Reasonable swingweight?

jklos

Professional
I have a very hard time using something below 360. I can't generate any power with low swingweights.
Fair enough. Thiem seems to have no problem generating power with a lower SW. Neither do juniors or other semi pros or pros or even amateurs for that matter. But again it's a preference.
 
Fair enough. Thiem seems to have no problem generating power with a lower SW. Neither do juniors or other semi pros or pros or even amateurs for that matter. But again it's a preference.
I can but it takes time to get acclimated. I find that it takes less effort to hit with high-swingweight racquets.
 
It is very interesting to me because in 43 years of playing tennis I’ve never experienced the arm fatigue to which many here refer, and I see myself as of average “strength “. NOT SAYING it doesn’t happen, just that I am. Puzzled.

Further with modern equipment and techniques I find it easier to hit with pace and spin. This is especially true on the forehand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

wings56

Hall of Fame
It is very interesting to me because in 43 years of playing tennis I’ve never experienced the arm fatigue to which many here refer, and I see myself as of average “strength “. NOT SAYING it doesn’t happen, just that I am. Puzzled.

Further with modern equipment and techniques I find it easier to hit with pace and spin. This is especially true on the forehand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I'd have to agree. I've played wooden racquet tournaments and never had arm fatigue
 
Preffered SW depends mainly on player stregth and technique. My prefferedd range is 315-325.
If racquet is well constructed and balanced, 320 SW is enough for good stability even when facing big hitters.
 
Preffered SW depends mainly on player stregth and technique. My prefferedd range is 315-325.
If racquet is well constructed and balanced, 320 SW is enough for good stability even when facing big hitters.
I loaned BHBH a racquet with around a 390 swingweight a long time ago and he didn't have any problems using it (might have surprised him). I've used swingweights from 300 to 400 and I find that high swingweights take less effort than low swingweights. I am not a strong guy. I can bench 110 (easily) squat 125 and deadlift 195 which I don't consider strong though probably quite good for my age (60) given how out-of-shape people my age typically are. My fitness center manager weighs 90 pounds and she can deadlift twice her weight but she's a lot younger than I am.

So low swingweights for people that are really strong and high swingweights for weak old guys recovering from cancer like me.
 

wings56

Hall of Fame
I loaned BHBH a racquet with around a 390 swingweight a long time ago and he didn't have any problems using it (might have surprised him). I've used swingweights from 300 to 400 and I find that high swingweights take less effort than low swingweights. I am not a strong guy. I can bench 110 (easily) squat 125 and deadlift 195 which I don't consider strong though probably quite good for my age (60) given how out-of-shape people my age typically are. My fitness center manager weighs 90 pounds and she can deadlift twice her weight but she's a lot younger than I am.

So low swingweights for people that are really strong and high swingweights for weak old guys recovering from cancer like me.
Interesting observation.
 
I personally can't believe how heavy most recreational players frames and swing weights are. Even college guys are usually under 330g static and sw. Many college guys are only playing about 300g unstrung SW in my experience. That puts them around 325-330 strung. Personally I'm at 315g, 31.0 cm balance, and 300g SW unstrung. So about 340g and 325-330 strung. Mine certainly feels heavier than many of my friends that don't play modified rackets but my racket is also much more stable and has better feel than most of theirs.
If by some miracle I could generate my typical RHS on a 390 SW racquet, I'd break my wrist. I used to think all the people here playing with 360+ SW racquets were full of crap, until I saw how they swung the ball. It's not by any means a modern FH. Which is fine. Whatever works for them, but I don't think the majority here are hitting a typical modern FH with a 360+ SW.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
If by some miracle I could generate my typical RHS on a 390 SW racquet, I'd break my wrist. I used to think all the people here playing with 360+ SW racquets were full of crap, until I saw how they swung the ball. It's not by any means a modern FH. Which is fine. Whatever works for them, but I don't think the majority here are hitting a typical modern FH with a 360+ SW.
Correct. 9/10 It’s guys with really slow racquet head speed. Which makes sense why they like the higher weights. Check out the SWs on old granny frames from the 90’s - they were pretty massive. Not saying these guys are grannies, but it’s a similar concept in terms of swing speed.
 
I loaned BHBH a racquet with around a 390 swingweight a long time ago and he didn't have any problems using it (might have surprised him). I've used swingweights from 300 to 400 and I find that high swingweights take less effort than low swingweights. I am not a strong guy. I can bench 110 (easily) squat 125 and deadlift 195 which I don't consider strong though probably quite good for my age (60) given how out-of-shape people my age typically are. My fitness center manager weighs 90 pounds and she can deadlift twice her weight but she's a lot younger than I am.

So low swingweights for people that are really strong and high swingweights for weak old guys recovering from cancer like me.
It depends on players strength and technique.
If your game rely on high RHS and your forehand swing path is low to high, you don't want to use high SW racquet.
 
Swingweight does matter yes, and typically better players will have a heavier swingweight. However, I don't think SW is as important as static weight. I have two reasons behind this.

1. I play a PS Team that's weighted up to 340g (24g tungsten in the handle, 2g at 12, 4g total at 3&9) but the swingweight is only around 315-318 max, and it is much more stable and comfortable than racquets I've played with SWs over 330.

2. I come from a golf background, and while both swingweight and static weight are very important in golf, they are important for different reasons. Swingweight is more about feeling the clubhead in space and being able to deliver the club properly, whereas static weight is more about your rhythm and swing speed. I know players who swing over 120 mph who use heavy clubs with medium swingweights, but I don't know any strong players who use lighter clubs with high swingweights. Not sure if the principles are the same for tennis, but I believe static weight is the 1a to swingweights 1b.
 
If by some miracle I could generate my typical RHS on a 390 SW racquet, I'd break my wrist. I used to think all the people here playing with 360+ SW racquets were full of crap, until I saw how they swung the ball. It's not by any means a modern FH. Which is fine. Whatever works for them, but I don't think the majority here are hitting a typical modern FH with a 360+ SW.
Correct. 9/10 It’s guys with really slow racquet head speed. Which makes sense why they like the higher weights. Check out the SWs on old granny frames from the 90’s - they were pretty massive. Not saying these guys are grannies, but it’s a similar concept in terms of swing speed.
Good points.

I fall in between the two categories, and ime, another important factor is movement and weight transfer, and esp. upper body rotational speed.
I enjoy "lighter" SW and faster frames on my forehand side, as I am able to properly move into the shot, hitting in front, and leveraging my wrist lag. On my backhand side, I am not anywhere as fast swinging through the ball, my left foot is weaker, so the loading and unloading is weaker, and my results are way better with higher SW. It's the difference between swinging a whip or a samurai-sword (i guess), compared to shoveling heavy snow or swinging a sledgehammer.

In golf, SW and other metrics related to the club and shaft, is a reflection of the type of swing you have, not how good a player you are. Do you have a smooth acceleration or a faster, almost jerky one? Do you like the a flexier or rigid type of feel?

Just look at Berdych or Djokovic. They hit huge forehands, but they're not accelerating as fast through the shot as others, but their SW lets them swing that way. Other like Fritz, Kyrgios, Tiafoe okay with (almost) stock frames if I'm not mistaken, with medium SW, but they generate a lot of RHS.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Reasonable depends on the player. I myself struggle playing against good players with anything under 330. The higher it gets the harder the timing becomes in turn. The swingweight thus should be hefty enough that you don’t find yourself pushed around, yet whippy enough to maintain good timing, i.e. contact up in front. Finding what that swingweight is requires tinkering and testing, no way around it.
 
Last edited:
Swingweight does matter yes, and typically better players will have a heavier swingweight.
Statements like that are incredibly misleading, need more context, and really doesn't help anyone new trying to get into the game. Within a certain range of SW, it really depends on the player's technique and strength. I mean, we really going to tell Thiem he needs more SW? Maybe Nadal needs to play with a 400 SW like the 60 year olds do here. There is definitely a point where SW is too much for a given player and that doesn't make them a worse player.
 

wings56

Hall of Fame
Something I've discovered with my own setup... Racquet A - 340g with 354g SW
Racquet B - 360g with 335g SW

A swings so much better. B feels much heavier and clunkier.
 
I always prefered higher static then SW, and both lower then the sledgehammers some of the TT crowd like swinging. Someting like 335-340g, 320-325 SW...
However if one of the components HAD (not voluntarily) to be WAY above my preffered, I'd rather choose the SW. Very high static kills my shoulder and wrist. With high SW I loose controll and timing, somewhat.

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
 
Fair enough. Thiem seems to have no problem generating power with a lower SW. Neither do juniors or other semi pros or pros or even amateurs for that matter. But again it's a preference.
Because they are freaks of nature that can harness their legs, core and arms in a kinetic chain even the best of us rec players couldn't dream of recreating. The comparison of a 3.5-5.0 rec player to a top pro is ludicrous. The top pros could generate power with a frying pan.

It's more than preference. For rec players it comes down to coordination and timing. If you are very coordinated with impeccable timing you can swing fast and use a light racquet, generating power off of the speed. If you aren't as coordinated with lesser timing, you need to swing slower and hence a bit more momentum will help your power.
 
Top