Increasing swingweight while maintaining MGR/I

A

Aussie-pro

Rookie
Hey all,

Is there any way to increase swingweight in a frame via adding lead and keeping a high MGR/I without needing to add a ton of additional lead to increase static weight?

What would be the best platform stick to add lead at 12 to achieve minimum 340 SW while keeping the static weight reasonably low and still having a MGR/I value of close to 21? Is the key finding the most HL balanced frame with the highest swingweight in stock form?
 
Aussie-pro said:
Hey all,

Is there any way to increase swingweight in a frame via adding lead and keeping a high MGR/I without needing to add a ton of additional lead to increase static weight?

What would be the best platform stick to add lead at 12 to achieve minimum 340 SW while keeping the static weight reasonably low and still having a MGR/I value of close to 21? Is the key finding the most HL balanced frame with the highest swingweight in stock form?
Click to expand...
light frames like the Hyper Hammer 5.3 stretch is a great frame to get there....

Which btw is actually hh...

I just did one and I think (have to measure) I have a 340 sw at around 320g.
 
I just watched a video of a bloke in czechoslovakia extending his racquets slightly in order to increase swingweight whilst keeping static weight low, if that helps

m.youtube.com

Miha Flisek - Impacting Tennis

Follow the journey of creating a tennis academy that teaches and follows the principles presented on this YouTube channel.
m.youtube.com m.youtube.com
 
Last edited:
Aussie-pro said:
Hey all,

Is there any way to increase swingweight in a frame via adding lead and keeping a high MGR/I without needing to add a ton of additional lead to increase static weight?

What would be the best platform stick to add lead at 12 to achieve minimum 340 SW while keeping the static weight reasonably low and still having a MGR/I value of close to 21? Is the key finding the most HL balanced frame with the highest swingweight in stock form?
Click to expand...
My bedtime now. I’ll get back to you soon in this.
 
Zoolander said:
You dont know what balance you like?!
Click to expand...
I dont go by the numbers of a balance measurement. I cant say its 13.0236 cm or something. But I can say the grip weight is 157g and the tip weight is 148g. Sure I can calculate a precise balance from those numbers but its kind of meaningless. Also i target numbers and then tune by feel. Like yesterday i played with my new racquet and I had set it up to target but it felt a bit too whippy. So i added 1g at 12pm during the change over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: esm
First mgr/i 21 is bs unless you play old school tennis (serve/volley).
Second, a high mgr/i is what you get from a depolarized frame.
Third, to have 340sw and depolarized frame you’ll need a static weight close to 360g.

A solution would be to start with a depolarized frame like the RF97 and built from there but in stock form the RF97 is pretty much bang on to your desired specs.
 
Keeping MgR/I the same will allow you to go up in swingweight without making the racquet feel more sluggish or changing the feel of how the racquet swings.

If you add weight at 12, you will need to counterbalance at top of the handle until you reach the same balance. If you increase sw by adding at 10 and 2 (my usual preference), then adding weight to the middle of handle or along the handle until you reach the same balance. If you increase sw by adding at 3 and 9, then add weight to butt until you reach the same balance. Doing this will maintain roughly similar mgr/I. If you want to be more precise, you will need to use a spreadsheet.

If you are looking for a nice-feeling platform stick, the Ultra Tour is a good one, and the v2.0 are now available cheap.
 
AMGF said:
First mgr/i 21 is bs unless you play old school tennis (serve/volley).
Second, a high mgr/i is what you get from a depolarized frame.
Third, to have 340sw and depolarized frame you’ll need a static weight close to 360g.

A solution would be to start with a depolarized frame like the RF97 and built from there but in stock form the RF97 is pretty much bang on to your desired specs.
Click to expand...

Federer, Del Potro, Wawrinka, Nishikori, Dimitrov, Kyrgios, Anderson and probably many others are suspected to play with MGR/Is around 21 or higher. I wouldn’t call any of them serve and volleyers. Just because you don’t like a depolarized frame doesn’t mean it might not be ideal for others, even those who don’t play serve and volley.
 
Villain said:
Federer, Del Potro, Wawrinka, Nishikori, Dimitrov, Kyrgios, Anderson and probably many others are suspected to play with MGR/Is around 21 or higher. I wouldn’t call any of them serve and volleyers. Just because you don’t like a depolarized frame doesn’t mean it might not be ideal for others, even those who don’t play serve and volley.
Click to expand...
You are so out of your depth here. If you believe in mgr/i 21 is magic, knock yourself out. I debunked the myth long ago. Actual champions play mgr/i <20.

Here are a few measured mgr/i from top players that actually won something:

Djokovic: 19.98
Nadal: 19.77
Serena: 19.78
Murray 19.04

Just because you don’t like polarized frames doesn’t mean it’s not ideal to win Slams. :)

The only exception in modern tennis is Federer but he’s old school and that’s alright as older players all use depolarized frames. Ok Murray is not as great a champ, but still better than everyone on your list exception of Roger. By the way Dimitrov uses a low mgr/i so he belongs on the low mgr list.

I’d bet a large sum that Nadal and Federer have no idea what their mgr/i number is. They play what they feel is right for them and their style.

Don’t forget your wristbands it’ll be useful when you dig out old threads. You’ll see how ridiculous the old mgr/i=21 thing got.
 
AMGF said:
You are so out of your depth here. If you believe in mgr/i 21 is magic, knock yourself out. I debunked the myth long ago. Actual champions play mgr/i <20.

Here are a few measured mgr/i from top players that actually won something:

Djokovic: 19.98
Nadal: 19.77
Serena: 19.78
Murray 19.04

Just because you don’t like polarized frames doesn’t mean it’s not ideal to win Slams. :)

The only exception in modern tennis is Federer but he’s old school and that’s alright as older players all use depolarized frames. Ok Murray is not as great a champ, but still better than everyone on your list exception of Roger. By the way Dimitrov uses a low mgr/i so he belongs on the low mgr list.

I’d bet a large sum that Nadal and Federer have no idea what their mgr/i number is. They play what they feel is right for them and their style.

Don’t forget your wristbands it’ll be useful when you dig out old threads. You’ll see how ridiculous the old mgr/i=21 thing got.
Click to expand...

Calm down dude, I didn’t say that pros don’t use polarized frames, a lot of them do including Nadal and Djokovic. I know this. I also didn’t say that 21 is “the magic number.” I don’t go out of my way to get my racquets to 21 but I do tend to hit the ball more consistently with depolarized frames and I play an all-court game with plenty of spin. My point is that a polarized frame is not right for everybody, just as a depolarized frame is not right for everybody. Also, you ignored my main point that depolarized frames aren’t just for serve and volleyers, which you said in your first post and is incorrect. Also, the three male pros you listed are usually suspected to be in the low 20s, not the 19s and I guess the reason Federer never won any slams is because his racquet MGR/I is >21.
 
Villain said:
Calm down dude, I didn’t say that pros don’t use polarized frames, a lot of them do including Nadal and Djokovic. I know this. I also didn’t say that 21 is “the magic number.” I don’t go out of my way to get my racquets to 21 but I do tend to hit the ball more consistently with depolarized frames and I play an all-court game with plenty of spin. My point is that a polarized frame is not right for everybody, just as a depolarized frame is not right for everybody. Also, you ignored my main point that depolarized frames aren’t just for serve and volleyers, which you said in your first post and is incorrect. Also, the three male pros you listed are usually suspected to be in the low 20s, not the 19s and I guess the reason Federer never won any slams is because his racquet MGR/I is >21.
Click to expand...
Yeah I wrote about Federer in my reply. Did you read it?

Modern tennis is all about baseline bashing. Polarized frame is a key component of that. Old school players learned on wooden racquets and/or first graphite frame that were depolarized. The game has changed.

My numbers come from measured frames on a rdc machine taken in a tournament. It’s not suspected numbers but actual numbers.

Depolarized is not only good for serve and volley, but let’s just say it is freaking good at serve and volley and definitely not as good at baseline bashing as a polarized frame.
 
AMGF said:
Yeah I wrote about Federer in my reply. Did you read it?
Click to expand...
I did, but you just dismissed it by saying he probably doesn’t know his MGR/I, which is most likely true, but that can probably be said for Nadal, Djokovic, etc too. Fed hits with a ton of spin and mostly bashes, so it can be done really well with a depolarized frame too.
My numbers come from measured frames on a rdc machine taken in a tournament. It’s not suspected numbers but actual numbers.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s pretty cool. Nice.
Depolarized is not only good for serve and volley, but let’s just say it is freaking good at serve and volley and definitely not as good at baseline bashing as a polarized frame.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but agree to disagree here. I think both can work equally well for bashing when married-up with the right player.
 
AMGF said:
Yeah I wrote about Federer in my reply. Did you read it?

Modern tennis is all about baseline bashing. Polarized frame is a key component of that. Old school players learned on wooden racquets and/or first graphite frame that were depolarized. The game has changed.

My numbers come from measured frames on a rdc machine taken in a tournament. It’s not suspected numbers but actual numbers.

Depolarized is not only good for serve and volley, but let’s just say it is freaking good at serve and volley and definitely not as good at baseline bashing as a polarized frame.
Click to expand...
That is sooo cool. Would you care to share the numbers?
 
jmnk said:
That is sooo cool. Would you care to share the numbers?
Click to expand...
Ah man it’s somewhere in one of the numerous threads about mgr/i. Numbers for these players are good. At least were good at the time, I’m not responsible for players trying new stuff over time.
Villain said:
I did, but you just dismissed it by saying he probably doesn’t know his MGR/I, which is most likely true, but that can probably be said for Nadal, Djokovic, etc too. Fed hits with a ton of spin and mostly bashes, so it can be done really well with a depolarized frame too.

Well, that’s pretty cool. Nice.

Fair enough, but agree to disagree here. I think both can work equally well for bashing when married-up with the right player.
Click to expand...
I can certainly agree to disagree. But I believe polarized is easier to put spin as weight decreases rhs no matter where the weight is making traditional depolarized frames less than ideal.

I dismissed Federer as he learned to play on heavily depolarized frames. He didn’t have a choice. Today players have access to a whole lot of more different set ups. Also Federer began when serve and volley was king of the game. It really makes sense that he is playing with a more depolarized frame.


Roger spin is midpack on his fh side and top tier on the bh (one handed really helps there). It isn’t massive. Nadal, Thiem and Sock on the other hand are really massive. I’ll post the graph in a bit.
 
42ca6e12f5d6cefb60eddcc343bd37e9.jpg

Here is the graph. I don’t know about Berretini but the speed he swings his racquet is crazy. He’s a big guy but I suspect he’s using a polarized set up though I have absolutely no idea as I never saw any specs for his frames.

Murray spin is not great, but even polarized frames will be hard to generate big rhs and spin when the swingweight is 400!

Dimitrov, baby Fed, has more spin from the same technique as Roger. Can it be the more polarized set up? Your guess is as good as mine. Just thinking put loud here.

Delpo, Kyrgios, Wawrinka all average to below average spin for atp players. Of all of them Kyrgios is probably the one that would benefit the most from a polarized set up. I can’t see Delpo going huge spin as his trademark is killing flat forehands.

Enjoy!
Sorry op for the thread jacking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AMGF said:
42ca6e12f5d6cefb60eddcc343bd37e9.jpg

Here is the graph. I don’t know about Berretini but the speed he swings his racquet is crazy. He’s a big guy but I suspect he’s using a polarized set up though I have absolutely no idea as I never saw any specs for his frames.

Murray spin is not great, but even polarized frames will be hard to generate big rhs and spin when the swingweight is 400!

Dimitrov, baby Fed, has more spin from the same technique as Roger. Can it be the more polarized set up? Your guess is as good as mine. Just thinking put loud here.

Delpo, Kyrgios, Wawrinka all average to below average spin for atp players. Of all of them Kyrgios is probably the one that would benefit the most from a polarized set up. I can’t see Delpo going huge spin as his trademark is killing flat forehands.

Enjoy!
Sorry op for the thread jacking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No need to apologize, this is interesting data! Thanks for sharing
 
AMGF said:
42ca6e12f5d6cefb60eddcc343bd37e9.jpg

Here is the graph. I don’t know about Berretini but the speed he swings his racquet is crazy. He’s a big guy but I suspect he’s using a polarized set up though I have absolutely no idea as I never saw any specs for his frames.

Murray spin is not great, but even polarized frames will be hard to generate big rhs and spin when the swingweight is 400!

Dimitrov, baby Fed, has more spin from the same technique as Roger. Can it be the more polarized set up? Your guess is as good as mine. Just thinking put loud here.

Delpo, Kyrgios, Wawrinka all average to below average spin for atp players. Of all of them Kyrgios is probably the one that would benefit the most from a polarized set up. I can’t see Delpo going huge spin as his trademark is killing flat forehands.

Enjoy!
Sorry op for the thread jacking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Do you think there's a "sweetspot" for a polarised setup like there is for the ~21 value for depolarised?

I know @travlerajm has/had a thread about looking into into a second optimum around "20.15", but it didn't seem to go past much further testing.
 
Return_Ace said:
Do you think there's a "sweetspot" for a polarised setup like there is for the ~21 value for depolarised?

I know @travlerajm has/had a thread about looking into into a second optimum around "20.15", but it didn't seem to go past much further testing.
Click to expand...
No magic number. That’s what I’ve been trying to say for the last 8 mgr/i threads. There is no optimum. If there was
all players would have the same mgr/i number.

But even then pros are much better than we are and we couldn’t copy their set up and get great results.

I’d say try as many set ups as you can, see what feels right and what you actually win games with. Rule of thumb the better your opponent, the more weight, twistweight and swingweight you need. The right balance lies in what you like and what makes you win.

If you try a polarized set up, buy a racquet that’s already polarized. My 0.02can$.
 
I wonder how early this preference gets "set" in a player? Maybe their first quality racket they play with extensively as a junior? Then what feels good changes very little after that?

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
 
emhtennis said:
I wonder how early this preference gets "set" in a player? Maybe their first quality racket they play with extensively as a junior? Then what feels good changes very little after that?

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I think the set is when the junior starts winning and begins playing open tournaments. The confidence sets in and the firsts sponsorships begin. The couple former ATP players at my club still play with the frames from their sponsorship days and don’t really look to try new stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
MgR/I
Replies
4
Views
2K
Irvin
Irvin
T
setting MgR/I close to 21.5
Replies
2
Views
1K
tchung4
T
M
Calculator for final tuning using MgR/I
Replies
9
Views
2K
Irvin
Irvin
TheLambsheadrep
swingweight vs racket weight
Replies
10
Views
2K
TheLambsheadrep
TheLambsheadrep
Q
Decreasing MgR/I
Replies
10
Views
2K
Mig1NC
Mig1NC
Back
Top