Rank top 5 racquets that hit the heaviest ball in your opinion

roundiesee

Hall of Fame
The heaviest ball I ever hit was with the APD Cortex; only my aching arm prevented me from using this on a regular basis, :(
 

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
The racquet doesn't hit a "heavy ball". The player does. A "heavy ball" is one that combines pace and heavy spin, so that will be different for each player. It will be whichever racquet gives you optimum swing speed combined with maximum spin. This will vary greatly depending on the player.

People just naturally think a "heavy racquet" will hit a "heavy ball", because it "feels" heavy or "solid" to the person hitting it. If the racquet is too heavy for you to get the necessary rpm's, then you will NOT hit a heavy ball with it, no matter what others may say. This thread is like combining the "What is the most powerful racquet?" threads with the "What racquet hits with the most spin?" threads. It's kind of pointless unless you have the SAME EXACT playing abilities/characteristics as the person advising you.
 
Last edited:

thejuice

Hall of Fame
Wilson Tour 90 and K90
Pro Kennex Redondo Mid
Head Prestige Mid (and current IG YT MP)
Dunlop MW 200G
Babolat Pure Control (2nd gen)

These are all based on what my usual hitting partners have told me of the balls I would hit.
 

jersey34tennis

Professional
pure drive roddick+
prince exo3 16x18
prokennex ki5 pse (hidden treasure)
k pro staff 88
Babolat Pure Control 2001 (played a guy who hit heaviest forehands i've ever hit against)
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
parasailing has a good point. strings is also important. I think the best combo for heavy balls was kevlar and poly on a 105s that's leaded up to 12oz. but that was literally like taking a hammer and hitting it against my wrist/elbow. went thru tons of PT for that. it's addicting tho. i still ordered a few more kevlar 18gs for "those matches" that I want to "show off". LOL.

in all honesty, i really really love the kevlars. but there is no freaking way that i could last 1 month with it.
Hey Broken. Take a look at my sig. Try the kevlar poly at low tensions. Since you have a 105 maybe try a 30lb range. I string the crosses higher because I am skipping every other one. You still get some of the ball bashing kevlar goodies even at lower tensions. IMHO if you experiment, you can find a middle ground where you can "show off" and your arm isnt mad at you.
 

LiquidWhip

Rookie
Wilson Six One 95 BLX 16 x 18 (in fact, any of the Six One 95s)
Wilson Ncode 90 (again, as above)
Wilson Blade 93
Head Youtek IG Radical Pro
Prince EXO3 Tour 100 16X18
 
That's two people who have suggested the Prince Exo3 Tour. I think I need to revisit this racquet. What string are you using in it? I found during playtest it was just so flexy of a frame even with a poly on it.

This is my list:

Wilson KPS 88
Wilson K90
Babolat Pure Storm Tour GT
Dunlop 4D 200 Tour
 
That's two people who have suggested the Prince Exo3 Tour. I think I need to revisit this racquet. What string are you using in it? I found during playtest it was just so flexy of a frame even with a poly on it.
No , at least there are 4 people in this thread, who mentioned it. I also would define it as powerful racquet in stock form and easy on swing unlike lots of mentioned racquets, powerful only when leaded up. And major part of Exo's "heaviness" consists of heavy spin.
 

Hi I'm Ray

Professional
IMO & in no particular order:

Prestige Mid
APD+ (new version)
VCore 100s
PB10 Mid
Slaz Pro Braided

Strings make a difference too.
 

ASH1485

Semi-Pro
Nadal's forhand is what you call a heavy ball.

but it does not mean that anyone holding the Aero pro can generate the same heavy ball.
 
Last edited:

snr

Semi-Pro
Oh man, the only one that needs to be said is the

Youtek IG Speed MP 315.

That bad boy hits the felt off the ball. It scrubs the print off the ball. It's so good. I love that frame. Probably one of the most under appreciated frames here. Can't believe TW gave it such a low review. They need to re-evaluate this one.

BTW, I like how ^ and ^^ has two votes going for the 6.1 BLX 16x18. I hit with that bad boy and i would totally agree. But it is a beast that can be untamed at times.
I have to disagree IMO. Played with the speeds and yes the ball is fast and I could "hit the felt off of it" too. Tons of racquet head speed. But the racquet itself - in stock form - is too light in the head to produce a heavy ball.

My regular partner said that while the ball was extremely fast and spinny and had tons of action, he just needed to "be there" get his racquet on it, and it never pushed back.

I have a Blade 98 16x19 and he felt even that had more "heaviness" on my ball than the Speed.

I typically hit with leaded Youtek Prestige MPs and I think those produce my heaviest ball that push back.
 

LiquidWhip

Rookie
No , at least there are 4 people in this thread, who mentioned it. I also would define it as powerful racquet in stock form and easy on swing unlike lots of mentioned racquets, powerful only when leaded up. And major part of Exo's "heaviness" consists of heavy spin.
I agree about the major contribution to the heavy ball when hitting with the Exo coming from the spin it generates. Not sure I agree with it needing lead to make it powerful though as I found it's plenty powerful in stock form - in fact, you said it yourself "I also would define it as powerful racquet in stock form"!
 

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
I have to disagree IMO. Played with the speeds and yes the ball is fast and I could "hit the felt off of it" too. Tons of racquet head speed. But the racquet itself - in stock form - is too light in the head to produce a heavy ball.
The racquet itself doesn't need to be "heavy" to produce a "heavy ball". That seems to be a misconception around here.
Pace & spin can be produced with a light and powerful racquet. Problem is that if a racquet is too powerful, you have to subtract some pace and add spin and then you lose some "heaviness".

But depending on the player swinging the racquet, you can hit a very heavy ball with a pretty light racquet.
 

TimothyO

Hall of Fame
The racquet itself doesn't need to be "heavy" to produce a "heavy ball". That seems to be a misconception around here.
Pace & spin can be produced with a light and powerful racquet. Problem is that if a racquet is too powerful, you have to subtract some pace and add spin and then you lose some "heaviness".

But depending on the player swinging the racquet, you can hit a very heavy ball with a pretty light racquet.
The extra RHS needed to generate a heavy ball using a lighter frame can lead to more errors since any increase in RHS increases timing requirements. It can be done but it's harder to do it consistently.

I think the best solution is to find the highest mass and SW frame that one can use with consistency and safely. That may in fact be a lower SW lighter frame. But even juniors can wield even a 12 oz frame with some training.
 

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
The extra RHS needed to generate a heavy ball using a lighter frame can lead to more errors since any increase in RHS increases timing requirements. It can be done but it's harder to do it consistently.

I think the best solution is to find the highest mass and SW frame that one can use with consistency and safely. That may in fact be a lower SW lighter frame. But even juniors can wield even a 12 oz frame with some training.
That is a entirely different discussion.

But if a racquet is too heavy for the user to be able to generate sufficient racquet head speed, then the spin part of the equation suffers and the shot loses "heaviness". My main point was that this equation of pace + spin will be different for everyone and is mostly dependant on technique, not the racquet. What hits a "heavy ball" for one, may produce a feeble shot for another. That's why these threads are interesting but really don't produce a lot of value. It's like the threads titled "Which racquets hit the hardest serves"? What would be more helpful would be to ask "What technique will result in hitting with more spin & pace"?

IMO, unless you are 5.0 or above, you are much better off focusing on hitting a consistent and deep shot with medium pace without making UEs, than focusing on how "heavy" of a ball you can hit.
 
Last edited:

KYHacker

Professional
Well, I haven't played with every frame on the market, but I have played with a lot. I will also state that I have played against only a few players at 4.5 and below that actually hit a "heavy" ball, but I have played against at least one hundred that think they hit a "heavy" ball.

My experience has been that a heavy ball starts with court penetration and can be a heavy slice, heavy flat, or heavy topspin shot. I think most people mean "topsin" when they say "heavy". I personally don't, although a penetrating topspin shot is the "heaviest" shot to play against in my opinion.

That said, no frame that I have played with that weighs under 10.5 oz. has had enough "stick" behind the ball to generate a heavy ball.

My candidates (in no particular order):

1) Prince Original Graphite Longbody 100 (has it all; this is the ONE for hitting a heavy ball)

2) Wilson Six.One BLX Team (my personal nirvana; has enough stick to hit serious pace; can explosively accelerate through contact zone to hit ridiculous spin)

3) Wilson BLX Blade Tour (extremely penetrating ball that hits substantial but not overwhelming spin)

4) Babolat Pure Drive Roddick (in capable hands it hits a very heavy ball)

5) Head Prestige Mid and variants (e.g. Gamma Tour 340X) (extremely penetrating ball that hits substantial but not overwhelming spin)

6) Dunlop Aerogel 4D 200 Tour (if you can swing it; look out)

I have not personally seen a heavy ball coming off the AeroPro Drive in stock form although it is a racquet that lets a lot of players hit a lot of balls in with spin. I have never been pushed around with a ball off that racquet (in stock form).
 

asifallasleep

Hall of Fame
Well I gave my 2013 Bab APD's to my wife and am now back to my K90's and occasionally with the IG Extreme Pro's. Interesting that they both were mentioned quite a bit on this list.
 
Not sure I agree with it needing lead to make it powerful though as I found it's plenty powerful in stock form - in fact, you said it yourself "I also would define it as powerful racquet in stock form"!
yes , that is exactly what I meant, maybe I expressed my thoughts in a wrong way(my signature). I meant that some of the racquets, mentioned here need some lead to get the power, another ones as IG Rad Pro are powerful but quite heavy on swing even in stock, in contrast to Exo3 ,which is already powerful in stock and is felt light on the swing at the same time.
 

TimothyO

Hall of Fame
My main point was that this equation of pace + spin will be different for everyone and is mostly dependant on technique, not the racquet.
But technique is heavily influence by the racquet. To ignore the relationship between the racquet and technique is like ignoring the relationship between shoes and movement. If your shoes are causing foot pain and tripping you up you wouldn't blame your feet alone for your movement problems. You'd first find shoes that free you to move as well as you can instead of restraining your full potential. So it is with the racquet which is probably an even move complex fitting process than the shoe but which is also more likely to be ignored given its complexities.

What hits a "heavy ball" for one, may produce a feeble shot for another. That's why these threads are interesting but really don't produce a lot of value.
Fully agree there, see my point above and in my first post. Each individual needs to find the heaviest frame they can wield safely to achieve their maximum efficiency. I CAN use a lighter frame to hit topspin but then I lose pace unless I increase RHS to a point that my consistency falls. I CAN hit with more pace using an even heavier frame since swinging a 10 oz frame and a 13 oz frame isn't too different when hitting casually. But under pressure of a match you need your frame to fit like a glove for maximum efficiency and smoothness.

IMO, unless you are 5.0 or above, you are much better off focusing on hitting a consistent and deep shot with medium pace without making UEs, than focusing on how "heavy" of a ball you can hit.
Fully agree there which is why so called "pushers" win easily at 3.0 to 4.0 (4.5 seems sort of transitional). I know some folks disparage "pushers" but they're playing within themselves as even the pros do. The difference is that lower level players lack the skill to consistently hit winners with amazing pace and precision even off "easy" balls. More often than not we're going to dump in the net or hit the back fence when we try that.

Which is why, imo, it's even more important to find a good fit with a frame and strings. With a good fit you're free to take a moderate, consistent stroke and get a consistent result with respect to depth, placement, and pace. With a poor fit you're doing at least one of two things: having to use excessive RHS to get the ball deep and over the net or having to restrain your swing to avoid spraying balls.

Recently I've found that the best approach to "racquet tuning" is a bit like artillery fire. Based on your most comfortable, smooth, natural stroke form and speed you need to find a frame that produces a consistent shot depth and placement with pace adequate for your level (too low and higher level opponents can exploit it...fortunately at 3.0-4.5 you don't need much pace to keep opponents from beating you).

Your body and natural form are the baseline for this equation and the frame is a tool that with a proper fit drops your shots on target consistently, just like the shell size, gun elevation, and powder charge in an artillery piece consistently and accurately drops a shell on target.

Whether hitting a tennis ball over a net and onto a point between the service line and baseline or firing an artillery piece at a specific target over an intervening hill, consistency and accuracy are ballistics problems. If we assume that the goal of the human machine is to achieve a consistent stroke (i.e. good technique) then that stroke/technique, by definition, needs to be married to a racquet with specific characteristics if it's to drop a ball onto a specific point on the other side of the court with consistency and accuracy.

In other words, you can't talk about stroke production without paying close attention to the technique + tool equation since changing the variables present in the tool necessitates changes in technique. And if the those changes feel uncomfortable or unnatural then the player can't play his best tennis since he isn't playing naturally and smoothly. Instead he's introducing artificial hiccups into his technique to get it to conform to the ballistic characteristics of his frame.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
For me, it has been a combo of the right weight and racquet plus an open pattern.

Tec 315 ltd, Tec 320, Pure Drive Roddick were my best, but thats off the top of my head.

The more closed pattern blades hit a big ball, but not as heavy.

I gauge heaviness from when my opponent is clearly late and mishits as a result of my shot. Sometimes they just say it was heavy. First time I heard this was from an instructor who rallied with me and said I hit nice and heavy. Wasn't entirely sure what he meant.

Heavy is a combo of pace and topspin. It messes up your timing so you are late, and as a result can feel pushed around.
 

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
But technique is heavily influence by the racquet. To ignore the relationship between the racquet and technique is like ignoring the relationship between shoes and movement. If your shoes are causing foot pain and tripping you up you wouldn't blame your feet alone for your movement problems. You'd first find shoes that free you to move as well as you can instead of restraining your full potential. So it is with the racquet which is probably an even move complex fitting process than the shoe but which is also more likely to be ignored given its complexities.
(didn't paste your entire response)

Good stuff Tim and I agree with almost everything you said. Finding a racquet that "hits the heaviest ball" for everyone is an individualistic search.
It's pretty much the same equation as just finding the best racquet for you, since the best combo of pace + spin will likely be something you should be using regularly. So this thread is in effect a "what's your favorite racquet" thread. Highly personal and subjective.

I just think people see several posters saying that for example, a PDR hits a heavy ball, so they think if they go out and get a PDR they will instantly start hitting a similar "heavy ball". They place too much emphasis on the racquet and too little on the user input. They also disregard the potentially huge difference in ability between the person making the statement and their own ability.

I also think your advice of using the "heaviest racquet you can safely swing" is more suited for advanced level, accomplished players with proper technique. I think a better way to say it would be, to "use the lightest racquet you can, that doesn't feel unstable to you or frequently get pushed around by the pace of your opponents typical shots. Another way would be "use the heaviest racquet you can that will still allow you to still generate top racquet head speed when you are in a long 3 setter." A "too heavy" racquet is far more penalizing to lower level player (4.0 and under) than a "too light" one and
similarly, a "too light" racquet is more penalizing to an advanced player than a "too heavy" one is. But that's another topic.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Excellent points above.
Also, consider the level of ball you are facing.
A 4.0 like myself might rarely face a strong 4.5, almost never a 5.5 level player, so should I wield the racket made to counter those level shots?
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't play heavier (~ above 11.7ish) for the heavy ball. I do it to keep my strokes consistent and hit loose. The heavy ball is a nice result of technique. But there is no doubt the high SW many pros use helps contribute to that.

Also the racquet can help for sure, but you have to know how to hit as well. The sticks I listed just seemed to get the most comments from opponents in terms to weight of shot.

Another one I forgot was the 6.1 95 16x18. Wails the ball, but is a rather heavy stick.
 

PrinceMoron

Legend
K88 but Volkl PB Mid 10 leaded up to 400 swings more easily.

Got a few PDR+ but string tension is too high, will have to play around with lower tension ranges.
 

v-verb

Hall of Fame
These

Snauwaert ATP 103 12 x 16, Snauwaert Hi-Ten 30 90 12 x 13, Wilson Hyper PS Woodforde Drill 110 12 x 16.

Unbelievable heavy balls

 
Top