Same swingweight, keep adding weight to the handle

Slowtwitcher

Slowtwitcher

Legend
If I keep adding weight to the handle, how does racquet behavior change?

Does "maneuverability" really increase as racquet gets more head-light if swingweight remains the same?
 
If I remember correctly, any weight added below 4cm up the handle technically reduces swingweight, but I never really noticed a difference when I would, for example, tape a coin to the buttcap. I do pretty much hold the racket by the buttcap with half my pinky off, so maybe it would make a bigger difference to someone who choked up on their grip more.
 
McLovin said:
According to the TW Customization Tool, you cannot add weight and NOT increase swingweight. I’ve tried it.
Click to expand...

Sure you can. Just have to add weight to the swingweight rotation axis, which is located 10cm from the buttcap.

Anyway, let's assume the weight I keep adding is has a center of mass at 10cm into the handle and doesn't increase swingweight.
 
golden chicken said:
If I remember correctly, any weight added below 4cm up the handle technically reduces swingweight, but I never really noticed a difference when I would, for example, tape a coin to the buttcap. I do pretty much hold the racket by the buttcap with half my pinky off, so maybe it would make a bigger difference to someone who choked up on their grip more.
Click to expand...
You can't reduce swing weight by adding weight in any position on the racket.

You will reduce the balance and increase both the static weight and recoil weight (I would have to double check that last one though)
 
Slowtwitcher said:
If I keep adding weight to the handle, how does racquet behavior change?

Does "maneuverability" really increase as racquet gets more head-light if swingweight remains the same?
Click to expand...

Adding weight to the handle lowers the power level of the racquet. This can be a very useful characteristic, and one that I've taken advantage of for the last decade or more. I've tended towards higher powered racquets and because I typically don't need that, I've significantly handle weighted all of the racquets I've used. Right now, I have about 30 grams all in the handle area of my SW104, and consequently it has slightly lower power levels than a stock v7 Blade 98 16x19 or a v3 Pure Strike 100 16x19, which would not be the case if it were stock.

Maneuverability depends on the stroke. I notice the weight on both groundstrokes and volleys but it is way more noticeable on volleys, where the racquet moves horizontally without much rotation.

EDIT: I should also add that by handle weighting a racquet, it feels dynamically more flexible as well when impacting the ball.
 
Slowtwitcher said:
Sure you can. Just have to add weight to the swingweight rotation axis, which is located 10cm from the buttcap.
Click to expand...
If you do a search on 'tennis racquet reduce swingweight' you'll see this has been discussed here ad nauseam. Going back as far as 2008 the answers have all been the same: You cannot add weight and reduce swingweight.

But, if you want to keep adding weight at the butt cap and tell yourself you're reducing swingweight, have at it.
 
Last edited:
Slowtwitcher said:
If I keep adding weight to the handle, how does racquet behavior change?

Does "maneuverability" really increase as racquet gets more head-light if swingweight remains the same?
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean by "maneuverability".

We know two things, SW will remain basically the same and the racquet will get more headlight. For me, maneuverability means getting the racquet head through the shot faster rather than slower. The more HL a racquet, the faster I can do this, and I would say the racquet is more maneuverable. So by my definition of "maneuverability", the answer is yes.
 
Injured Again said:
Adding weight to the handle lowers the power level of the racquet. This can be a very useful characteristic, and one that I've taken advantage of for the last decade or more. I've tended towards higher powered racquets and because I typically don't need that, I've significantly handle weighted all of the racquets I've used. Right now, I have about 30 grams all in the handle area of my SW104, and consequently it has slightly lower power levels than a stock v7 Blade 98 16x19 or a v3 Pure Strike 100 16x19, which would not be the case if it were stock.

Maneuverability depends on the stroke. I notice the weight on both groundstrokes and volleys but it is way more noticeable on volleys, where the racquet moves horizontally without much rotation.

EDIT: I should also add that by handle weighting a racquet, it feels dynamically more flexible as well when impacting the ball.
Click to expand...
Weight added anywhere reduces racquet head speed as per TWU. So you’re not reducing the SW or power of the frame, you’ve just slowed your racquet head speed so much you now have less power than with a stock racquet.

If you like that I see no problem with this approach. You’ve not lowered the power though, you’re just slowing your rhs.

If we had a machine that could swing a frame predictively you’d see the SW on your frame isn’t any lower than stock. Oh wait, we do, it’s called an RDC machine and your local shop probably has one. Or you can just measure the SW from TWU methodology. I assure you, your frame has not lost power.

You can’t reduce SW by adding weight.
 
AMGF said:
Weight added anywhere reduces racquet head speed as per TWU. So you’re not reducing the SW or power of the frame, you’ve just slowed your racquet head speed so much you now have less power than with a stock racquet.

If you like that I see no problem with this approach. You’ve not lowered the power though, you’re just slowing your rhs.

If we had a machine that could swing a frame predictively you’d see the SW on your frame isn’t any lower than stock. Oh wait, we do, it’s called an RDC machine and your local shop probably has one. Or you can just measure the SW from TWU methodology. I assure you, your frame has not lost power.

You can’t reduce SW by adding weight.
Click to expand...
yeah i happened upon this “phenomenon” when i first started playing with lead. balance notwithstanding, a heavier racquet always equals more weight in your hand.
 
It’s impossible to add weight and reduce swingweight if you think about it physically. Think about it this way. How could adding more mass to something make lighter to swing?

I started a thread on adjusting to high swingweight and some answers included using lighter strings and changing balance.
 
DaylightBlue said:
It’s impossible to add weight and reduce swingweight if you think about it physically. Think about it this way. How could adding more mass to something make lighter to swing?

I started a thread on adjusting to high swingweight and some answers included using lighter strings and changing balance.
Click to expand...
Or shortening the handle
 
McLovin said:
If you do a search on 'tennis racquet reduce swingweight' you'll see this has been discussed here ad nauseam. Going back as far as 2008 the answers have all been the same: You cannot add weight and reduce swingweight.

But, if you want to keep adding weight at the butt cap and tell yourself you're reducing swingweight, have at it.
Click to expand...


You can add weight to the rotation axis and swingweight will remain the same. Because physics.

Go play with the Customization Worksheet and let me know what you get. Rotation axis for swingweight is at 10cm.
 
Aside from the physics, adding weight to the handle always gives me the feeling of slowing evrything down, service, groundstrokes etc. Only when really needed, for example when the balance is really off I add something under the buttcap
 
AMGF said:
Weight added anywhere reduces racquet head speed as per TWU.
Click to expand...

Only per unit force applied. But since humans are capable of changing the force applied to the frame we can keep racket head speed constant as weight is applied. The force put on the ball is related to mass and velocity of the frame so adding weight and swinging it just as fast will increase the power of the racket. It merely requires more arm force to do so.

So if you define power as "RHS per unit force applied" then adding weight lowers power. But if you define power as "force applied to a ball", then a heavier frame will increase power. Try hammering a nail with a hammer and then a pencil and tell me which has more "power".
 
Dartagnan64 said:
Only per unit force applied. But since humans are capable of changing the force applied to the frame we can keep racket head speed constant as weight is applied. The force put on the ball is related to mass and velocity of the frame so adding weight and swinging it just as fast will increase the power of the racket. It merely requires more arm force to do so.

So if you define power as "RHS per unit force applied" then adding weight lowers power. But if you define power as "force applied to a ball", then a heavier frame will increase power. Try hammering a nail with a hammer and then a pencil and tell me which has more "power".
Click to expand...
I agree. No one hits with 100% all the time. But there is a point where too much is just that, too much. When you get to that point, you believe adding weight reduces power.
 
Slowtwitcher said:
You can add weight to the rotation axis and swingweight will remain the same. Because physics.

Go play with the Customization Worksheet and let me know what you get. Rotation axis for swingweight is at 10cm.
Click to expand...
But the swing-weight remaining the same is not reducing the swing-weight. So again, you cannot add mass and reduce swing-weight.
 
AMGF said:
Weight added anywhere reduces racquet head speed as per TWU. So you’re not reducing the SW or power of the frame, you’ve just slowed your racquet head speed so much you now have less power than with a stock racquet.

If you like that I see no problem with this approach. You’ve not lowered the power though, you’re just slowing your rhs.

If we had a machine that could swing a frame predictively you’d see the SW on your frame isn’t any lower than stock. Oh wait, we do, it’s called an RDC machine and your local shop probably has one. Or you can just measure the SW from TWU methodology. I assure you, your frame has not lost power.

You can’t reduce SW by adding weight.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. When you add weight to the bottom of the racquet, you are reducing the "hitting weight" of the racquet, which is basically the effective dynamic mass of the racquet involved in the impact of the ball. This is because the racquet becomes more headlight, and so the balance point is moved towards the handle and further away from the contact point.

I found it. See here under "Key Points":

  • Hittingweight is the effective mass (in grams) colliding with the ball.
  • Hittingweight is greatest at the balance point where the effective weight equals the total weight of the racquet.
  • Hittingweight decreases as you move away from the balance point in any direction.
  • Hittingweight is lowest at the widest points on the racquet and near the tip.
  • Hittingweight is the single most important contributor to the inherent power of the racquet.
If anything, racquet head speed increases until the swingweight becomes so significant that I can't swing it any faster, because in most any swing, the racquet will tend to rotate around the balance point. My racquets have not reached that point. Handle weighting moves the balance point away from the hoop so not only is there less racquet power, there is also slightly higher racquet head speed, which with the proper swingpath trajectory and mechanics can help to increase spin generation. This was also my goal in making this modification to my racquets.

Swingweight is important, but it is not everything in determining the inherent power of a racquet. Swingweight in combination with balance point determines hitting weight.
 
Good point about hitting weight, when comparing different frames, but I find it hard to believe that adding weight will lower the balance enough to cause the frame to actually have less power than its stock version. When comparing different frames sure, but the same frame I'd be curious to see the testing on that. Hey as I said earlier, if it works for you I see no problem in that.

I just tried playing with the TWU shot speed simulator and used the 20g to the butt option to see the effect on the SW104. It seems like adding 20g to the butt lowers the shot speed a tiny bit: 0.1mph. Not that noticeable but yeah lower ball speed. I stand corrected. However, the hitting weight with 20g at butt doesn't change at all 135g.

Based on those numbers I still believe your lower power comes mostly from the lower RHS and almost nothing from the lower hitting weight especially since 20g at butt is not enough to change the hitting weight by 1g (their data is rounded up for hitting weight so hitting weight went down but not enough to do a 1g difference). Fun fact, some lightweight racquets will see their shot speed go up with 20g at butt.
 
Injured Again said:
That is incorrect. When you add weight to the bottom of the racquet, you are reducing the "hitting weight" of the racquet, which is basically the effective dynamic mass of the racquet involved in the impact of the ball. This is because the racquet becomes more headlight, and so the balance point is moved towards the handle and further away from the contact point.

I found it. See here under "Key Points":

  • Hittingweight is the effective mass (in grams) colliding with the ball.
  • Hittingweight is greatest at the balance point where the effective weight equals the total weight of the racquet.
  • Hittingweight decreases as you move away from the balance point in any direction.
  • Hittingweight is lowest at the widest points on the racquet and near the tip.
  • Hittingweight is the single most important contributor to the inherent power of the racquet.
If anything, racquet head speed increases until the swingweight becomes so significant that I can't swing it any faster, because in most any swing, the racquet will tend to rotate around the balance point. My racquets have not reached that point. Handle weighting moves the balance point away from the hoop so not only is there less racquet power, there is also slightly higher racquet head speed, which with the proper swingpath trajectory and mechanics can help to increase spin generation. This was also my goal in making this modification to my racquets.

Swingweight is important, but it is not everything in determining the inherent power of a racquet. Swingweight in combination with balance point determines hitting weight.
Click to expand...

This is not a modification description! Any racket will always have more hitting weight as you move to the center of mass.

But any lowering of the center of mass is always more than made up for in hitting weight due to overall mass increase. Overall mass increase still ups hitting weight regardless of where its added.
 
You cannot decrease Hitting Weight (aka Effective Mass) by adding weight anywhere on the racquet. Adding mass at the butt may reduce the power level, make the impact feel softer, or both, but the reason has nothing to do with the hitting weight.

Just like Swingweight, Effective Mass can only increase when you add mass anywhere on the frame. This statement can easily be proved by looking at the formula for Effective Mass.
 
McLovin said:
If you do a search on 'tennis racquet reduce swingweight' you'll see this has been discussed here ad nauseam. Going back as far as 2008 the answers have all been the same: You cannot add weight and reduce swingweight.
But, if you want to keep adding weight at the butt cap and tell yourself you're reducing swingweight, have at it.
Click to expand...

Dude, @Slowtwitcher never said you could add weight and REDUCE swingweight. He said you could add weight without INCREASING swingweight. Two entirely different things, and he happens to be right.
 
Slowtwitcher said:
If I keep adding weight to the handle, how does racquet behavior change?

Does "maneuverability" really increase as racquet gets more head-light if swingweight remains the same?
Click to expand...
I have had a few occasions where I was able to make a sluggish racquet playable by adding substantial weight to the handle.

I had a racquet I put plastidip on. I ended up adding a ton more weight than what I had anticipated and the racquet was over a pound when I got done with it. It was almost impossible to swing and time consistently. I fixed it by adding a 25g brass disc the buttcap. That stick was a beast and without the weight I wasn't playable. IIRC it was like 32pts head light or something crazy like that.

There used to be a thread on here about headlight racquets and I can't find it now. But IIRC there was a change in the launch angle when a racquet was tail weighted or something like that.
 
gebruikershaes said:
He’s right you know. In the real world you swing the entire racquet. You don’t pivot around a certain point like on a machine. Thus adding any weight to whatever part of the racquet increases the actual swing weight.
Click to expand...

I'll just call you Captain Obvious II, if you don't mind :rolleyes:
 
- Swingweight cannot be reduced by adding weight.
- Weight added to the handle will not increase swingweight much because of the way swing weight is measured on the RDC machine. However, the racquet will be more difficult to swing in reality.
- Weight added at the handle will make the racquet more head light, only because it has become more handle heavy.

So how does this, now more head light (handle heavy) racquet play differently...

More handle weight is for good for players with long fast strokes. It stops the head getting left behind the handle. As you swing the racquet, you both swing the whole racquet forward and bring the head around. These two things need to be coordinated. A heavy handle slows the handle movement forward in relation to the head coming around which is needed by good players with long fast strokes.

If you look at all racquets for sale on a scatter graph, you find that roughly all the different racquet weights have the same head and and shoulders weight, but the heavier racquets only have more handle weight and are therefore more headlight. Typically the best players with long fast strokes have the heavy but head light racquets and the worse players with slow short strokes have the light but head heavy racquets. Of course there are personal preference exceptions
 
Injured Again said:
That is incorrect. When you add weight to the bottom of the racquet, you are reducing the "hitting weight" of the racquet, which is basically the effective dynamic mass of the racquet involved in the impact of the ball. This is because the racquet becomes more headlight, and so the balance point is moved towards the handle and further away from the contact point.

I found it. See here under "Key Points":

  • Hittingweight is the effective mass (in grams) colliding with the ball.
  • Hittingweight is greatest at the balance point where the effective weight equals the total weight of the racquet.
  • Hittingweight decreases as you move away from the balance point in any direction.
  • Hittingweight is lowest at the widest points on the racquet and near the tip.
  • Hittingweight is the single most important contributor to the inherent power of the racquet.
If anything, racquet head speed increases until the swingweight becomes so significant that I can't swing it any faster, because in most any swing, the racquet will tend to rotate around the balance point. My racquets have not reached that point. Handle weighting moves the balance point away from the hoop so not only is there less racquet power, there is also slightly higher racquet head speed, which with the proper swingpath trajectory and mechanics can help to increase spin generation. This was also my goal in making this modification to my racquets.

Swingweight is important, but it is not everything in determining the inherent power of a racquet. Swingweight in combination with balance point determines hitting weight.
Click to expand...

Full disclosure: I'm no math heavy (I have the grades to prove it!!), but I definitely respect the numbers and I'm perfectly willing to pull over when the physics police are obligated to assert their authority on a relevant matter. That being said...

I've done some of my own racquet tuning using lead tape through recent years. I've always preferred a frame with extra heft and stability, but also enough head-light (HL) balance to make that mass relatively manageable on the courts. I personally believe that racquet balance is one of the more underappreciated specs in the racquet world and I think it can often make the most difference for a player seeking a better fit with a certain frame. Long story shorter, I've done some of my own thinking and experimentation with some of this.

I really like the idea of "hitting-weight". I've measured some of my own frames with a postage scale to see how much weight registers at the top of the hoop when the racquet is horizontal. I refer to this as the "tip weight"; not terribly precise, but it's a similar idea that has helped me to compare some of the racquets in my collection. I definitely recognize a difference in potential power between frames having different hitting-weights (or tip-weights).

One question: Does TW's list of hitting-weight functions assume that the racquet static weight stays constant while hitting weight is changed? If so, it might be important to clarify that.

I bring this up because I'm not sure that "moving the balance point away from the hoop" will inherently decrease the power potential of a racquet, at least in real-world terms. If I add lead to the handle of my racquet, I haven't removed any mass from the hoop. That same mass is still working against the ball when I hit it - the tip-weight hasn't been reduced. I can see how the leverage will change when the balance is altered, but it seems to me that the mass in the hoop and maybe the upper throat is still there to win the collision with the ball in about the same way.
 
fuzz nation said:
Full disclosure: I'm no math heavy (I have the grades to prove it!!), but I definitely respect the numbers and I'm perfectly willing to pull over when the physics police are obligated to assert their authority on a relevant matter. That being said...

I've done some of my own racquet tuning using lead tape through recent years. I've always preferred a frame with extra heft and stability, but also enough head-light (HL) balance to make that mass relatively manageable on the courts. I personally believe that racquet balance is one of the more underappreciated specs in the racquet world and I think it can often make the most difference for a player seeking a better fit with a certain frame. Long story shorter, I've done some of my own thinking and experimentation with some of this.

I really like the idea of "hitting-weight". I've measured some of my own frames with a postage scale to see how much weight registers at the top of the hoop when the racquet is horizontal. I refer to this as the "tip weight"; not terribly precise, but it's a similar idea that has helped me to compare some of the racquets in my collection. I definitely recognize a difference in potential power between frames having different hitting-weights (or tip-weights).

One question: Does TW's list of hitting-weight functions assume that the racquet static weight stays constant while hitting weight is changed? If so, it might be important to clarify that.

I bring this up because I'm not sure that "moving the balance point away from the hoop" will inherently decrease the power potential of a racquet, at least in real-world terms. If I add lead to the handle of my racquet, I haven't removed any mass from the hoop. That same mass is still working against the ball when I hit it - the tip-weight hasn't been reduced. I can see how the leverage will change when the balance is altered, but it seems to me that the mass in the hoop and maybe the upper throat is still there to win the collision with the ball in about the same way.
Click to expand...
You are correct that Hitting Weight can’t be reduced by adding mass to the butt. But it can reduce the power level for other reasons, as it makes your arm sweep forward slower, and it makes the impact a bit softer and spinnier. If you are choking up a little or using a 2hb, the power reduction becomes more pronounced, because then it also slows how fast the racquet rotates forward about the wrist axis. The power reduction could be perceived as lower hitting weight, even though the hitting weight is actually slightly higher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Does adding lead to ONLY handle affect S.W. or power level?
Replies
5
Views
1K
ferrari_827
F
nalbandian_fan
  • Poll Poll
Swingweight vs. Maneuverability
Replies
13
Views
2K
nalbandian_fan
nalbandian_fan
S
Swingweight - tennis handle
Replies
23
Views
3K
Irvin
Irvin
F
Does adding weight in handle add power?
Replies
43
Views
8K
polksio
polksio
M
Adding weight to the handle or buttcap?
2
Replies
70
Views
19K
Irvin
Irvin
Back
Top