Is it possible to hit topspin FH with a 90 head

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
larger racket heads expand the relative sweet spot (i.e. the racket surface over which the ball will leave with the intended trajectory and spin). The real sweet spot is just a tiny area but no player needs to hit that precisely to get the shot near enough to the intended target.
Given pros have impeccable timing and near robotic swing mechanics, they can use whatever they want and get proper shots. Recreational players hit tennis balls all over the face of the racket and benefit from a larger relative sweet spot because of it. Rec players that do just as well with smaller head sizes generally have very grooved swings and great timing and tend to play at a higher level than most of the tennis population. The world of 3.5-4.0 tennis are not nearly precise enough.

It's like forged muscle back irons vs. cavity back improvement irons. Most players do better with the latter because they are more forgiving for off center hits. Scratch golfers that hit the center 90% of the time play better with the forged clubs due to improved consistency on center struck balls. But mid to high handicappers hit all over the club face and need forgiveness.

Golf and tennis at rec levels have one major thing in common: they are both largely about minimizing your errors.
 

Mac33

Professional
Firstly,most pro's I believe use 95 to 98,100 is more the exception.

I played years with the Prince Exo 3 Silver 117 - extraordinary power but little spin.

Mostly been using 95 to 100 since ( around 25-40 different frames!)

Now using the Yonex RDiS 100 - 93 Mid and generating more spin and power with this frame than any other.

For me,hitting a full blooded forehand topspin when the ball was played low and short to my forehand has always presented me with huge problems especially when hitting with the wind.

Oversize frames are a nightmare for this shot.

The smaller 93 head size of the Yonex,with a longer wristier swing has really got me dialled into this shot.

Very thin beam (20 mm) and mid head size for me are key to generating maximum spin.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Low and short, you hit your topspin forehand with a combination of outside sidespin and slight topspin.
Just like an ankle high skidder to your backhand side, you hit a hard backhand with a combination of inside sidespin and some underspin.
 

Mac33

Professional
I naturally hit the very low ball played to my backhand with a bit of side spin.

Doesn't really happen though on forehand.

Just not natural for me,will give it a try though.
 

snvplayer

Hall of Fame
Yes the difference is 10 sq. inches which is not significant it is minimal. My point of 1/2 " was there is a 1/2 inch difference in the frame width. Which anyone can check if they have a 90 and a 100 sq. inch racket.

The 90 will barely fit inside the 100. So it is basically the frame width difference on each side. So if you think that extra 1/2" of extra width makes a big difference you are mistaken.

If you are comparing, you need to look at the % increase not the absolute difference. 90 to 100 is a 10% increase in surface area. 10% increase in physical attribute is very much tangible and will have obvious affect on how it plays. Let's do a quick analogy. Compare 300g and 330g (10% weight difference) rackets. Or, Stiffness of 60 vs 66. These are very much noticable changes with clear impact on their playability. 10% increase in surface area will result in a larger sweet spot and significantly affect other physical charaterisitics.

Sure, it's possible to put topspin with 90 in racket - but it will take much more effort than with 100 in racket, which is what OP is essentially saying.
 

kramer woodie

Professional
Its in your head. Simple really. Get a 65". Wilson has a new one for $399. Go hit the wall with that for an hour. Now grab the 90. Problem solved

Shroud

You got it right. Just get an old wood racquet 65-68 inch head size. Practice on a wall, then go on court and play with it. Have some fun.
We hit top spin in the early 60's, only way to keep the ball inside the lines. Did we hit as much as is hit today? No! The strokes both forehand
and backhand were hit with top spin.

My grip then was index pad on bevel 3 for my forehand and index pad on bevel 8 for my one hand backhand. The backhand ripped the felt
off the ball...tons of spin for down the line winning passing shots...but to hit it properly really get low, bend knees, and hit well out in front.
Volleys, serves, and slice bevel 2 with index pad (commonly called Continental grip).

Plus in the olden days the courts were Not textured they were slick painted concrete. The ball did Not bounce high the game was mostly
played waist-high to mid-calf. You really had to have strong quads to take the ball at your knees because it would hit the court and skid
for a foot to foot and half. Left a nice yellow skid mark when balls became yellow. True old fashion hard court is fast!

Aloha
 

xFullCourtTenniSx

Hall of Fame
If you are comparing, you need to look at the % increase not the absolute difference. 90 to 100 is a 10% increase in surface area. 10% increase in physical attribute is very much tangible and will have obvious affect on how it plays. Let's do a quick analogy. Compare 300g and 330g (10% weight difference) rackets. Or, Stiffness of 60 vs 66. These are very much noticable changes with clear impact on their playability. 10% increase in surface area will result in a larger sweet spot and significantly affect other physical charaterisitics.

Sure, it's possible to put topspin with 90 in racket - but it will take much more effort than with 100 in racket, which is what OP is essentially saying.

10 in^2 is the size of a tennis ball. Oh lord I'm not going to hit the strings when I'm missing the size of a tennis ball spread out around the edges of my racket! Someone send me the biggest oversize you have!

No, it does not take more effort than with a 100 in^2 racket. And that's not what he's saying, he's asking if it's possible. It's either possible or impossible, and it's very much possible. I do have more difficulty applying spin with a wood racket, but that has more to do with the incredibly tight string pattern than the head size. By today's standards, it'd be something like a 27x30 string pattern or something.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
If you are comparing, you need to look at the % increase not the absolute difference. 90 to 100 is a 10% increase in surface area. 10% increase in physical attribute is very much tangible and will have obvious affect on how it plays. Let's do a quick analogy. Compare 300g and 330g (10% weight difference) rackets. Or, Stiffness of 60 vs 66. These are very much noticable changes with clear impact on their playability. 10% increase in surface area will result in a larger sweet spot and significantly affect other physical charaterisitics.

Sure, it's possible to put topspin with 90 in racket - but it will take much more effort than with 100 in racket, which is what OP is essentially saying.

Comparing a 10% difference in weight which can be noticeable as opposed to head size is not a good comparison. that is why if you actually lay a 90" racket inside of a 100" and look at how small the difference in size is you will understand my point.

I just compared my 95" to my wife's 98" and the width of both rackets are exactly the same. The length of the mains are about 3/8" longer than the mains on my 95 and the X's strings are the same. Do you really think that the little difference in size makes much of a difference?

Many think oh I will hit more framers and mishits with the smaller frame, I really don't think that the tiny extra area is going to save your mishits. The larger head size affect the power level much more than the spin, the added trampoline effect gives more power but not much effect on spin.

I have found the smaller head size racket enables me to swing faster and still keep the ball in the court which creates more topspin. Plus the smaller racket head is easier to whip around as compared to the larger 100 sq. and up. Whenever I do try a larger racket the first thing I notice is it feels slower and harder to whip around as fast. Also because of the added power I have to be more careful not to hit long. So it can actually work the opposite of what you are saying.
 

Mac33

Professional
You have a denser concentration of weight with a smaller frame - so it should feel more solid - all other specs being equal.

I share the above opinion too - when I use a 98 or 100 now after playing for a few months with my 93 Yonex - the larger frames do feel harder to control,harder to change the direction of the frame,harder to whip.

Go below 90 and yes I feel you do lose power.

However the Wilson Six One 95 and the Yonex RDiS 100 93 Mid are possibly the two frames I hit with most power.

Go bigger than 93-95 and any advantage in increased hitting area is negated by loss of control and a reduction in that dense solid feel.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
You have a denser concentration of weight with a smaller frame - so it should feel more solid - all other specs being equal.

I share the above opinion too - when I use a 98 or 100 now after playing for a few months with my 93 Yonex - the larger frames do feel harder to control,harder to change the direction of the frame,harder to whip.

Go below 90 and yes I feel you do lose power.

However the Wilson Six One 95 and the Yonex RDiS 100 93 Mid are possibly the two frames I hit with most power.

Go bigger than 93-95 and any advantage in increased hitting area is negated by loss of control and a reduction in that dense solid feel.

Spot on I agree 100%.
 

Power Player

Bionic Poster
Do you really think that the little difference in size makes much of a difference?



I have found the smaller head size racket enables me to swing faster and still keep the ball in the court which creates more topspin. Plus the smaller racket head is easier to whip around as compared to the larger 100 sq. and up. Whenever I do try a larger racket the first thing I notice is it feels slower and harder to whip around as fast. Also because of the added power I have to be more careful not to hit long. So it can actually work the opposite of what you are saying.

Looks like you answered your own question.

I agree with your findings, but there is a difference in frame sizes as illustrated in your post. I really love how easy it is whip a 95 through contact, especially on serve.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
Looks like you answered your own question.

I agree with your findings, but there is a difference in frame sizes as illustrated in your post. I really love how easy it is whip a 95 through contact, especially on serve.

Yes your right there is a difference in how different frame sizes play, but it seems like there is this false theory that a player needs a 100 sq. inch or larger to produce a lot of topspin. I feel that players that don't have good spin producing technique need the larger racket for spin so beings it helps them they think everybody needs the larger head size racket.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Yes your right there is a difference in how different frame sizes play, but it seems like there is this false theory that a player needs a 100 sq. inch or larger to produce a lot of topspin. I feel that players that don't have good spin producing technique need the larger racket for spin so beings it helps them they think everybody needs the larger head size racket.
It's easy to blame the racquet, because that way nothing is ever their fault and they can claim to have improved without having fundamentally changed anything.

I hit the most spin out of the group I play with, and I use the smallest head size (90). Everyone else uses 95s and 100s.

I do have a 95S that I like to bring out when I'm sluggish on my shots, however.
 

zaph

Professional
Well the answer is yes, having broken the strings in my two good rackets, I am now using a 90 inch 20 year old racket I got in a charity shop. It works, but I wouldn't recommend it, as it is hardly making my life easier.

The only advantage is it is probably improving my timing and forcing me to keep my eye on the ball. Less margin for error. Of course my dad learnt to play with wooden rackets, so his level of control with one of the modern ones is absurdly good. Compared to a wooden racket they are absurdly easy to use.
 
Ye, it's in your head man. (or perhaps there is a technique issue)

I am a pretty clean hitter, but I'm not Bjorn Borg or Tom Okker, but I don't have any trouble hitting semi western topspin with my old wooden maxply.
 
Top