work, you know how it goes. But you probably know also how it goes when nerves kick in? The racket all of the sudden can't do the work as the stiff hand is stopping it. But can that same stiff hand command still the lighter racket and get at least half decent job done?

These are the things that drive me to give this light racket a chance. But i think key would be to just play matches and also accept that some of the big returns, big serves and big hits won't be there and just do the math that are you winning more with easier defence, placement, spin and lesser unforced errors.
Now remember one thing: Prestige is NOT heavy in handle. Rather, it's heavy in middle around throat or thereabouts. I think weight in the middle is optimal for flat hitting. But weight in poles so at 12 OR in handle is great for loopy spin shots. At least that's how I've felt it, after modding tons of racquets.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Don't play with me. I've gone through university studies with physics involved.

Swingweight makes racquet harder to swing fast, static weight doesn't. As simple as that.
That you say such misinformed nonsense proves that you don't understand physics.
 
That you say such misinformed nonsense proves that you don't understand physics.
Just for some basics, there is angular momentum AND linear momentum involved in tennis shot. Swingweight slows down angular velocity, static weight slows down linear velocity. In general we can say that linear momentum for the racquet is mostly generated from legs whereas angular momentum is generated from core and arm. As legs are much stronger and rcquet weight is like nothing for them, you can easily gain momentum my using handle weight, with quite small slowing down in angular part of the velocity.

Simple basic physics.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
Regular hitting partner often tends to be the best source of real and objective data. It's interesting that your pal said your shots had less weight with the lighter static weight racquet. This perfectly agrees with the comment of my hitting partner today. I switched from 315g/320SW to 375g/335SW, and my pal said that my shots were much heavier than before.

So it seems like there's some magic in heavy static weight. Looks like it's the magic recipe to the "heavy ball". Swingweight is more related to how hard the racquet is to swing, but with too little static weight it's maybe harder to create the magic heavy ball?
I just thought about something similar.

I popped strings on my racket and ended up borrowing a juice 104

well i felt like i was hitting the ball well, but there was no penetration with it. my hitting partner said that i was hitting shots that didnt have as much weight to them.

the juice had a very hh balance, but the shots didnt have the same pop.


More static weight= more inertia from a linear movement/non rotational movement

static weight will be felt more on returns and volleys, higher weight is better for these

More swingweight= more rotational inertia, so the head will slow down less and move less when you swing it

swingweight is felt on serves and any swinging shot



a high sw racket with a low static weight will not move and twist on contact as much as a low sw racket with the same static weight.

but a faster swing will be needed to create the same exit speed when the ball is hit as opposed to a racket with equal sw and higher static weight



essentially swingweight is how heavy the racket is in your hand when you swing it, a light racker can feel really heavy and a heavy racket can feel really light


static weight is just how much mass there is in a racket and a higher static weight racket with a low sw can be very stable and maneuverable compared to an equal weighted racket with more sw




to maximize your shots you should test your racket out, and add increments of lead tape. swing as best as you can and keep on testing more and more lead tape until it reaches a point where it starts being too heavy and the speed of your shots decreases

when you reach that point take off just enough lead tape to where your peak was, and then take off a little more so that it is not impossible to maneuver

everyone has different balances and static weights that they like, i have played with a 380 gram 380+sw pure drive roddick plus, and i have played with a 350 gram 360sw tecnifibre and now a 350gram 350-360 sw radical mp

i have also used a k90 stock form which was 360 grams with 330 sw

from experience and research, the best racket for you depends on your game.

I play a lot of baseline rallies and my ideal racket is heavier with a higher swingweight than most

if i played mostly serve and volley i would opt for someting with a lower static weight and swingweight, a 320 gram racket with 340 sw would be best to keep the maneuvarable profile



there are tons of different combinations

but you need to use a racket that allows you to get fast racket speed on your swings with enough mass to hit the ball well.


find the specs that are best for you by testing them out. everyone has different limits on what they can use, and everyone is different.



lastly, on your groundstrokes you want a racket with enough mass and swingweight to hit the ball, the racket should be heavy enough that with minimal effort achieves good results

with my rackets i can have 1/4th the length of my normal swing and hit groundstrokes back with plenty of power and pace. be loose fluid and let the racket do the work for you, all you have to do is get the racket to make contact out in front of your body.
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
Now remember one thing: Prestige is NOT heavy in handle. Rather, it's heavy in middle around throat or thereabouts. I think weight in the middle is optimal for flat hitting. But weight in poles so at 12 OR in handle is great for loopy spin shots. At least that's how I've felt it, after modding tons of racquets.
Yes and no. Graphene MP is polarized - not much weight in the middle. I do have iPrestige, Flexpoint, YT and IG as well they all do have mass in the middle and I can feel it. And Graphene plays very different ball compared to other ones. IPrestige is closest.

But this thread is not so much about Prestige. Rather GRad Rev and low static weight and high swingweight.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
Yes and no. Graphene MP is polarized - not much weight in the middle. I do have iPrestige, Flexpoint, YT and IG as well they all do have mass in the middle and I can feel it. And Graphene plays very different ball compared to other ones. IPrestige is closest.

But this thread is not so much about Prestige. Rather GRad Rev and low static weight and high swingweight.
Ey speaking of iprestige

I just got 2 9/10 condition ones for 30$ each

I love them!!
 

John Kawasaki

Semi-Pro
Hammer to nail: big heavy handle with a light head vs. a light handle with heavier head: if you swing the latter fast enough you will drive the nail. Just depends on how you want to drive (or how/if you are capable of) the nail. It's taken me a while to realize/believe this; Justine Henin with 10.9 oz static with but head heavy 4/5 pts HH, Rafael Nadal with 11.9 oz static weight but head heavy (10 grams at 12), Aggie Radwanska with a Pure Drive Light(static weight under 11 0z. but weight added to the hoop for HH balance)......it's doable. I concur Radical Rev with a sub 10 oz static weight but 335 swing weight does damage......and, for some reason a light static weight makes the 335 swing weight "feel' easier to swing; I don't know the physics behind this. I can not play with an 11oz or 12 oz racquet with a 335 swing weight as easily as a 10 oz static weigh with 335 swing weight.
 
Last edited:

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Hammer to nail: big heavy handle with a light head vs. a light handle with heavier head: if you swing the latter fast enough you will drive the nail. Just depends on how you want to drive (or how/if you are capable of) the nail. It's taken me a while to realize/believe this; Justine Henin with 10.9 oz static with but head heavy 4/5 pts HH, Rafael Nadal with 11.9 oz static weight but head heavy (10 grams at 12), Aggie Radwanska with a Pure Drive Light(static weight under 11 0z. but weight added to the hoop for HH balance)......it's doable. I concur Radical Rev with a sub 10 oz static weight but 335 swing weight does damage......and, for some reason a light static weight makes the 335 swing weight "feel' easier to swing; I don't know the physics behind this. I can not play with an 11oz or 12 oz racquet with a 335 swing weight as easily as a 10 oz static weigh with 335 swing weight.
The physics behind it is rather simple. You don't swing the racquet about an axis 10cm up the handle (how swingweight is measured). That arbitrary value is due to it being easier to implement in the RDC that measures swingweight. As such, the RDC produces a value of swingweight which makes it possible to draw conclusions on the distribution of weight in the hoop (useful for customisation), however it is not the value of swingweight we feel when swinging a racquet (that would be about a point beyond the handle of the racquet). With conventional swingweight measurements we more or less ignore the effect of weight in the handle on the swingweight of the racquet, even though swingweight as we perceive it does change when adding weight there. Tennis Warehouse University has a quite interesting and enlightening experiment where they try to find the characteristic of a racquet which determines/predicts power best and they get statistically great results by using the swingweight about an axis beyond the handle.

Basically, the light racquets are easier to use, because their true swingweight is in fact lower, since their handle weight contributes less to the real swingweight than that of the heavier racquet.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Just for some basics, there is angular momentum AND linear momentum involved in tennis shot. Swingweight slows down angular velocity, static weight slows down linear velocity. In general we can say that linear momentum for the racquet is mostly generated from legs whereas angular momentum is generated from core and arm. As legs are much stronger and rcquet weight is like nothing for them, you can easily gain momentum my using handle weight, with quite small slowing down in angular part of the velocity.

Simple basic physics.
Simple basic physics? How about the law of conservation of energy (or your favourite word, momentum)? And where is your proof for your wild claims regarding the relationships between angular velocity, linear velocity, static weight and swingweight?

You look like a pseudoscientist when you make claims such as the ones above.

Now let's take a racquet weighing 11oz with a 320 swingweight. If I add 10g at 12 vs the amount necessary in the handle to achieve the same swingweight (real swingweight) the two racquets will require equal amounts of effort to swing. If we swing the racquets equally, theory predicts that we will get an identical shot. If we add less weight in the handle of the latter racquet, we would assume that our swing speed would increase as we are still putting in the same amount of energy and with the same energy input comes the same shot as a result.

So much for pure theory. Reality is however that we rarely swing at full capacity and that we have a upper threshold regarding swing speed. We can accelerate a racquet with a much more substantial swingweight to the same speed as a racquet with a lower swingweight with good technique (without exerting a lot of effort!). The theory of conservation of energy demands that the racquet with a higher swingweight will produce the heavier ball. So much for your "scientific" thought process.

I will add that sufficient lead at 12 increases the drag effect of the racquet, allowing you to get a more substantial wrist lag without thinking about it/trying actively. This actually adds acceleration to the swing at impact.
 

John Kawasaki

Semi-Pro
STW, thanks for breaking it down......all I know is that personally I seem to benefit from these light static weight HH sticks; when I allow myself to try them. I have had good success with others like the 99LS, 97LS especially if I lead at 12. I'm hitting a Rad Rev now that is at 9.9 oz strung and 8 pts HH.....having better success with this as compared to PS97 or TT95 (both of these in my usual wheelhouse of 11.6-11.8 oz strung at 8 puts HL). I find the plow through very nice off the ground....only thing I'm adjusting to is my vollying (I love the PS97 and TT95 in this dept).
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
Thanks STW and torpantennis for getting to (age old) debate of swing weight and where it should be measured from. Obviously nobody swings from the wrist. Shoulder or what ever can be your reference point. Actually I have been measuring swing weights from reference point of -30cm or -80cm. You can do that with Swingtool app. And yes there is no single reference point to tennis swing...

But now back to the topic. I had second outing and played a set with another hitting partner. This is funny. Well maybe. I did return to Prestige. I had to. My game is leaning on that first shot that I can push my opponent and open the point. Be it serve or return I just could not find depth or heaviness. And yes I could spin more and perhaps theoretically be more consistent but I got killed too often. Also in the heat of the point my old habits of flattening came out as an instinct and I would easily fail.

I believe that I should rather play with the racket that support my strengths than to choose one that helps my weaknesses. I am too old to change my game completely I think. So the only question remains: When will I learn? :)

Maybe for fun I will add 35g to handle to bring the balance to about 33cm and total weight to 317g. Well let's see if I bother.
 
Last edited:

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
Thanks STW and torpantennis for getting to (age old) debate of swing weight and where it should be measured from. Obviously nobody swings from the wrist. Shoulder or what ever can be your reference point. Actually I have been measuring swing weights from reference point of -30cm or -80cm. You can do that with Swingtool app. And yes there is no single reference point to tennis swing...

But now back to the topic. I had second outing and played a set with another hitting partner. This is funny. Well maybe. I did return to Prestige. I had to. My game is leaning on that first shot that I can push my opponent and open the point. Be it serve or return I just could not find depth or heaviness. And yes I could spin more and perhaps theoretically be more consistent but I got killed too often. Also in the heat of the point my old habits of flattening came out as an instinct and I would easily fail.

I believe that I should rather play with the racket that support my strengths than to choose one that helps my weaknesses. I am too old to change my game completely I think. So the only question remains: When will I learn? :)

Maybe for fun I will add 35g to handle to bring the balance to about 33cm and total weight to 317g. Well let's see if I bother.
Hey Joonas, have you followed through with your idea of adding 35g in the handle? I'm about to do the same thing.
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
Hey Joonas, have you followed through with your idea of adding 35g in the handle? I'm about to do the same thing.
Yes I did. And it made great difference. It became like 295g frame with 334sw. Compared to Pro version it is more flexy and doesnt eat up your arm... Very spinny. Also for the serves.

But the thing is that my timing has been built with heavier frames. It is very nice frame to hit with but in points I just lack depth and blocking power like in volleys and serve returns. So I keep going with the Extreme Pro. But for someone after 295g frame this is unique option with balance, weight and swingweight.

If you like the feel and weight is enough for you then I guess this is a very nice option.

I used hot glue to fill the handle and at the end few pieces of lead tape folded. Very easy, clean and removable.
 

DonDiego

Hall of Fame
this seems to be the way it always goes in the light racquet threads ... a bunch of lead starts getting added in various places
Of course, at least for this racquet. This is the best mold among the Pro, MP, Rev and S. Player's specs of the Pro and MP (headsize, string pattern, beam width) but with a lower flex, and a more solid hoop than the MP. I would be crazy not to try various mods until I find the perfect one for me.

Yes I did. And it made great difference. It became like 295g frame with 334sw. Compared to Pro version it is more flexy and doesnt eat up your arm... Very spinny. Also for the serves.

But the thing is that my timing has been built with heavier frames. It is very nice frame to hit with but in points I just lack depth and blocking power like in volleys and serve returns. So I keep going with the Extreme Pro. But for someone after 295g frame this is unique option with balance, weight and swingweight.

If you like the feel and weight is enough for you then I guess this is a very nice option.

I used hot glue to fill the handle and at the end few pieces of lead tape folded. Very easy, clean and removable.
Ok, I thought you put 35g on top of the strung weight. I was actually playing with this racquet at 295g. Went undefeated in 5 matches, but just to be picky, I'd say more weight when returning would have been nice. I'll try to push it to 305g strung with overgrip. But to do this I'll have to counterbalance a bit on the hoop, so I don't ruin the ''true nature'' of this racquet.
 

6august

Hall of Fame
BUzzzz!!!

Anything more about this Rad Rev, please?

Recently I want to switch from my Rad MP. Due to my age I want to shorten my backswing and I think this Rev with some silicon in the handle could solve the problem.

o_O
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
Actually my 13yrs daughter (been playing for 8 years) changed from Pure Drive to my modded (317g, 32.6cm, 334sw) Radical Rev. I think it is quite unique stick as it is essentially a 295g frame with solid swingweight and still quite head light balance.

I asked her why she want to change to it and her answer was that with Radical Rev she can feel the ball especially in serve whereas with Pure Drive she can't feel it same way. I was bit surprised for that kind of answer from teenager girl. Maybe she will make a good TT smarta** in future :confused:
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Thanks STW and torpantennis for getting to (age old) debate of swing weight and where it should be measured from. Obviously nobody swings from the wrist. Shoulder or what ever can be your reference point. Actually I have been measuring swing weights from reference point of -30cm or -80cm. You can do that with Swingtool app. And yes there is no single reference point to tennis swing...
Yeah it seems to be complex, as there are more coexisting axis of rotation), with quite a difference between their rotation axis positions.
But I wanted to ask, you mean that wrist rotation somehow being eliminated in modern tennis? I know I still use it a lot, together with body rotation, shoulder rotation and elbow rotation. It somehow comes natural when you deal with heavier racquets.

There is also yet another measure which is for some reason marginalized (left out of perspective), yet I'd say it's important. It's the moment (of force) of the racquet when you hold it by the handle. And it does not fully corespond with swingweigth, from wherever you calculate it. Because you can counterbalance the moment therefore decreasing it, which you cannot do with the swingweight.
 

Joonas

Semi-Pro
But I wanted to ask, you mean that wrist rotation somehow being eliminated in modern tennis?
I don't think wrist rotation is anyhow more or less eliminated in modern tennis than before. But obviously with (modern) light rackets you are able to "wrist" your shots whereas with heavier rackets it becomes much harder.

My point is more that like you say the tennis stroke can not be isolated to wrist or elbow or shoulder but is more the combination of these joints moving starting from core. So in that context heavy racket with low swing weight has higher swingweight from reference point below the standard 10cm from butcap compared to a light racket with higher swingweight. And this you can measure with Swingtool app but not with traditional swingweight measuring device.

How I see it the role of the wrist is to let racket go "round" it and not to resist that movement to enable acceleration. In other word racket (and its head) with enough mass and adjusted to your swing will help to get effortless power (speed at point of contact) and spin. And all this requires good technique, loose joints, good timing and lot of exercise :) And then by the laws of physics you need enough mass at high enough velocity and acceleration to meet the ball.

Obviously different techniques can leverage different rackets. I see young guys hitting fast and heavy shots with light rackets. They are able to maximize the velocity and rotation around the wrist. and then we have bit more old school guys like myself that need overall heavier frame to reach power because we can't flick the wrist with same effectiveness. And then the pros have obviously operate in higher level in all the aspects.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
This field is so complex and interesting as well. One can see and point out so much that is important in this respect.

What I consider a good, natural design of the racquets are the ones with less mass in the head and more in the throat and handle. Because the mass in the handle is what makes the things heavier, from any existing axis of rotation head is the farthest place, especially the tip of the head. Therefore with racquet with the mass concentrated more in the throat and handle than in the head you can expect that it will be pretty maneuverable and easier to swing as well, whether the axis of rotation is in the wrist or somewhere else. Of course, if the mass is specifically concentrated closer to the wrist, it makes thing easier to the wrist (not necessary to the rest of body).

Modern design racquets may be less natural. May be more effective too, with adequate technique, like spinwise. But I'm not sure they're equally beneficial to the health. Although it may look like less mass is better, but these guys state otherwise:
http://www.racquetresearch.com/
that higher mass, in combination with light head, is the best for the arm and joints health.

Anyway, I plan to stay 'old school' hitter ;)
 
Top