Swing Weight vs. RHS

[Serjojeee]

Higher SW racquets often require control nature of the frame itself (being control oriented rather than powerful) and sufficiently slow string bed. This is the game to make things predictable: make it inert by SW, but then take away excess power by otherwise control oriented setup. In the end racquet won't be too powerful, but just predictable and stable. But it's important whati is used as a platform. My recommendation is to start with light enough control oriented frame, then build up SW and RW (and TW if needed). The rest is string bed.

And that's why I moved to ps from the pure drive. The question is - how much sw do I need... And wright now I think that somewhere in the 335-340 will be ok. Not that tiring on down the line shots and enough power on cross courts slaps. Round poly at 58 for predictability. The density of the stringbed of the ps is not uniform though. A little bit confusing - where to apply lead - at 3/9, or more upwards where the stringbed is denser.

 

[zalive]

I think 335-340 is quite ok, especially taking into account woofer grommets. Perhaps even 330 will be more than enough with this racquet. You must try and play with SWs a bit until you find the spot you like the best.

 

[movdqa]

If the twistweight is high, then just add at 12. If stability is a problem, then add at 3/9 until it's stable and then add at 12 until you get where you want to go.

My experience on using high-SW racquets is that your body gets stronger to compensate for the higher-SW which is why I recommend going up very slowly. There may be some benefit in training with a higher-SW racquet and then playing with your regular frame outside the confusion as you may be able to generate more RHS this way.

 

[Serjojeee]

Well I must put disclaimer, I use OHBH.

With OHBH you can use verticality for a swing path: start racquet position is up above, then swing starts to go down at first half of path, then finishes up. Down then up. All needs to be coordinated with body turn (weight transfer from back to front foot). Stance I use for BH is closed. No need for windshield wiper, you can get a lot of topspin, but by using an extreme grip like BH SW or at least between BH SW and BH Eastern. Currently I use BH Eastern and it's not enough for this type of swing, so I should switch to a BH SW.

Mastering the bh for the past 2 years I think that you can hit it very differently. A tricky shot. But if you are hittng topspin one - that's the way to go. I use the modified eastern as best of both worlds - love to drive high bh flat and hard

 

[zalive]

If the twistweight is high, then just add at 12. If stability is a problem, then add at 3/9 until it's stable and then add at 12 until you get where you want to go

RanchDressing suggests adding lead first at 12 o'clock until you get the SW, then assess twist stability, and add at 3+9 o'clock if needed (however this might require taking off some at 12 o'clock if SW became too much from lead added 3+9 o'clock). Sounds like a reasonable approach since sometimes 12 o'clock lead affects stability somehow, as more solidity somehow may make a need for twist stability lower because of more ease when handling the ball.

Mastering the bh for the past 2 years I think that you can hit it very differently. A tricky shot. But if you are hittng topspin one - that's the way to go. I use the modified eastern as best of both worlds - love to drive high bh flat and hard

That's advanced level for me, I'm not there but yeah, I do try to hit any BH ball with topspin, although because of eastern, if I used too steep swing path, sometimes balls turn out either flat or even backspin when I was out of position or hitting of the bounce

 

[Serjojeee]

I think 335-340 is quite ok, especially taking into account woofer grommets. Perhaps even 330 will be more than enough with this racquet. You must try and play with SWs a bit until you find the spot you like the best.

Yes, that will take some time to become comfortable with...

If the twistweight is high, then just add at 12. If stability is a problem, then add at 3/9 until it's stable and then add at 12 until you get where you want to go.

My experience on using high-SW racquets is that your body gets stronger to compensate for the higher-SW which is why I recommend going up very slowly. There may be some benefit in training with a higher-SW racquet and then playing with your regular frame outside the confusion as you may be able to generate more RHS this way.

To be honest - i'm not good enough player for a lot of weight at 12 - too "shank you very much" thing is going on. Way more easy to spin the ball, but the trajectory is more erratic, and on flat shots you should be spot on the contact point. I used to like that setup though. So I duplicated Thiem's setup in two steps (+5 pts sw 1st 5hrs training session, +5 pts sw 2nd training session - which is yet to come), but with less amount of lead. The raquet felt differently to what I predicted though.

 

[movdqa]

RanchDressing suggests adding lead first at 12 o'clock until you get the SW, then assess twist stability, and add at 3+9 o'clock if needed (however this might require taking off some at 12 o'clock if SW became too much from lead added 3+9 o'clock). Sounds like a reasonable approach since sometimes 12 o'clock lead affects stability somehow, as more solidity somehow may make a need for twist stability lower because of more ease when handling the ball.

I think that works too - I just like to avoid additional steps if I can.

Putting on lead at 12 often actually means from about 10 to 2 if you have a lot of it unless you take the approach of just putting a ton on one spot. The vast majority of pro stocks that I've seen do it from around 10 to 2.

 

[Serjojeee]

RanchDressing suggests adding lead first at 12 o'clock until you get the SW, then assess twist stability, and add at 3+9 o'clock if needed (however this might require taking off some at 12 o'clock if SW became too much from lead added 3+9 o'clock). Sounds like a reasonable approach since sometimes 12 o'clock lead affects stability somehow, as more solidity somehow may make a need for twist stability lower because of more ease when handling the ball.



That's advanced level for me, I'm not there but yeah, I do try to hit any BH ball with topspin, although because of eastern, if I used too steep swing path, sometimes balls turn out either flat or even backspin when I was out of position or hitting of the bounce

The difference is in starting high with your backswing and rotating thrue your front leg (like 180 0 of shoulder rotation) and then stepping with the other one, when the rotation is finished, and you are in neutral stance. Couple months oh wall demolition in school yard nearby with the flat high bh as hard as I can

 

[zalive]

The difference is in starting high with your backswing and rotating thrue your front leg (like 180 0 of shoulder rotation) and then stepping with the other one, when the rotation is finished, and you are in neutral stance. Couple months oh wall demolition in school yard nearby with the flat high bh as hard as I can

Yeah, this is about how it looks for me as well when I'm at wall, especially after some practice. But things look differently when I'm at the court obviously I need more court hitting practice...

 

[Serjojeee]

I think that works too - I just like to avoid additional steps if I can.

Putting on lead at 12 often actually means from about 10 to 2 if you have a lot of it unless you take the approach of just putting a ton on one spot. The vast majority of pro stocks that I've seen do it from around 10 to 2.

That will be too much I believe... And 9/3 placement improve blocking shots on serve returns - a nice bonus with big servers.

Yeah, this is about how it looks for me as well when I'm at wall, especially after some practice. But things look differently when I'm at the court obviously I need more court hitting practice...

Not an easy shot for shure. And I meant open stance finish but you got what I whanted to say - shoulders parralel to the baseline, cause racquet inertia drags them that way, just don't fight it and everything will be ok - almost my yoga mantra

 

[movdqa]

That will be too much I believe... And 9/3 placement improve blocking shots on serve returns - a nice bonus with big servers.

Most of the pro stocks that I've bought came with two to three layers of lead between 10 and 2.

Some of the frames that have come out in the past few years have higher twistweights and this may be a trend to provide more comfort. I found that I didn't need to add any lead at 3/9 on the RF97 and just added lead from 10 to 2. The racquet was rock-solid stable stock. I think that the IG Prestige is like this as well along with some of the new Head "Pro" models. There was a nice video about twistweight which talked about this. So the manufacturers may be taking care of the stability issue for us in their newer releases.

 

[Serjojeee]

Most of the pro stocks that I've bought came with two to three layers of lead between 10 and 2.

Some of the frames that have come out in the past few years have higher twistweights and this may be a trend to provide more comfort. I found that I didn't need to add any lead at 3/9 on the RF97 and just added lead from 10 to 2. The racquet was rock-solid stable stock. I think that the IG Prestige is like this as well along with some of the new Head "Pro" models. There was a nice video about twistweight which talked about this. So the manufacturers may be taking care of the stability issue for us in their newer releases.

Well, looking at Djokivic's setup I'm starting to think that there is no such a thing as too much twistweight But I thought about changes in tw of modern frames - they raised significantly, and sweetspots of pd and ps 18x20 stringbeds is near the tip of frames. Maybe I should give it a try.

 

[movdqa]

Well, looking at Djokivic's setup I'm starting to think that there is no such a thing as too much twistweight But I thought about changes in tw of modern frames - they raised significantly, and sweetspots of pd and ps 18x20 stringbeds is near the tip of frames. Maybe I should give it a try.

Berdych's tgk260.2s has two layers of six-inches at 3/9 and I think two grams at 12:00. So he definitely wanted more stability and maybe the added weight at 3/9 is more conducive to his relatively flatter game like Djokovic's spreading approach. BTW, I play with a polarized setup - my feeling is that a non-polarized setup feels more comfortable but a polarized setup performs better.

 

[Serjojeee]

Berdych's tgk260.2s has two layers of six-inches at 3/9 and I think two grams at 12:00. So he definitely wanted more stability and maybe the added weight at 3/9 is more conducive to his relatively flatter game like Djokovic's spreading approach. BTW, I play with a polarized setup - my feeling is that a non-polarized setup feels more comfortable but a polarized setup performs better.

I liked lead from 10 to 2 but that were days of pure drive and apd at 350 sw and 2hbh, spin to win days And spin was better with lead at 12. Now I find it too tiring to swing that hard for hours with 1hbh, and high twist weight in 18x20 enables to go for flat winners. And 18x20 is not for spin anyway - so I might not gain anything on flat crosscourt shots and not gain much in topspin down the line shots cause of dense string pattern.

 

[movdqa]

I think that placement of lead tape does affect your game or maybe your style affects where you place the tape to be most effective in matches.

 

[Power Player]

I liked lead from 10 to 2 but that were days of pure drive and apd at 350 sw and 2hbh, spin to win days And spin was better with lead at 12. Now I find it too tiring to swing that hard for hours with 1hbh, and high twist weight in 18x20 enables to go for flat winners. And 18x20 is not for spin anyway - so I might not gain anything on flat crosscourt shots and not gain much in topspin down the line shots cause of dense string pattern.

You are overthinking this. Figure out your swing weight and balance first by adding lead at the tip and counterbalance in the handle. Just get the SW right and then you can worry about all the nuances. This takes patience and court time. There is no reason to try and figure out every setting for twist weight, lead placement..etc. It's too much. Once you get a reference SW you will know a lot more about your game and where you want the lead to be to hit that number. It takes a long time to figure this stuff out, so it's not worth over thinking it and changing things up every time you hit the court.

 

[Serjojeee]

You are overthinking this. Figure out your swing weight and balance first by adding lead at the tip and counterbalance in the handle. Just get the SW right and then you can worry about all the nuances. This takes patience and court time. There is no reason to try and figure out every setting for twist weight, lead placement..etc. It's too much. Once you get a reference SW you will know a lot more about your game and where you want the lead to be to hit that number. It takes a long time to figure this stuff out, so it's not worth over thinking it and changing things up every time you hit the court.

I'm ok with headheavy fealing of not counterbalanced frames, so the question is only in lead placement. By the way, that were only thoughts of why adding lead to the ps frame and where to place it to achieve the desired result. I can handle a low sw stock frame ok - good for reaction shots and topspin, and I was ok with that for a while The all at 12 idea nonetheless will be implemented - it might work...

 

[Power Player]

Just start with lead at 12 so you can determine your SW. Spend a lot of time on it. It will change over time as well, but as long as you have that solid number in mind, it makes the customization process a lot easier.

 

[Serjojeee]

Just start with lead at 12 so you can determine your SW. Spend a lot of time on it. It will change over time as well, but as long as you have that solid number in mind, it makes the customization process a lot easier.

That's what I have done but at 3/9, there is already 4.5 gms there, and if that sw is ok, I'll do the trick all at 12 in two wide strips and look, is that better to 3/9 placement of the same sw raquet.

 

[Shroud]

That's what I have done but at 3/9, there is already 4.5 gms there, and if that sw is ok, I'll do the trick all at 12 in two wide strips and look, is that better to 3/9 placement of the same sw raquet.

Probably depends on the racket. In general the advantage of weight at 12pm over 3/9 is that you get a higher SW at the same static weight, or the same sw with less added weight. And you get more polarization.

 

[Power Player]

My Yonex just needs it at 12 and then under the grip. No issues with twisting for me . I wonder if 4 inch strips focused on the flat part of the isometric shape somehow cranks the SW up even more than spreading it from 10-2.

 

[n8dawg6]

i like a SW of about 450 in a 20 pt HL racquet.

 

[Serjojeee]

i like a SW of about 450 in a 20 pt HL racquet.

You can not be serious!!!

 

[Shroud]

i like a SW of about 450 in a 20 pt HL racquet.

Have fun with that. It would be pretty heavy. Even on my racket that is bread for a high sw low static weight existence it would be well over 400g.

I had a prince that may have been close to that but a bit more head light and it was 16.25 OZ.

 

[Serjojeee]

Probably depends on the racket. In general the advantage of weight at 12pm over 3/9 is that you get a higher SW at the same static weight, or the same sw with less added weight. And you get more polarization.

I googled the theory behind that sw customising thing. I know what I'm looking for, the only difference is 18x20 in the 98 square inch head. The frame was bought for a more flat shots so I customise it in that manner.

 

[movdqa]

i like a SW of about 450 in a 20 pt HL racquet.

 

[Shroud]

I googled the theory behind that sw customising thing. I know what I'm looking for, the only difference is 18x20 in the 98 square inch head. The frame was bought for a more flat shots so I customise it in that manner.

Cool. FWIW I had the 6.1 95 (18x20) and ended putting weight mostly at 12 maybe 11:30- 12:30 really.

If you hit flat, there are a couple of things you might dig. IMHO you really want a low launch angle if you hit flat. Tight strings or a dense patter will help for sure and you might want to try a locked string bed with syngut, multi, or kevlar in the crosses. That would keep the launch angle lower I think than something like a poly cross.

Just thinking out loud wouldnt a flat shot benefit more from 3,6,9 and 12? I would think that would keep the racket steadiest for a flat shot.

 

[ONgame]

i like a SW of about 450 in a 20 pt HL racquet.

just like, tape two racquets together, and add a third handle

 

[n8dawg6]

thinking about dipping the racquet in molten lead.

 

[ONgame]

thinking about dipping the racquet in molten lead.

Or just mold a lead racquet, problem solved.

 

[travlerajm]

I just leaded up my shortened 6.1 95 to 380 SW. I had it balanced perfectly at 370, but the grip is too small for me, which hurts the elbow. When I add a 6-gram overgrip to make it feel better on the elbow, the only way to retune the balance right is to take the swingweight up to 380 by adding 6g at 2:30 and 9:30. 13.9 oz and 380 SW is heavier than I usually play with - we'll see how it goes.

 

[RanchDressing]

thinking about dipping the racquet in molten lead.

A woodie in molten lead!

 

[Serjojeee]

Cool. FWIW I had the 6.1 95 (18x20) and ended putting weight mostly at 12 maybe 11:30- 12:30 really.

If you hit flat, there are a couple of things you might dig. IMHO you really want a low launch angle if you hit flat. Tight strings or a dense patter will help for sure and you might want to try a locked string bed with syngut, multi, or kevlar in the crosses. That would keep the launch angle lower I think than something like a poly cross.

Just thinking out loud wouldnt a flat shot benefit more from 3,6,9 and 12? I would think that would keep the racket steadiest for a flat shot.

The problem is that you have a net just in the middle of the court... And only poly is good enough for applying the spin to bring the ball down after it flyes past it. So when I'm saying flat, that means 1000 rpms and not 3000 and a foot of net clearance and not three feet... Sorry for being the captain obvious Almost all the flat hitters have some lead at 3/9 - Delpo, Wawrinka, Fed moved to that idea (his racquet has the tw of 15, that counts to me).
And I down't want the lead to be the most part of my racquet

 

[movdqa]

I just leaded up my shortened 6.1 95 to 380 SW. I had it balanced perfectly at 370, but the grip is too small for me, which hurts the elbow. When I add a 6-gram overgrip to make it feel better on the elbow, the only way to retune the balance right is to take the swingweight up to 380 by adding 6g at 2:30 and 9:30. 13.9 oz and 380 SW is heavier than I usually play with - we'll see how it goes.

I'm going back to my IG Prestiges today at 386 and I suspect that it will feel a little heavy. I had the RF97 probably ten points lower so that I didn't have to play with a moving target. It would be so nice to have an RDC machine available. I contacted a relatively local service but he was leaving for a few weeks. I may contact him to do some customization on some older frames that I have.

 

[Serjojeee]

Cool. FWIW I had the 6.1 95 (18x20) and ended putting weight mostly at 12 maybe 11:30- 12:30 really.

If you hit flat, there are a couple of things you might dig. IMHO you really want a low launch angle if you hit flat. Tight strings or a dense patter will help for sure and you might want to try a locked string bed with syngut, multi, or kevlar in the crosses. That would keep the launch angle lower I think than something like a poly cross.

Just thinking out loud wouldnt a flat shot benefit more from 3,6,9 and 12? I would think that would keep the racket steadiest for a flat shot.

To be honest, all at 12 (two 4 inch stripes) felt much better at wall practice, no instability diagnosed. And kick serve was way easier to hit. Tomorrow I'll find out how it works on the court. My buddy plays better than me, and he is a hard hitter, so stability issues will be amplified.

 

[Shroud]

To be honest, all at 12 (two 4 inch stripes) felt much better at wall practice, no instability diagnosed. And kick serve was way easier to hit. Tomorrow I'll find out how it works on the court. My buddy plays better than me, and he is a hard hitter, so stability issues will be amplified.

Yep. I rarely do 3/9 and definitely way more at 12.

Good luck against your friend

 

[travlerajm]

I just leaded up my shortened 6.1 95 to 380 SW. I had it balanced perfectly at 370, but the grip is too small for me, which hurts the elbow. When I add a 6-gram overgrip to make it feel better on the elbow, the only way to retune the balance right is to take the swingweight up to 380 by adding 6g at 2:30 and 9:30. 13.9 oz and 380 SW is heavier than I usually play with - we'll see how it goes.

Played a competitive set with it today. It was amazing! My hitting partner really liked it too - he named it: "Thor's Hammer".

Thor's Hammer is pretty spectacularly solid on returns, and really grabs the ball for spin. I can really hit a heavy ball, yet what sets it apart is the control - depth control, directional control, touch, spin control. everything.

Serves were the one thing I was concerned about before I tried it, but I really liked serving with it. It' really easy to consistently hit a super-high-rpm serve, so it dives into the box reliably. And since the rpm so high, I can make the kick bounce differently by varying the attack angle (either twist it to toward the backhand or curl it toward the forehand with similar motion). The height of the kick doesn't go as high because I wasn't cranking the velocity, but that's partly because I was using softer balls on a cool night, and the extra rpm makes the ball start to curve back downward after the bounce.

Volleys are solid as rock - just stick it out there. And defensive shots seem easier to control. I think I found my new favorite swingweight. I think having so much extra twistweight really amps up the spin while making the racquet more stable at the same time. I have 4 layers of lead tape at 10 and 2, and 3 layers at 3, 12, and 9.

Overheads take good footwork, but if you can get the racquet up early enough, it feels like a sledgehammer.

I felt like my groundies seem to have deceptive heaviness that caught my opponent by surprise so that he was hitting late. He's a regular partner too.

In the past, I had shied away from going heavier than 370SW because I noticed my serve losing pop (compared to 360 at this shortened length), but at 380SW, the loss in racquethead speed seems to be offset by some other advantages - more easy access to spin on the serve (which helps with consistency), and more stability and control on every other shot.

 

[sma1001]

Played a competitive set with it today. It was amazing!

Excellent start. However you need, i believe, to play a close 3 set match to determine whether this promising feedback will work for you in a full match.

 

[travlerajm]

Excellent start. However you need, i believe, to play a close 3 set match to determine whether this promising feedback will work for you in a full match.

Maybe so, but I rarely find the time to finish a 2-set match these days. A 3-set match represents less than 1% of my tennis playing opportunites, so endurance due to racquet weight not a concern. And when endurance does become an issue for me, it's the legs and lungs that give out first for me.

 

[travlerajm]

Played a competitive set with it today. It was amazing! My hitting partner really liked it too - he named it: "Thor's Hammer".

Thor's Hammer is pretty spectacularly solid on returns, and really grabs the ball for spin. I can really hit a heavy ball, yet what sets it apart is the control - depth control, directional control, touch, spin control. everything.

Serves were the one thing I was concerned about before I tried it, but I really liked serving with it. It' really easy to consistently hit a super-high-rpm serve, so it dives into the box reliably. And since the rpm so high, I can make the kick bounce differently by varying the attack angle (either twist it to toward the backhand or curl it toward the forehand with similar motion). The height of the kick doesn't go as high because I wasn't cranking the velocity, but that's partly because I was using softer balls on a cool night, and the extra rpm makes the ball start to curve back downward after the bounce.

Volleys are solid as rock - just stick it out there. And defensive shots seem easier to control. I think I found my new favorite swingweight. I think having so much extra twistweight really amps up the spin while making the racquet more stable at the same time. I have 4 layers of lead tape at 10 and 2, and 3 layers at 3, 12, and 9.

Overheads take good footwork, but if you can get the racquet up early enough, it feels like a sledgehammer.

I felt like my groundies seem to have deceptive heaviness that caught my opponent by surprise so that he was hitting late. He's a regular partner too.

In the past, I had shied away from going heavier than 370SW because I noticed my serve losing pop (compared to 360 at this shortened length), but at 380SW, the loss in racquethead speed seems to be offset by some other advantages - more easy access to spin on the serve (which helps with consistency), and more stability and control on every other shot.

I just put Thor's Hammer on the scale: 14.2 oz., so the swingweight might actually be higher than 380! I didn't realize that with my fine-tweaking, the weight had crept over the 14-oz mark. I'll try and measure it accurately soon.

 

[travlerajm]

I just put Thor's Hammer on the scale: 14.2 oz., so the swingweight might actually be higher than 380! I didn't realize that with my fine-tweaking, the weight had crept over the 14-oz mark. I'll try and measure it accurately soon.

Looks like it comes in at about 382.

 

[Serjojeee]

Yep. I rarely do 3/9 and definitely way more at 12.

Good luck against your friend

Thanks a lot It'll be fun, apart from 55F outside.

 

[movdqa]

Is there a reason why the static weight is so high? Is that by design or did you just keep adding to get to the swingweight? My regular frames are around the same swingweight at about 13.25 ounces and I think that you can get there with the RF97 around the same weight.

 

[Irvin]

Is there a reason why the static weight is so high? Is that by design or did you just keep adding to get to the swingweight? My regular frames are around the same swingweight at about 13.25 ounces and I think that you can get there with the RF97 around the same weight.

Difference is in RW or length of the two rackets.

EDIT: Shorter racket need more weight to get the SW increase because SW = mdd if d is lower mass must be greater.

EDIT: Also SW = RW + mdd

 

[movdqa]

Difference is in RW or length of the two rackets.

EDIT: Shorter racket need more weight to get the SW increase because SW = mdd if d is lower mass must be greater.

EDIT: Also SW = RW + mdd

What was the goal of the modifications.

My regular frames are XL and I prefer them for some additional flexibility in hitting but they do have that small swingweight to static weight advantage too.

 

[zalive]

Is there a reason why the static weight is so high? Is that by design or did you just keep adding to get to the swingweight? My regular frames are around the same swingweight at about 13.25 ounces and I think that you can get there with the RF97 around the same weight.

If you want to keep MgR/I (pendulum) in optimal range/spot (which is speed of a natural swing of your arm), you cannot go too polarized. If you polarize the setup, you must 'counterweight' it with increasing MgR/I (by putting some mass at the top of the handle, throat or 6 o'clock). This will also decrease SW to static weight ratio.

 

[movdqa]

If you want to keep MgR/I (pendulum) in optimal range/spot (which is speed of a natural swing of your arm), you cannot go too polarized. If you polarize the setup, you must 'counterweight' it with increasing MgR/I (by putting some mass at the top of the handle, throat or 6 o'clock). This will also decrease SW to static weight ratio.

The setup in my IG Prestiges is polarized (silicone in the handle, 15 grams of lead from 10 to 2. The setup in the RF97 is 15 grams from 10 to 2 because it is already quite headlight. My YT Prestiges are not polarized - 10 grams from 10 to 2, 8 grams at 3/9 and silicone and a nail in the handle. All of these are around 13.25 and 375-390 SW. I find the XL frames to make it easier to do the pendulum thing.

 

[Power Player]

I'm finding one way to gauge the proper balance of SW and RHS is the sound of the ball off the strings. Regardless of string type, if you are generating a loud pop on contact (and the ball shape is good and it's staying in, of course) you are probably hitting the ball with quality RHS, and you are also making clean contact. The next question is if you are exerting too much energy to do that. If the answer is yes, you probably want more SW. If the answer is no, you are probably in business. If you can't make the ball pop off the strings consistently, evaluate technique and also consider your frame may be moving too slowly.

 

[travlerajm]

Is there a reason why the static weight is so high? Is that by design or did you just keep adding to get to the swingweight? My regular frames are around the same swingweight at about 13.25 ounces and I think that you can get there with the RF97 around the same weight.

Yes - I'm so used to playing with my MgR/I tuned to 21.0, that anything else feels terrible. I'm spoiled by having my MgR/I tuned, and there's no going back.
I also need to have my MgR/I tuned for my 2hb (which, for fh MgR/I = 21.0, means balance has to be at exactly 12.54").
For a given swingweight, there is only 1 weight/balance combination that will satisfy both of those constraints. If the swingweight is 382, then my static weight needs to be 14.2 oz.

This is also the reason why I tried the 380+ SW int he first place. My 6.1 95 is has a lot of mass int he handle in stock form, but the size 3 one I have has a too small a grip for me. When I add 2 overgrips, the balance is too headlight to reach my favored MgR/I numbers (too much tailweight for my 2hb) unless I take the swingweight all the way up to 380 AND add some extra mass to the lower throat.

 

[Serjojeee]

Well, two stripes of lead 5 inches wide centerd at 12 (+ 10 pts sw to about 335), to the ps 18x20 made magic ) The confidence on the forehand side skyrocketed - all was in and spin/power was easily adjusted, huge and predictable. I runned around the bh a lot, mainly cause the forehand was so easy and accurate, the other reason - the bh was off and I clipped the courd a thousand times. Underspin bh was also off. Everything has a tradeoff, thats just life. The advice was spot on, thanks a lot!