Paradox?; Control with stiff racquets. Your thoughts please.

[textbook strokes]

As the title implies, I can't find any control with flexible racquets, despite the common notion that flex gives you control and touch, as stiffness gives you power.
I'm an advanced-intermediate player (4.0?), with good technique, and very fit, so I have no trouble with heavy, or very heavy (Hell, I tried the Kps 88 for months) racquets. I have good headspeed and good power.
Being a racquet junkie, I spent a lot of time and money searching for my holy grail:???:, changing all the specs in my quest, but in the end, I have found that I can only feel the ball with stiff racquets, that have a ratio of 69,70 or above.
whenever I play with a more flexible stick, I tend to get inconsistent, and not in contact with the ball.
Does any of you have a similar experience?. Am I fooling myself?.
Please share your thoughts.

 

[Al1978]

Your experience is not unusual. A flexible racqut offers more control in terms of less velocity off the stringbed compared to a stiffer frame with otherwise equal specs (mass, balance, head size, etc). But a stiffer racquet may offer more control in practice because the racquet bends less on impact, creating a more predictable response.

 

[ollinger]

A stiffer racquet provides more control for textbook strokes.

 

[MrAWD]

I play with Redondo Mid and that is as flexible as you can find and I have yet to hear anyone complaining about that racquet not having enough control!! Once it got some lead at 3&9 the power is not an issue as well for any stroke out there!

Fedja

 

[backhand]

Control, far as I know, is a function of how long the ball is cupped by the strings. More time, more opportunity to do things to the ball and get feedback. Deform it, spin it, feel it in your hand.

That time will be determined by string tension, and racquet flex, I'd guess. And the latter is a function of innate stiffness and swing speed.

The only way a stiff racquet can have more control than a softer one is if the ball is dwelling longer. That could happen if the stiff racquet is strung softly, or if it is swung so hard that you're deforming the stiffer racquet more than you would a flexier stick swung at lower speeds. A good player, with higher swing speeds, will find plenty of control and feel with a typical Bab. An intermediate, with lower speeds, will think it feels like a hollow plank.

The reason most pros like stiffer racquets than in the past is they provide more power for today's game. Control requires really good mechanics, careful stringing, and plenty of swing speed. Back in the day, control came more easily, but power took more work...

 

[coyfish]

Control, far as I know, is a function of how long the ball is cupped by the strings. More time, more opportunity to do things to the ball and get feedback. Deform it, spin it, feel it in your hand.

That time will be determined by string tension, and racquet flex, I'd guess. And the latter is a function of innate stiffness and swing speed.

The only way a stiff racquet can have more control than a softer one is if the ball is dwelling longer. That could happen if the stiff racquet is strung softly, or if it is swung so hard that you're deforming the stiffer racquet more than you would a flexier stick swung at lower speeds. A good player, with higher swing speeds, will find plenty of control and feel with a typical Bab. An intermediate, with lower speeds, will think it feels like a hollow plank.

The reason most pros like stiffer racquets than in the past is they provide more power for today's game. Control requires really good mechanics, careful stringing, and plenty of swing speed. Back in the day, control came more easily, but power took more work...

Tight strings offer more control. The strings "trampoline" less offering crisper response and better accuracy. Looser strings trampoline increasing the time the ball collides with the string bed. This creates more power but less control.

 

[big bang]

I grew up using super stiff racquets and never changed. I find a lot more control from stiff racquets, when I hit the ball and feel that firm respons I know in a split second were the ball is going to land. with flexy racquets I cant paint the lines and my game becomes unstable..

 

[movdqa]

Stiffer racquets provide better directional control because the racquet head angle doesn't change as much so that you don't have to compensate for the tendency to hit the ball outward from the line of your hit.

One other issue is that you can get depth control with more topspin. The stiffer racquets seem to be better at that.

 

[backhand]

Tight strings offer more control. The strings "trampoline" less offering crisper response and better accuracy. Looser strings trampoline increasing the time the ball collides with the string bed. This creates more power but less control.

OK, I can visualize what you're talking about. But I wonder if "crisp"=control. What I mean is, does the sensation translate to actual control? Example: I've owned two definitive "control" racquets: The Pro Staff 85, and the Head Pro Tour 280. Used both in the same period for a while. Both were strung at comparable tensions with the same sting (Bab gut). Both were comparable weight, the PS was little more HL. Both even had the same unusual construction: Kevlar for the PS, Twaron for the Pro Tour. The PS was nearly 10 pts stiffer. The string pattern of the 85, scaled up, produced about a perfect 18x20 for a 95. So the Pro Tour "gave"more on contact, otherwise very similar specs. IMO, that give is analogous to string being looser and the frame being constant. May be wrong about this.

Anyway, outcomes: The PS felt crisper, and I had a belief that it was more precise. That would also follow from the 10 sq in less surface area. But the Pro Tour had a buttery feel that translated into a sense that I could put almost any spin on the ball I wished, add or take off small amounts of speed, really manipulate the ball surface.

My friends I played against concurred; they typically would say that I hit harder and flatter with the PT, while the Pro Tour gave the ball eyes. It went exactly where they weren't. I'd call that control, and I'd call what the flatter shots of the PS gave me precision. Put another way, being able to add or subtract small amounts of spin and/or return speed is part of control. That's been argued elsewhere on these forums, BTW, not an original. And I think that this kind of control can come either from softer stringing or a flexier frame.

Just my .02

 

[kalic]

It's all personal preference... BTW, bending angle of frame is minor factor for directional control, except if you use metal strings at 100lbs

 

[fuzz nation]

Paradox? Yeah, I'd agree that there is a bit of that going on here, but also keep in mind that the issue of touch and feel is hugely subjective. The sensation that runs into a player's hand at contact, that instant feedback, can be confidence inspiring for one hitter while another might feel disconnected and out of control. What's too harsh or too mushy? Everyone has their own personal definition.

My stiff racquets are some older ProStaff 6.1 Classics which give me more pop along with a crisp feel. I've found nothing better for volleying well and I can put serves on a dime with this frame, but the hotter response I get with my ground strokes makes this racquet more tricky for me to use consistently at the baseline.

I've got some more flexible mids that are a lot more fun for me to hit strokes with because I can swing away and keep the ball down on the court. Since they are also quite heavy, I can thump the ball rather well with them despite their liveliness being a bit more diminished due to the flex. My problem with these "softies" is that I can't punch the ball as effectively with a compact stroke and I need to string them with high enough tension so that I don't feel like I'm hitting the ball with a sponge.

Flexible racquets can help add more control to full strokes because they have inherently less "pop" that a similar rig with more stiffness. While that may be helpful with strokes that tend toward the more traditional style, I think it can be detrimental for strokes that are more of the modern fashion. The "newer style" seems to depend on some racquet stiffness and no more than moderate weight to generate those sorts of strokes well.

You may be hooked on the pop and crisp response that comes from a frame with more backbone, but just need a setup (and maybe stroke mechanics) that allow you to produce the spin you need. If I were to try to use my stiffer ProStaffs for everything, I'd essentially need to use strokes with more angular contact to churn out more spin all the time, but the rest of my game would be fine.

 

[movdqa]

> If I were to try to use my stiffer ProStaffs for everything, I'd essentially
> need to use strokes with more angular contact to churn out more spin
> all the time

That's the modification that I've made to my game. It took several years
to make the transition but I'm in the control = spin camp now. I can still
hit with my Redondo (actually hit with it for ten minutes last week) but
it's no match for the KPS if you want to hit heavy topspin.

 

[bsandy]

Stiff Control Racquet . . .

That would be the Prestige.

 

[Rabbit]

Stiff Control Racquet . . .

That would be the Prestige.

Head Youtek Prestige Mid -> 63
Head Youtek Prestige MP -> 63
Head Youtek Prestige Pro -> 66

Your definition of 'stiff' differs from mine....

 

[travlerajm]

There is no question that a stiffer racquet provides more directional accuracy off the stringbed due to less frame deformation and shorter dwell time.

When I was in high school adn playing with the POG mid, I demo'd the Wilson Profile 2.7 110" (84 RA) and instantly discovered that I could hit my flat shots and volleys with laser accuracy, so I switched to that frame, and used it for 10 years.

With that superstiff racquet, I soon learned that I needed to string it in the high 70s with Problend to take away the power enough so that I could keep groundstrokes in the court. Even strung this tightly with low-power strings, I still had a huge serve bigger than that of most D1 players.

But the tradeoff to using a superstiff racquet was that I could not generate as much curvature on my shots to "shape" my shots. The frame was great for accuracy on flat shots and volleys, but I couldn't hit the dipper or smack a groundstroke hard with high net clearance.

So a flexible frame gives you more control in the form of added spin/power ratio, while a stiffer frame gives you more control in the form of better directional accuracy and control of the rebound angle.

Today, I prefer a balance of stiffness and flex, and prefer frames with stiffness in the mid 60s.

 

[textbook strokes]

Stiff Control Racquet . . .

That would be the Prestige.

Paradoxical indeed!. The prestige is one of the racquets I can't stand!. It has a flex index of 63, wich, in my scale, is too low (flexier).
Whenever I rally with it, or the new BLX 95, that is stiffer in specs but also flexier than my beloved K95 16x18, my shots are all different among each other. One goes long, next goes short, and the other goes wide ( I' talking about little margins).
It's only with a stiff frame that I can feel that the ball receives the exact amount of power that my arm is generating for every stroke. Otherwise I feel that the flex racquet introduces a new element in the equation every time the ball is in contact, and that element is always variable.
Sorry if I overcomplicate the explanation.

 

[JT_2eighty]

Anyway, outcomes: The PS felt crisper, and I had a belief that it was more precise. That would also follow from the 10 sq in less surface area. But the Pro Tour had a buttery feel that translated into a sense that I could put almost any spin on the ball I wished, add or take off small amounts of speed, really manipulate the ball surface.

My friends I played against concurred; they typically would say that I hit harder and flatter with the PS, while the Pro Tour gave the ball eyes. It went exactly where they weren't. I'd call that control, and I'd call what the flatter shots of the PS gave me precision. Put another way, being able to add or subtract small amounts of spin and/or return speed is part of control. That's been argued elsewhere on these forums, BTW, not an original. And I think that this kind of control can come either from softer stringing or a flexier frame.

Just my .02

I'd say that is a great way of describing it. I've used the flexy Pro Tour for most of my last 15 years of playing tennis (RA mid-50s). Last year or so I used the k blade tour for a good 8+ months (RA 65), and had the same trade-off in terms of flat-precision from the stiffer stick versus buttery-control from the flexible PT. I actually like both sticks for different applications and found the kbt to be more solid at the net, most likely because that added stiffness allowed me to punch volleys with better pace and accuracy, while the flexible PT is my preferred weapon for baseline rallying, where I can mix up spins and angles of all sorts with equal accuracy, but coming into the net became less-reliable with the PT. I've essentially balanced and weighted them equally to match, so that I can switch when the situation calls, but both are perfect to me in terms of control... while the feel and type of control is quite different.

 

[gloumar]

With that superstiff racquet, I soon learned that I needed to string it in the high 70s with Problend to take away the power enough so that I could keep groundstrokes in the court. Even strung this tightly with low-power strings, I still had a huge serve bigger than that of most D1 players.

What you say make me remind of what brang me to flexible racquets : comfort ! With a stiff racquet and a stiff stringbed to compensate the power, you get a very naughty gear for the arm

And I would like to know to what extent does the flex really influence the lateral accuracy ? As I remember I have learned from TW University that the time for any racquet (flex or stiff) to bend at impact was too long for the ball to get influenced in other terms than a more or less absorption of its own energy, and therefore a drop of power for flexy racquets.
So I guess the string, which reaction time is much much faster, is the only thing that can influence accuracy of the ball, surely not the flex of the racquet...
But I may have missed sthg