Reconsidering racquet choices

Injured Again

Professional
Not really. There are two basic types of beams used in(on?) Angell frames. TC97 and most probably K7 (and the rest I know only from Angell thread) have sort of more classic, boxish beam and the rest of the original line (TC90, TC95, TC100 and TC105) has a custom “D” profile beam that plays nothing like any Blade I’ve ever hit (older ones but I doubt new one is that much different or anywhere near what Angell D beam plays like). It’s much more dynamic and a term most used to describe it would be “uniform flex”. It’s really unlike most of the stuff out there and works really well to provide solidity even in low static weight/large head specs. TC100 63RA is maybe the best match play frame I’ve ever used.
Maybe it's time to scour the "for sale" ads to see if I can snag one. This sounds intriguing on many levels. Thanks!
 
Interesting! I went there in late June or early July and asked the front desk staff about it, and no one knew about it other than that it was supposed to be implemented some time later. I'd love to go there and get some actual metrics. I'll give them a shout tomorrow and see if I can get on the Playsight court.
My bro sent me a vid clip from his match last night. I’m not sure if they have it on more than one court yet.
 

Dansan

Rookie
There's two guys I play doubles with occasionally that are over 60. One uses a Wilson hammer, and the other uses a head Ti S6..they are like extended length 110-115 sq in , 8-9.0z racquets. They work as an extremely effective "wall" team.

They stick their arm out and they can return pretty much any ball.

I play with full/fast strokes, hit with modern technique forehands, powerful serve, ect. I'm probably a strong 4.0 , and I was left dumbfounded after playing these guys. I started to question whether or not I was playing tennis the right way or not...It's like a total paradigm shift.

You ever play against a wall until you shank a ball or hit an error too low or too high? The wall always returns....this is what playing them was like, and it's the same way every time.

Maybe look into something like the Wilson hammer or Head Ti S6…..it's so big and light, if you still have legs all you need to do is stick the racquet out. You look at their technique and form, you would think they are 2.5-3.0 level - but they are beating young guys that are 4.0-5.0 using 12oz player frames ! I've even seen them frustrate guys to no end, and outlast them until they shank a ball due to exhaustion, or simply hit an unforced error.

Until USTA starts enforcing racquet size and weight limitations rules, why not get an advantage over the competition? These guys don't care about their form, or technique. This class of player cares about winning and embarrassing the competition.
 

Injured Again

Professional
There's two guys I play doubles with occasionally that are over 60. One uses a Wilson hammer, and the other uses a head Ti S6..they are like extended length 110-115 sq in , 8-9.0z racquets. They work as an extremely effective "wall" team.

They stick their arm out and they can return pretty much any ball.

I play with full/fast strokes, hit with modern technique forehands, powerful serve, ect. I'm probably a strong 4.0 , and I was left dumbfounded after playing these guys. I started to question whether or not I was playing tennis the right way or not...It's like a total paradigm shift.

You ever play against a wall until you shank a ball or hit an error too low or too high? The wall always returns....this is what playing them was like, and it's the same way every time.

Maybe look into something like the Wilson hammer or Head Ti S6…..it's so big and light, if you still have legs all you need to do is stick the racquet out. You look at their technique and form, you would think they are 2.5-3.0 level - but they are beating young guys that are 4.0-5.0 using 12oz player frames ! I've even seen them frustrate guys to no end, and outlast them until they shank a ball due to exhaustion, or simply hit an unforced error.

Until USTA starts enforcing racquet size and weight limitations rules, why not get an advantage over the competition? These guys don't care about their form, or technique. This class of player cares about winning and embarrassing the competition.
The guys I saw at the National 60's indoors all have excellent, textbook technique that would have been typical of a pro player from that generation. Their balance and stroke production is beautifully smooth and consistent. They seem to have just made equipment choices that give them the best chance to square up the ball on the sweetspot, and that lets them swing more easily and time the ball better so they make better shots with better placement overall. I guess it was just surprising to me that at this highest level, there's been such a move towards oversized frames - I haven't seen that as much in our local open age group tournaments nor in our 55+ 9.0 league, yet these guys at the national 60's indoors look a notch above in skill level over the vast majority of our better local players.

Part of the reason why I made the switch from a 110 to a 104 at the beginning of the year was that many of my local peers are still using ~100 square inch racquets, and I've gotten enough snide comments about my granny stick in the past, especially when I've been pressed, frame or mis-hit a ball, and it drops in for a winner. Instead of embracing that, there was some part of giving in to the peer pressure and moving to a more traditional frame. If I whack an 80 MPH groundstroke winner with a 110, most people think it's the racquet. If I whack a 80 MPH groundstroke winner with a smaller frame, most people think it's me. There's a lot of inherent psychology there which is going to have some effect, whether I want to admit it or not, and especially since I'm one of the guys struggling against the top group, who doesn't want to emulate those we're chasing after and be recognized as someone who could still do that because of me and not the frame?

I guess that when I was a 4.0, that kind of stuff never crossed my mind - since I started playing tennis again nearly 20 years ago, I've been using 115, then 110 square inch racquets. As a 4.0, I was just another player in the meat of the bell curve. When I became a 4.5 several years ago, which apparently is fairly rare for someone to do in their 50's and to have done it through singles play, the more comments I got about my racquet choices.

It's not all bad - I think I had a disregard for those who said that smaller frames offer advantages I thought were just word fodder to justify using the same racquets as the pros. But after eight months, I do see where smaller frames can help on the most offensive of shots, and that ability is something I haven't been able to replicate in a larger frame. But the days of those most offensive shots for me are probably in my past.
 

GBplayer

Hall of Fame
I use a 93" racquet and wear the strings out in a 2" sweet spot. Also at 365g and feel no fatigue even when playing for four hours in doubles matches. The wear and tear is more on the legs.
 

joohan

Hall of Fame
I use a 93" racquet and wear the strings out in a 2" sweet spot. Also at 365g and feel no fatigue even when playing for four hours in doubles matches. The wear and tear is more on the legs.
One mans duh is another mans yabba dabba doo...

I subscribe to efficiency and lure of heavy players frames but I don’t feel it’s something OP (based on what he’s shared so far) can use going forward...
 

Pitti

Rookie
I'm around 30 and have recently returned to play tennis, so my circumstances are way different from yours. Still, I think you could try something like what I do: I've always liked to play control-oriented racquets with powerful strings at a moderate tension. This way the racquet can give you the control you want and the strings can give you the power in a given moment.

My current racquet is a Wilson Ultra Tour ( which has a 18x20 pattern) strung with a full bed of multifilament (Tecnifibre XR3 or TGV) at 51 or 52 lbs. The closed pattern gives a great directional control and extends the life of strings along with my flatter strokes. I don't play with hard strokes, but the multifilament string lets me hit in any concrete moment a powerful attacking shot and helps with the defensive on-the-run shots, compensating the low-powered frame. These strings are also great for my sensitive arm.

It's a matter of trial and error...
 

graycrait

Hall of Fame
@Injured Again ,

As a die hard tennis enthusiast and racketholic who some call a sandbagging 4.5 at 64 yrs old (which I think is nigh impossible vs 22yr old 4.5 skill with 22 yr old legs), I think variety of rackets is quite fun. I "occasionally" will go to TW Racket Finder, uncheck the box in front of "current models only" and enter the specs I am looking for. Then I either mention such and such racket on the TW Classic Rackets forum or simply go to the auction site and start looking for rackets that interest me. I went through quite a phase in OS rackets, even adding 2oz or more of lead to them. I have about 15-20 OS (which are mostly 107" even if they are described as "110")Princes right now. I have 5 POG OS rackets including a 1 stripe. I think the 1 stripe plays like a club compare to 4-stripes or the "Classic" that came out a few years ago. My favorite OS racket is the Michael Chang Ti OS Longbody. With one overgrip it weighs a shade under 12oz and plays crisper than the POG OS's, much crisper than the Michael Chang OS Longbody Graphite.

I have had and have quite a few longbody rackets to give me that extra "reach." The only advantage those rackets have given me is a slight improvement on serve and maybe swingweight without being really heavy. (Amazes me that when I was 14 I was swinging 13-15oz wood rackets all day, now I think a 12.5oz racket is heavy). How much reach can an extra inch give me? I would be better off preparing earlier and moving my feet better, but there is something going on with me and a 28" 95" 11.5oz racket that I really like on serve. But I have shelved the longbodies for the time being.

My current infatuation is with 27" 12.2oz 93" 18x20 rackets, having a pair of Wilson ROK 93s and a pair of Volkl Quantum Tour 10 93 inchers. However, your thread has forced me to toss the Michael Chang Ti OS LB back in the bag along with another of my experimental rackets, the Pro Kennex Micro Mid 22x30 93" 13oz which I have strung twice in a week's time to try and figure out tension and strings in such a dense beast. That 22x30 Micro Mid takes 48feet of string and only has a 93" head!

I use what rackets I think will match up to the type and people I will be playing on the day. With same age peers who don't hit as hard I have found the 100" Triple Threat Warrior works fine or just about anything that weighs between 11-11.5oz. With the 20 yr old UTR 9-12s the longbodies don't work as well for me as a standard length 12.2oz racket. With lower level high school kids sometimes just a flexy longbody OS racket allows me arm comfort while trying to get all those "crazy" shots they hit back into their wheelhouse.

Have fun with your racket selection processes. One of my favorite phrases to hear from any of the wide variety of people I hit with is, "What the "heck" are you playing with today? One day I was both pleased and surprised to hear a 20 something former collegiate player ask his doubles partner on one of the adjacent courts, "What is that old guy hitting with?" His 40 yr old partner who I know simply said, "Oh, that is a Prince Mono."
 

Injured Again

Professional
I use a 93" racquet and wear the strings out in a 2" sweet spot. Also at 365g and feel no fatigue even when playing for four hours in doubles matches. The wear and tear is more on the legs.
I just don't have that kind of swing accuracy and I am hugely envious of those players who do. Of the group of guys I hit with, I am the one who tends to mis-hit and mis-time the ball the most often. Because I swing a heavy racquet and often swing pretty hard, I tend to be a plant-and-swing player. When I'm under pressure, either the footwork or the timing of the footwork isn't quite right and I don't catch the ball cleanly. I have a tough time separating my swing timing from my footwork timing and that makes me inflexible if I don't get both right. This seems to be one of those skills that people just either have or don't have, and I don't have it.
 

Injured Again

Professional
I'm around 30 and have recently returned to play tennis, so my circumstances are way different from yours. Still, I think you could try something like what I do: I've always liked to play control-oriented racquets with powerful strings at a moderate tension. This way the racquet can give you the control you want and the strings can give you the power in a given moment.

My current racquet is a Wilson Ultra Tour ( which has a 18x20 pattern) strung with a full bed of multifilament (Tecnifibre XR3 or TGV) at 51 or 52 lbs. The closed pattern gives a great directional control and extends the life of strings along with my flatter strokes. I don't play with hard strokes, but the multifilament string lets me hit in any concrete moment a powerful attacking shot and helps with the defensive on-the-run shots, compensating the low-powered frame. These strings are also great for my sensitive arm.

It's a matter of trial and error...
I've typically been one to use pretty heavy/powerful racquets and then taming that power with a deader string, especially in the past years when I was using a 110. It always seemed like the opposite combo didn't work for me. The heavier racquet/deader strings combo seems to be less sensitive to slight changes in swing speed, which kind of suits me because I don't have that kind of fine control. My touch game is pretty poor and it seems that fine control is where a control racquet really shines, no matter what string is in it.
 

Injured Again

Professional
@Injured Again ,

As a die hard tennis enthusiast and racketholic who some call a sandbagging 4.5 at 64 yrs old (which I think is nigh impossible vs 22yr old 4.5 skill with 22 yr old legs), I think variety of rackets is quite fun. I "occasionally" will go to TW Racket Finder, uncheck the box in front of "current models only" and enter the specs I am looking for. Then I either mention such and such racket on the TW Classic Rackets forum or simply go to the auction site and start looking for rackets that interest me. I went through quite a phase in OS rackets, even adding 2oz or more of lead to them. I have about 15-20 OS (which are mostly 107" even if they are described as "110")Princes right now. I have 5 POG OS rackets including a 1 stripe. I think the 1 stripe plays like a club compare to 4-stripes or the "Classic" that came out a few years ago. My favorite OS racket is the Michael Chang Ti OS Longbody. With one overgrip it weighs a shade under 12oz and plays crisper than the POG OS's, much crisper than the Michael Chang OS Longbody Graphite.

I have had and have quite a few longbody rackets to give me that extra "reach." The only advantage those rackets have given me is a slight improvement on serve and maybe swingweight without being really heavy. (Amazes me that when I was 14 I was swinging 13-15oz wood rackets all day, now I think a 12.5oz racket is heavy). How much reach can an extra inch give me? I would be better off preparing earlier and moving my feet better, but there is something going on with me and a 28" 95" 11.5oz racket that I really like on serve. But I have shelved the longbodies for the time being.

My current infatuation is with 27" 12.2oz 93" 18x20 rackets, having a pair of Wilson ROK 93s and a pair of Volkl Quantum Tour 10 93 inchers. However, your thread has forced me to toss the Michael Chang Ti OS LB back in the bag along with another of my experimental rackets, the Pro Kennex Micro Mid 22x30 93" 13oz which I have strung twice in a week's time to try and figure out tension and strings in such a dense beast. That 22x30 Micro Mid takes 48feet of string and only has a 93" head!

I use what rackets I think will match up to the type and people I will be playing on the day. With same age peers who don't hit as hard I have found the 100" Triple Threat Warrior works fine or just about anything that weighs between 11-11.5oz. With the 20 yr old UTR 9-12s the longbodies don't work as well for me as a standard length 12.2oz racket. With lower level high school kids sometimes just a flexy longbody OS racket allows me arm comfort while trying to get all those "crazy" shots they hit back into their wheelhouse.

Have fun with your racket selection processes. One of my favorite phrases to hear from any of the wide variety of people I hit with is, "What the "heck" are you playing with today? One day I was both pleased and surprised to hear a 20 something former collegiate player ask his doubles partner on one of the adjacent courts, "What is that old guy hitting with?" His 40 yr old partner who I know simply said, "Oh, that is a Prince Mono."
I've always been pretty amazed at people who can pick up different racquets and adjust to them quickly. I just don't have that ability. When I switched to the SW104 at the beginning of this year, I struggled for six or seven months to find a string which would give me back some of the higher launch angle I had with the Babolat 110 16X19. I could not compensate for that lower launch angle no matter how much I tried.

And the regular/extended length racquet issue seems to be just another case where I have to choose which makes me a tougher competitor to play against. Many times when on the run, I just can't quite get there and catch the ball high up on the stringbed, and that higher sweetspot location really helps. I also just don't have the extension I used to - there's always a bit of alligator arming all of my swings, especially overhead, and there the reach noticeably helps too.

The flip side is that the longer racquet makes it more difficult to make a last moment adjustment. Since I've been playing a bit recently with the 27" v7 Blade 98, I really do notice times when I have to adjust for a bounce I'm not expecting, or I simply misjudge the ball in some way, that I can do so much better because it's shorter and lighter.

Everything is a compromise, and it's hard not really being sure if I'm making the right choice. Fortunately, I've now got a couple of very experienced players helping me through this, and it will be interesting to see where it goes.
 

tennis347

Professional
I've always been pretty amazed at people who can pick up different racquets and adjust to them quickly. I just don't have that ability. When I switched to the SW104 at the beginning of this year, I struggled for six or seven months to find a string which would give me back some of the higher launch angle I had with the Babolat 110 16X19. I could not compensate for that lower launch angle no matter how much I tried.

And the regular/extended length racquet issue seems to be just another case where I have to choose which makes me a tougher competitor to play against. Many times when on the run, I just can't quite get there and catch the ball high up on the stringbed, and that higher sweetspot location really helps. I also just don't have the extension I used to - there's always a bit of alligator arming all of my swings, especially overhead, and there the reach noticeably helps too.

The flip side is that the longer racquet makes it more difficult to make a last moment adjustment. Since I've been playing a bit recently with the 27" v7 Blade 98, I really do notice times when I have to adjust for a bounce I'm not expecting, or I simply misjudge the ball in some way, that I can do so much better because it's shorter and lighter.

Everything is a compromise, and it's hard not really being sure if I'm making the right choice. Fortunately, I've now got a couple of very experienced players helping me through this, and it will be interesting to see where it goes.
The only compromise I see with Blade that when in a real defensive position sometimes my shots land a little short and can be picked on. You have to be a little creative with the Blade as it does not give you free power. It has plenty of swing weight stock. I tried adding a lead but I think it may compromise maneuverability especially in defensive situations. I am thinking about just playing with the Blade stock.
 

Injured Again

Professional
The only compromise I see with Blade that when in a real defensive position sometimes my shots land a little short and can be picked on. You have to be a little creative with the Blade as it does not give you free power. It has plenty of swing weight stock. I tried adding a lead but I think it may compromise maneuverability especially in defensive situations. I am thinking about just playing with the Blade stock.
I think in my case, I also tend to mis-hit or have bad balance and can't swing effectively so that shot tends to be shorter AND floaty, and then I really get picked on. It seems to come down to a matter of what portion of my game against these players ends up being defense, and can I do something/anything to help lower that percentage without making errors (which I guess would also lower that percentage, but in the absolute wrong way).

The stock blade is a super nice hit! I posted in the other thread that I noticed I had been hitting the whole time without any string dampener. I **always** use the most dampening I can find, which is the old (and unfortunately illegal) Prince worm. But the Blade has such a nice solid impact response that I don't need it and didn't really even notice it wasn't there. But it's really just a bit small because of my poor swing accuracy.
 

Injured Again

Professional
That is really a nice thing to have. You are lucky to have such help.
I am fortunate beyond words. For one thing, this year our teaching pro who has been one of the top age group players in the NW is on our 55+ 9.0 team that I'm a captain of. I've taken lots of lessons from him in the past but they've been mostly technique driven. I also practice a lot in the morning and one of those guys was a teaching pro who has extensive tournament experience. I also talked him into joining the team, and he's been more than kind helping me but I never really dug into this issue until the last few days. Lastly, there's also a former D1 college #1 player who occasionally joins us and has been really kind towards me as well.

I'm hearing many common themes from what these guys are saying - now it's just a matter of processing it and realizing the changes in my actual game. It's been awesome to be able to open up in this thread here about my problems, and I think it's also obvious to these guys that I'm kind of willing to unzip my pants and bare my soul.
 

Pitti

Rookie
I've typically been one to use pretty heavy/powerful racquets and then taming that power with a deader string, especially in the past years when I was using a 110. It always seemed like the opposite combo didn't work for me. The heavier racquet/deader strings combo seems to be less sensitive to slight changes in swing speed, which kind of suits me because I don't have that kind of fine control. My touch game is pretty poor and it seems that fine control is where a control racquet really shines, no matter what string is in it.
I think it depends a bit on what you are used to. I can tell you what I do, but over the internet it's really difficult to know what another player could benefit from. I'm comfortable with the low-powered racquet + powerful strings because it's what I've used since I was 13 or 14. I also like the 18x20 pattern for the same reason. I'm used to it and to its different launch angle. The fact that it "protects" the strings and extend their life is a plus when using multifilament strings. Because of that pattern I also have a decent touch volley game, which is way harder with an open pattern. I probably play with slightly flatter strokes using more of an eastern grip because I live in a colder city in my country and I have played most of my tennis indoors at autumn and winter (from 15ºC to -5ºC outside), etc.

We usually think we just adapt our game to external factors when we want and this is true to some extent: in a windy day we consciously play more slice, if the rival has a good forehand we try to avoid it, etc. But we forget that we also adapt it to other external factors without noticing we are doing so (the racquet weight, its pattern, the type of court we play in, the general weather, the kind of strings we use, our fitness state and age...). I think these "unconscious" adaptations can determine our game and are important to determine how do we play and what do we need. Of course, everyone can re-adapt to some extent.

In your case, you can (1) Continue with your current SW104. Accept that this way your defense is a bit weaker and attack whenever you can. (2) Try a slightly different thing, similar to your previous high-powered racquets. Maybe a slightly smaller head will give you a bit more control and touch. You know you'll probably be comfortable with that. (3) Try a completely different thing. You may adapt to it and love it. You may hate it. In any of the three options, you'll need some time to play your best.

And obviously, regardless of racquet choices, the most important factor that anyone should improve and know is oneself. Constantly trying to (a) learn/improve some new tactics or patterns (b) to polish some concrete technical aspect and (c) to adapt to ones own physical limitations. In my case (a) I'm improving my offensive game and my net approaching (b) I'm improving my backhand and (c) I'm prone to get migraines, which determine how strong or weak will I feel the moment I take the racquet, my reflexes and ultimately my offensive or conservative game.

Just my two cents. Tennis is not an exact science in which the same factors combined in the same way produce the same outcome every time. And that makes it an amazing sport.
 

mark b.

Rookie
Oh MY! I am a 65yo male with two titanium knees who used to compete at the 4.5 level when I was a kid like you. Can you improve....absolutely. I did, but it wasn't my technique. Hitting balls since I was 16 has solidified how I make ball contact. When I have taken lessons from "gold ball" pro's, they ALL say the same thing. "It's not your strokes!!!" I'm one of those continental grip smooth strokers you see on the gold ball tour.
(1.) It's learning to anticipate their next shot. Yes, you can learn this. See Will Hamilton's Book on Singles Strategy. It's good.
(2.) It's learning to hit the ball where they can't (or have less chance) exploit my weakness. Yes, I hate the short angled slice too.
(3.) I played with OS racquets for the past 20 years and finally admitted I couldn't snap my wrist on serves with a 12.5 oz. POG anymore. I play with a 100sq.in. 11.4oz frame that Tennis Warehouse ranks very highly. String with Poly for control.
(4.) Hit the ball higher over the net. I know, that sounds weird but continental grips HATE balls over our shoulders.
(5.) Subscribe to "Gold Ball Hunting". It's free and it's fun.

I can't play singles anymore sadly but you can. Go get'em.
 

Injured Again

Professional
@Pitti Everuthing you say is true. The question seems to be how long it will take to adapt, and do I have the physical ability to implement the changes that adaptation will require.

I hate to go far away from the things I do well because I feel I do them better than most at my age, including these national level players. What gets me are the things I don't do well, and relative to my best age group peers I really don't do these well. What is the path towards improving those things? Are they things I can improve sufficiently with what I have? And how do I make that decision?

These 60 year olds obviously grew up with wood racquets and are now using frames with twice the surface area. How did they get there and what forced those changes?
 

Injured Again

Professional
Oh MY! I am a 65yo male with two titanium knees who used to compete at the 4.5 level when I was a kid like you. Can you improve....absolutely. I did, but it wasn't my technique. Hitting balls since I was 16 has solidified how I make ball contact. When I have taken lessons from "gold ball" pro's, they ALL say the same thing. "It's not your strokes!!!" I'm one of those continental grip smooth strokers you see on the gold ball tour.
(1.) It's learning to anticipate their next shot. Yes, you can learn this. See Will Hamilton's Book on Singles Strategy. It's good.
(2.) It's learning to hit the ball where they can't (or have less chance) exploit my weakness. Yes, I hate the short angled slice too.
(3.) I played with OS racquets for the past 20 years and finally admitted I couldn't snap my wrist on serves with a 12.5 oz. POG anymore. I play with a 100sq.in. 11.4oz frame that Tennis Warehouse ranks very highly. String with Poly for control.
(4.) Hit the ball higher over the net. I know, that sounds weird but continental grips HATE balls over our shoulders.
(5.) Subscribe to "Gold Ball Hunting". It's free and it's fun.

I can't play singles anymore sadly but you can. Go get'em.
"... kid like me"! :)

I said earlier I don't have the pedigree of being a long time player. I played in a lower middle class high school without any kind of formal training, and my first introduction to real tennis was when I went to a D1 college and thought I'd give it a try. Reality was quick and it was brutal, and I really didn't play much until my son took an interest when I was 43 years old. At age 50, I thought I was going to be a forever-4.0 but gradually my physical training let me gain an advantage on my age group peers, and stuff began to click.

It's probably why I'm asking a lot of seemingly naive questions. I don't have the experience to play a highly flexible game and competing against the highest age group levels feels like I've just sat down at a poker table with a bunch of sharks who can read me like an open book. Is there any way at my age that I can fast track my strategic and shot making development? It seems like my opponents won't hit me off the court and won't be able to cover a lot of court either so I don't have to worry about those aspects. The unfortunate thing is that in my previous years, I play 18+ and 40+ and I **mostly** worried about those things. Now I'm playing the wily old pros and am being schooled. Seems like I only have half the stuff to worry about, so can I get better quickly before further physical changes make even when I'm doing now just not possible any more?

I've been instructed in a lot of strategic changes, and I've read/watched my share of instructional guides as well but the devil is in the execution. Stuff I don't do well seems easier with a bigger racquet, and just knowing I'm playing with it makes me instinctively play more of a touch game. Being 30, I wouldn't worry about these things, but being almost 58 and with aching knees and hips that I don't know how long they'll last, I feel a lot of pressure to figure this out as quickly as I can.
 

Injured Again

Professional
Wanted to follow back around on this. I'm a current playtester for the Pure Strike, and I'm playing with the regular 16X19 which is only 316 grams strung. I came to realize that when I was on the move, I tended to mis-hit less even though it's a smaller head size than I'm now using. It got me thinking that maybe my current spec, about 356-357 grams, swingweight of 345-350, was maybe a bit too heavy even though it feels right when I'm plant and swing.

So I took every piece of lead tape off my SW104's, and cut down the replacement grip to the absolute shortest length that could accommodate my one-handed playing style. I wrapped the rest of the beige palette in electrical tape to make it at least match the frame. I shed about 9 grams and probably 8-10 swingweight. It's noticeably easier to swing, and I'm currently having some timing issues with my forehand but not backhand. Volleys are easier, and serving and overheads aren't too affected. But it is **way** easier to make accurate contact when I'm on the move, and I have better ability to just bump the ball accurately into a place that is difficult for my opponent.

Thanks again to everyone for this discussion, and especially to those who also went through the process of moving to a lighter racquet and suggested that might be an alternative for me. Now the fun begins as I try to revamp my game with this newfound ability to make good contact.
 
Top