Heavier is the way

beltsman

beltsman

G.O.A.T.
I hypothesize that heavuer/higher SW racquets are generally better. Slower swing speed, same power.

Benefits:
  • Slower swing = more consistency. Less variation in swing speed.
  • Easier to hit sweet spot
  • Forces you to use proper form
  • Absorbs pace and handles heavy balls
  • Protects arm from vibration
I am going to start adding lead tape. Lots of it. Bye bye light tweenerse.
 
It heavily depends on the surface you play on the most. For us amateur players, it's hard to imagine that you prefer racquets around 350g against high-bouncing balls.
 
lordkarim said:
It heavily depends on the surface you play on the most.
Click to expand...
As indoor season started (clay to carpet) I checked the threads here in this forum and as far as I recon it was basicly 50/50 to counter fast balls with light fast racket vs. deflect fast ball with short swing from heavy racket.
 
Generally my sticks are just north of 350g strung. But I mainly do this with blu tack in the trapdoor, any lead in the frame is an after thought. Actually last summer, I leaded my 100x Phantom as high as need to be so that it feels solid all the way through, maybe 3g on both sides. Felt great, but then I played a match hitting max serves.... the next day I really felt it... broke something in the elbow, as still does not bend fully though I think it pretty much straightens now at least almost 100%. After a couple of weeks, does not hurt anymore, but, I moved to a lower SW and an inherently more powerful frame (Prince ATS 100 310). Also, I know some pros hit with stock frames, so added weight is not the be all of it.
 
Cannot agree more with OP in this in my case...tried many racquets in the last 2 years (mainly for fun just like most of us) and ended up (by coincidence) with the Rafa Origin, strung weight 350g, with SW up to 370 (not sure about mine, didn´t measure it yet but most of the guys confirmed the SW from 350 upwards).
Absolutely loving the frame for the exact qualities that OP mentioned but it is mainly because of my "technique". I´ve never had this spinny wrist windshield wiper movement and that´s the main reason why this type of frame suits me. I don´t really think that these kind of players who have these movements and their game is based on spin will be able to wield such frame. Also, someone below 70kg not being used to workout a little can have an issue, you really need some strength to swing it for the whole match/tournament.

BUT - the reward is highly addictive...the stability, plow and ability to redirect opponent´s pace is amazing. And in my case - my FH improved drastically after just few weeks playing with this one. I had to be much more cautious of hitting the ball in front and it has improved a lot.

In terms of adding lead to certain frames to get the same results - I doubt you can achieve that. With some racquets you will "kill" their DNA with placing lead all over the place and it´s playability will go down the toilet.

Generally, the heavier frames are more suitable to players with slower swings and more direct/flat hitting style.
 
Do you prefer theory or what is out in the real world?

Real World: yes, many professionals agree with you and use heavy.
I can introduce you to hundreds upon hundreds of players UTR 9-11 who use tweeners. I will assume they will blow you off the court, but maybe you are almost professional.

Having a spinny/wristy (whatever wristy means) swing doesn't matter, even linear swinging style players use tweeners at the highest levels, there isn't a style of swing that "fits" a 350 g or 350 SW, there is a level though, pro.

I guess I could see where a SW 350 would be good for mid or beginners, maybe the balls are there for people to bludgeon with a club, but I bet whoever wins matches using a SW350 is just a better player anyway than their opponent because the opponent isn't pressuring them enough to stress them out.
 
FuzzyYellowBalls said:
Do you prefer theory or what is out in the real world?

Real World: yes, many professionals agree with you and use heavy.
I can introduce you to hundreds upon hundreds of players UTR 9-11 who use tweeners. I will assume they will blow you off the court, but maybe you are almost professional.

Having a spinny/wristy (whatever wristy means) swing doesn't matter, even linear swinging style players use tweeners at the highest levels, there isn't a style of swing that "fits" a 350 g or 350 SW, there is a level though, pro.

I guess I could see where a SW 350 would be good for mid or beginners, maybe the balls are there for people to bludgeon with a club, but I bet whoever wins matches using a SW350 is just a better player anyway than their opponent because the opponent isn't pressuring them enough to stress them out.
Click to expand...

See, I feel like it's the opposite. The better player (rec level) can do fine with a lighter SW because the incoming pace is less. The other player needs to deal with heavier incoming pace, and that's where the extra SW helps.
 
beltsman said:
I hypothesize that heavuer/higher SW racquets are generally better. Slower swing speed, same power.

Benefits:
  • Slower swing = more consistency. Less variation in swing speed.
  • Easier to hit sweet spot
  • Forces you to use proper form
  • Absorbs pace and handles heavy balls
  • Protects arm from vibration
I am going to start adding lead tape. Lots of it. Bye bye light tweenerse.
Click to expand...
Let us know the result in your match day then please :)
 
As someone who has just been through this, yes...generally. I used a RF01 Futures for about 2 months on and off. Off the ground, yes, lighter is better because of reasons cited. For everything else, especially the serve, no. For me it was not better. So, I went around the block to visit my neighbor....i.e. I wound up with the same racket I was using. Lesson? Stick with what you play with as long as you can.
 
beltsman said:
See, I feel like it's the opposite. The better player (rec level) can do fine with a lighter SW because the incoming pace is less. The other player needs to deal with heavier incoming pace, and that's where the extra SW helps.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can see that, in some matchups I suppose. But, people aren't going to drag a 350SW stick into high level rec play, around UTR 9-11 and really be able to hang, if they can, they are near pro really. A 350SW is going to be a detriment there.

Kind of what I am saying is I can see someone using a 350SW and just being the better player and it won't really matter what they are using to a degree, like maybe there is some magic spot in rec play where a 350SW is beneficial, but a very narrow category, a very rare circumstance.
 
travlerajm said:
Why do theory and real world have to be mutually exclusive?
Click to expand...
To preserve the meaning of the language I guess, communication, I suppose OP has a hypothesis because he hasn't proven it in the real world, and I've not seen that hypothesis work in the real world. A theory could be proven by the real world, but the words are mutually exclusive until a theory becomes proven or a fact.
 
beltsman said:
I hypothesize that heavuer/higher SW racquets are generally better. Slower swing speed, same power.

Benefits:
  • Slower swing = more consistency. Less variation in swing speed.
  • Easier to hit sweet spot
  • Forces you to use proper form
  • Absorbs pace and handles heavy balls
  • Protects arm from vibration
I am going to start adding lead tape. Lots of it. Bye bye light tweenerse.
Click to expand...
Extra weight certainly helps up to a point. Not sure if slower swing speed on serve is such a good thing.
 
beltsman said:
I hypothesize that heavuer/higher SW racquets are generally better. Slower swing speed, same power.

Benefits:
  • Slower swing = more consistency. Less variation in swing speed.
  • Easier to hit sweet spot
  • Forces you to use proper form
  • Absorbs pace and handles heavy balls
  • Protects arm from vibration
I am going to start adding lead tape. Lots of it. Bye bye light tweenerse.
Click to expand...
Good luck with your endeavors. I've brought a couple of racquets into remarkably better layouts for me after tuning them with lead tape, but I've also struck out with a couple others, even after a couple of attempts with adding some lead. Sometimes it's great for tailoring a better fit, but it has been a universal improvement for me every time I've done it.

I used to subscribe to the idea that most of us should use the heaviest frame that we can manage for a full outing. Now I believe that this approach to picking a racquet can be a potential minefield - too easy to take up with a racquet that's too heavy if I completely adhere to this idea. What I've come to find is that I need a racquet that is stable enough for me to both control my baseline shots and also command my volleys around the net. Once I have what seems to be "enough", any extra mass can make that particular racquet a bit too much of a bludgeon - even my "block" returns of serve can be hard to keep in the court.

I also find that I have to balance my love of a heavy, stable racquet with the liveliness of more modern racquet designs that have larger heads (and sometimes significant extra stiffness). Years ago I could enjoy playing with a 92" mid weighing a full 13 oz., but that much weight in a racquet having a 98"-100" head is going to have a lot more liveliness that's more difficult for me to control. And since my arm can't tolerate poly strings, I have to find that balance with a recipe that typically includes a snug bed of synthetic gut. First world problem, right?

So as my head sizes have increased over time, I've been better off with just a little less beef on board to get the right trade-off that works for me. I'm absolutely an advocate for heavy-ish racquets, but within reason.
 
Not sure I agree. Over the past year I maxed out at 357g strung with a crazy SW. For the most part I used a 345SW, 336g static club. I recently switched to a stock Ezone, 314 SW, 305g static. Now I am playing the best tennis of my life. My practice partner who is a UTR 9+ uses a stock Pure Strike 98, and I do pretty well against him with an uncustomized Ezone. I think that the benefits of a faster swing speed outweigh the drawbacks of sheer mass
 
FuzzyYellowBalls said:
This is a good example of what I mean by real world.
Click to expand...
Pretty much all of the guys I play with are bone stock. Only time I'm using lead now is when I am changing the gauge of strings

However, it should be noted that we are all young, extremely fit, and primarily play singles. For older players, especially doubles players who play with a less developed stroke or do not have the swing speed, then I can see how a heavy racket can be a crutch.
 
FuzzyYellowBalls said:
To preserve the meaning of the language I guess, communication, I suppose OP has a hypothesis because he hasn't proven it in the real world, and I've not seen that hypothesis work in the real world. Tt A theory could be proven by the real world, but the words are mutually exclusive until a theory becomes proven or a fact.
Click to expand...

FuzzyYellowBalls said:
This is a good example of what I mean by real world.
Click to expand...
Yes. If we assume that 99%+ of tennis players play with stock racquets (not going out on a limb here), then theoretically we would expect that a random sampling of solid level rec players who play tennis in the real world would produce examples of players using stock racquets.
 
travlerajm said:
Nothing is more demoralizing than losing a singles match to a fat guy.
Click to expand...
No, there's a dude in my area that's fat, but has amazing strokes. He can't move well, but it doesn't matter, he overwhelms people with his pace, placement and deep shots. Good serve too. I got him with a few drop shots, but I couldn't keep up 95% of the time. Not demoralizing because he's fat, demoralizing because I suck compared to him.
 
jimmy8 said:
No, there's a dude in my area that's fat, but has amazing strokes. He can't move well, but it doesn't matter, he overwhelms people with his pace, placement and deep shots. Good serve too. I got him with a few drop shots, but I couldn't keep up 95% of the time. Not demoralizing because he's fat, demoralizing because I suck compared to him.
Click to expand...
Semantics
 
For me the ideal set up is a higher SW, not a heavier racquet. I prefer slightly lighter racquets (300ish g unstrung), but head-heavier to get to a 330-340 SW.
 
Since when is 350 SW high? For me 330 is pretty high and that reflects what I see at high rec levels around me. Is anyone actually lugging a baseball bat around? RF97 is like 335? Legitimately curious here. That is some serious mass
 
Blakefan17 said:
Since when is 350 SW high? For me 330 is pretty high and that reflects what I see at high rec levels around me. Is anyone actually lugging a baseball bat around? RF97 is like 335? Legitimately curious here. That is some serious mass
Click to expand...
I have been playing my usta matches with swingweights ranging from 370 to 420sw.
 
Can't speak for others, but for me personally I get more RHS out of my RF97s, PS85s, and PS90s than I do with the new TFight 315S which I've been playtesting. I get pretty good pace and way more shape on the ball with the TFight even with the lower RHS, but the way I swing the racquet makes me frustrated that I just can't get the same RHS as I can with my 12.8+ ounce Pro Staffs. Something about the 315S feels light and substanceless through the air. Anyone else have this problem when dropping weight?
 
Rally said:
Can't speak for others, but for me personally I get more RHS out of my RF97s, PS85s, and PS90s than I do with the new TFight 315S which I've been playtesting. I get pretty good pace and way more shape on the ball with the TFight even with the lower RHS, but the way I swing the racquet makes me frustrated that I just can't get the same RHS as I can with my 12.8+ ounce Pro Staffs. Something about the 315S feels light and substanceless through the air. Anyone else have this problem when dropping weight?
Click to expand...
(assuming swingweight/balance is already roughly where you want it) I have found the lighter, thicker racquets I have owned felt better through the air with weight added along the inside of the throat. ymmv. will not feel like a heavy mid, but still better.
 
tele said:
(assuming swingweight/balance is already roughly where you want it) I have found the lighter, thicker racquets I have owned felt better through the air with weight added along the inside of the throat. ymmv. will not feel like a heavy mid, but still better.
Click to expand...
How do you swing your racquet on the forehand? My technique, which could just be a coping technique to manage higher weights, is to 1) load on my back foot and coil during the takeback, 2) uncoil from hips to chest and with a slight pulling motion from the buttcap I let the angular momentum launch the racquet outward until the point of contact at which point 3) the racquet has so much momentum that I just loosen my body and let the racquet's momentum carry my arm through the followthrough. I've been swinging this way for about 8 years now, and it started ever since I picked up my Pro Staff 90. If it makes a difference, I have an extreme eastern forehand (bevel 3 right on the edge of bevel 4).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

spaceman_spiff
Low Swingweight + Low Swing Speed = Bad Idea
Replies
27
Views
11K
spaceman_spiff
spaceman_spiff
T
Lead Tape vs Vinyl Electric Tape
Replies
13
Views
10K
TimothyO
T
P
Racket recommendation that is half-way between two Babolats ...
Replies
2
Views
192
Soundbyte
S
Amone
The Player's Racquet, and Reasoning
Replies
17
Views
2K
Amone
Amone
K
Shoulder Bursitis and Labrum Tear, which transition Racquet?
Replies
17
Views
910
J D
J
Back
Top