Serjojeee
Rookie
I'd say that power level of the frame near the tip was not as big as with all lead at 12. But a bit lower on the stringbed it's much more powerful.
The Official Lead Tape Placement+Racket Customization Thread
- Thread starter xFullCourtTenniSx
- Start date
ohiostate124
Professional
What would you all recommend doing to a reissue ps85? I've heard lead at 3 & 9 to raise the sweet spot a bit.
Karma Tennis
Legend
IMO, the easiest way to manage this is to pick an ideal Balance spec. and stick to it regardless of weight specification and distribution and SW.
For example, if you find your ideal Balance spec is 8 Points Head Light, then it doesn't matter about the other specs. Just configure the static weight and weight distribution in such a way that you end up with your ideal Balance spec. As long as you can handle the static weight and it doesn't compromise your stroke path and RHS, you should be right.
Serjojeee
Rookie
Well, that's a good idea, but I changed balance from 330 unstrung to 320 and can say that there are benefits in both worlds. 320 works better know with SW 340, it's almost as easy as SW 335 with 325. And the feel is different - all the mass was at the tip, and now it's near the handle, the swing path became different. Lead is the ultimate tennis thing
1990's Graphite
Hall of Fame
Quick question.. If I have lead tape under the bumper at 10 /2 and want to add some at 12, but on the frame (inside) will that affect anything at all? or do I need to keep the lead under the bumper also for consistency ?
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Lead inside the frame will do the same thing that lead under the bumper. BUT lead under the bumper will have less chance of falling off, is easier to add, and you don't run the risk of touching it if you OCD about lead poisining. Lead under the bumper will have a greater effect on SW because it is 1 cm farther from the 10 cm SW axis. For instance if you add 10 g (0.01 kg) of lead under the bumper and that point is 55.5 cm above the 10 cm pivot you add (0.01*55.5*55.5) 30.8025 SW points to your racket. If you add 10 g inside the frame (1 cm closer to the pivot you add (0.01*54.5*54.5) 29.7025 SW points. You can get the same effect by adding a little more inside the frame or a little less outside the frame.
1990's Graphite
Hall of Fame
Thanks Irvin, I guess I was more curious would the lead both around the hoop (under bumper ) and also on the inside cause some disproportion or effect... if it's only SW then that's ok.. Haven't mastered sliding lead under bumper without taking guard off as some have here...... Yet
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Actually there will be sone small change in TW too. The longer the strip of lead tape and the more it weighs the greater the change. Also balance and total mass goes up too.Thanks Irvin, I guess I was more curious would the lead both around the hoop (under bumper ) and also on the inside cause some disproportion or effect... if it's only SW then that's ok.. Haven't mastered sliding lead under bumper without taking guard off as some have here...... Yet
Biogenic
Rookie
Hello! I have a question I have 2 6.1 95L team and one is 283g and is more HH and the other is 287 but more HL. How can i balance this? What I did was balance them by putting lead in the throat area and they are fine now. But I was wondering will the sw be the same or did i do the right thing? Please answer im noob at this 1st time thank yiou
Karma Tennis
Legend
A lot of people get obsessed with racquet specifications. The most important question for you is "How do they feel when you hit with them?". Do you notice any difference. If you don't, then you don't need to do anything else. If you do notice a difference, then you will have to be a little bit more stringent in your matching process..
There are calculators on the net that can advise you as to the best place to put weight. But you will need some local tools to measure things like SW for yourself if you want to match them perfectly.
Otherwise guys like @Irvin may be able to help you further.
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Any time you add any weight to any frame any where you are adding inertia. Depending on what pivot point you are using to measure your inertia the value of the inertia measurement can change. Fpr instance, RW weight is the inertia measure at the Center of Mass, Swing weight is the inertia measure at 10 cm from the butt of the racket. But few realize they are both the same thing. The Parallel Axis Theorem can be used to convert from on to the other. and if the balance and weight are the same, if both rackets have the same SW the RW will also be the same and vice versa.
Therefore if you're going to try to match the two rackets IMO the easiest way to do it is to get the weight and balance points the same first. But when adding weight to control the balance there is an infinite number of ways that you can do that. let's assume you have a racket that has a balance of 320 mm and weighs 325 g. Relative to the but that racket has a gcm force of (325*32.0) of 10,400. Now let's assume you have another racket that has a balance of 319 mm and weighs 322 g. This racket has a gcm force of 10,271.8. Getting the weight the same is easy add 3 g to the lighter racket but where is the problem. there is a difference of 128.2 gcm between the two frame so if you divide the gcm/w you get your answer 128.2/30 = 42.7 cm or 427 mm.
But the same can be done by dividing that 3 g weight into 2, 3, or even more pieces. As long as you add 128,2 gcm to the racket the balance and weight will be the same. How much weight you add at what point also controls the SW and TW of the racket.
TW has some calculators that will easily allow you to match up two frames just by plugging in the numbers and they will be close.
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
I have weight at 3&9. On older models ( pre 2007) of pure drive, it worked well.
This didn't work on newer models. I am constantly pulling forehand cross courts long or wide. Serve was also a problem but by stroke of luck, a little weight at 12 seems to have fixed it. Not sure what to do about the cross courts.
Down the line are great And I hit a ton of wInners.
I know it's my technique that's at fault but that's a work in progress.
Anything I can try with lead tape?
zalive
Hall of Fame
You can try adding bit more at 12 o'clock and see if it helps. Try with a chunk of putty, easy to experient with.
In case this direction doesn't help, try adding putty at the throat and see if this helps.
Both zones change significantly how racquet swings, but work in different directions. So if racquet doesn't swing effortlessly then putting mass at one of those two areas should make it better. Then what you can do is keep adding until you find the optimal spot for your strokes.
styksnstryngs
Professional
Has anyone modified both the graphene and gxt versions of radical mps to achieve similar balance and swingweight? I love my modded grad mp, but I can't find any more, and my best bet is to try to get the gxt rad to a similar spec. The stock gxt has a 322 sw, 5pts higher than the non xt version. Similar mass, similar balance, but more polarized. I put lead at 11 and 1 and some in the buttcap to make it more headlight, so would putting lead at 3 and 9 instead of 11&1 work? I'm just worried about sweetspot moving down because of the lead in the handle.
djNEiGht
Legend
I take balance measurements before adding weight. Then I will add weight slowly and remeasure. Off the top of my head you could prob add a small amount at 3/9 and then the remainder at the bottom of the throat. If you want to add more to the 3/9 position, then add the remainder inside the butt cap and not at the throat.
Roland G
Hall of Fame
zalive
Hall of Fame
1.5 gram to the butt, and you preserve the original balance.
I added 3 grams at 12 on my areoprodrive. So should I also put 1.5 gram in the butcapp to have the original balance?
I now have 3 grams at 12 and 10 grams in the butcapp. What did I do to the speetspot/overall feel of the racket. Should I remove grams from the butcap or doesnt it matter much?
I know its personal but would love some recommendation.
In other words I don't know wtf im doing
I now have 3 grams at 12 and 10 grams in the butcapp. What did I do to the speetspot/overall feel of the racket. Should I remove grams from the butcap or doesnt it matter much?
I know its personal but would love some recommendation.
In other words I don't know wtf im doing
Last edited:
tennisbike
Professional
The balance point of one racket is not necessarily the same on other tennis racket. So asking and giving information without knowing where the balance point on the particular racket will not give one an accurate answer. Thus please find the balance point first.
If you have ever seen a Dunlop Maxply Fort or a picture of one, you might notice there are three red stripe right below the throat area. Well, I checked mine and the balance point is right on the middle red stripe. How did I check it? Well, initially I just put a round pencil under the racket and roll around until the racket almost balance. You should mark it first. My current method is using a carpenter triangle, a cheap one from Harbor Freight, and balance my racket on it. Then I put a ruler again the edge, so I can read the balance point. Most of my rackets has balance point at around 32 cm or 32.5 from the butt cap.
Once you have identified where the balance point is then you have a see-saw. Keep it balanced and stay at the same balance point. Good luck!
If you have ever seen a Dunlop Maxply Fort or a picture of one, you might notice there are three red stripe right below the throat area. Well, I checked mine and the balance point is right on the middle red stripe. How did I check it? Well, initially I just put a round pencil under the racket and roll around until the racket almost balance. You should mark it first. My current method is using a carpenter triangle, a cheap one from Harbor Freight, and balance my racket on it. Then I put a ruler again the edge, so I can read the balance point. Most of my rackets has balance point at around 32 cm or 32.5 from the butt cap.
Once you have identified where the balance point is then you have a see-saw. Keep it balanced and stay at the same balance point. Good luck!
zalive
Hall of Fame
I added 3 grams at 12 on my areoprodrive. So should I also put 1.5 gram in the butcapp to have the original balance?
I now have 3 grams at 12 and 10 grams in the butcapp. What did I do to the speetspot/overall feel of the racket. Should I remove grams from the butcap or doesnt it matter much?
I know its personal but would love some recommendation.
In other words I don't know wtf im doing
Compensation for the balance for 3 grams at 12 o'clock is roughly 6 grams at the top of the handle (7'' or 17-18 cm from the butt), however full compensation for the swing is 7 grams at 7''. Whether restoring the previous balance and especially swing was the best idea - it's up to how good both felt prior to change.
In reality unless you wanna go to tenths of gram precision, wherever the BP is, whatever the hoop geometry is, approximations I suggest are good enough. You can't mistake for as much as half a mm, you can miss few tenths of a mm at most. If you wanna calculate differences for different scenarios in regards to BP and swing change, feel free.
Hi, I'm currently looking at customizing my racquet to improve my mgr/i number while maintaining decent recoil weight, and after tinkering with the TW tool, it looks like I would need to increase swingweight from 330->340 and increase overall weight from 334 grams -> 350 grams at 32.2cm balance, in which recoil weight would sit at around 169 with the mgr/i of ~20.8. Couple questions I'd like to ask:
1. Will this jump in weight/SW be significantly noticeable enough where it would actually be detrimental? I feel like I can use my current setup handily, so I think I can handle a weight increase, but I'm not quite sure if this increase is too much. If it turns out 10 points of SW is relatively negligible, then i would wonder if I could afford to be a bit more greedy to improve the recoil weight, but in that case I"m worried the overall weight increase will end up being too much.
2. I also use a Yonex dampener, and with the 3~4 grams increase from this, how much will that alter the swingweight and balance when I'm trying to calculate?
Thanks in advance!
1. Will this jump in weight/SW be significantly noticeable enough where it would actually be detrimental? I feel like I can use my current setup handily, so I think I can handle a weight increase, but I'm not quite sure if this increase is too much. If it turns out 10 points of SW is relatively negligible, then i would wonder if I could afford to be a bit more greedy to improve the recoil weight, but in that case I"m worried the overall weight increase will end up being too much.
2. I also use a Yonex dampener, and with the 3~4 grams increase from this, how much will that alter the swingweight and balance when I'm trying to calculate?
Thanks in advance!
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Assume your balance point is 10 cm below the 3&9 positions (you will need actual measurements.) That means you're adding 30 gcm of force above the balance point so you need 30 gcm below to maintain balance. 1 g @ 30 cm, 2 g @ 15 cm, 3 g @ 10 cm etc. Md = 30 gcm.
EDIT: if you have a specific point where you want to add weight find out how far the point is below the balance point. Say you want to add mass at the top of the handle and the top of the handle is 14 cm below balance. Md = 30 gcm - M*14 cm = 30 gcm - M = 30 gcm/14 cm - M = 2.14 g
Last edited:
zalive
Hall of Fame
1. It's you who must try it, there's not much sense in putting questions that can't be answer. It depends a lot on your strokes. SW of 340 is nothing too big but when you compare 340 SW with perfectly tuned swing to a 330 SW with a perfectly tuned swing, of course the 330 one will be easier to swing some. However it's the tuning for an easy swing what makes a higher SW racquet playable, and you must allow yourself some experimenting to find a perfect spot, or...just get lucky to hit such with the first iteration
I myself usually need more than one iteration of customization to get everything really good. If I had access to good measuring equipment I guess math would help me get everything right much quicker, but without a precise measurement of SW it's not easily done for me.2. Dampener alters how racquet swings and if you use a dampener you must enter it into specs. You deal with the specs you actually play with, these are the specs that are relevant to you, and those include both OG and a dampener if you use them. So, if I enter data for a 3.5 gram dampener into some random but typical racquet scenario, I get that it increased the SW by approx. 2.5 pts, moved the BP towards HH direction by approx. half a mm and also increased MgR/I by approx. 0.04 pts (this shows that how racquet swings will be indeed altered some).
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Since you did not specify the balance I assume your present balance is 32.2 cm also. That being the case you can improve your MgR/I (assuming you want to raise it from 20.6 to 20.8) by adding mass to the top of the handle @ 7". Then the increase in SW will be minimal, your balance will drop, giving you an increase in RW at the same time.
Last edited:
Thanks for the helpful advice! I took the new setup for an hour session today and didn't feel like I had too much difficulty adjusting, although I think it may still take a little bit more time before I'm fully comfortable. But the arm comfort was definitely noticeable which is important for me. At the same time, with the recoil weight now being in the low 170 range, I'm thinking about possibly venturing out into a poly hybrid setup to see how it works out as I could always use more spin potential and control if it's something I can access. Right now I'm using a Ashaway Monogut ZX 16 mains at 58lbs, TNT ocho 16 crosses at 55 lbs, and I'm not sure I'd want to go higher in tension for the ZX to balance out the increased SW/power. If I were to try out a copoly like the RPM team 16 on the crosses with the ZX mains, what tensions would you recommend? And do you think this particular copoly will coexist well with the ZX? (I picked this one based on the relatively decent tension maintenance and playable durability). If this setup will allow me to get away with lowering the tension a bit on the ZX, I'd be fine with that too.
Karma Tennis
Legend
Simplest way of doing this is to get your hands on a Balance Board.
Measure the balance of your original configuration. When you add weight, measure the balance again. Then proceed to add weight at whatever "countering"position you chose and measure the balance again. Rinse and repeat until you have your desired result.
If you are unable to acquire a Balance Board, they are quite easy to make. Just Google for instructions. Otherwise you can make do with the edge of a table and a tape measure. Again just Google for instructions.
Personally, once I acquired a Balance Board, I have never looked back. Matching racquets in terms of Balance is so easy with one.
Measure the balance of your original configuration. When you add weight, measure the balance again. Then proceed to add weight at whatever "countering"position you chose and measure the balance again. Rinse and repeat until you have your desired result.
If you are unable to acquire a Balance Board, they are quite easy to make. Just Google for instructions. Otherwise you can make do with the edge of a table and a tape measure. Again just Google for instructions.
Personally, once I acquired a Balance Board, I have never looked back. Matching racquets in terms of Balance is so easy with one.
Roland G
Hall of Fame
Apologies in advance for all the questions but the feedback from this thread is always great!
My racquet is around 335g strung and I'm looking to add 3g (total) at 3 & 9 and I am looking to keep the same balance which is currently 33cm, how much would I need to add in the handle to achieve this?
Thanks in advance
My racquet is around 335g strung and I'm looking to add 3g (total) at 3 & 9 and I am looking to keep the same balance which is currently 33cm, how much would I need to add in the handle to achieve this?
Thanks in advance
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
That question is asked more than you think. If you add mass above the balance point the force added is mass times distance. If you want to maintain the same balance again mass time distance below the balance point. So you want 3 g at 3&9, assuming 3&9 are 20 cm above the balance of 33 cm that's 60 gcm. If you add mass at the butt cap 33 cm below COM you will need to add (60/33) 1.8 g. Usually you can easily add that inside the butt cap as there is about a 2 mm space below the pallet.
Last edited:
Following up on my experience with poly/zx hybrid setup - Strung up Babolat RPM team 16 at 57 mains and Monogut ZX at 55 crosses and experienced no arm pain or soreness. Despite the relatively high poly main tension, the 170 recoil weight definitely held up and I'm very pleased with the results! After I play with this setup for another week or two I will likely venture out into the wacky kevlar/zx hybrid and hopefully I'll get closer to my racquet's "final form" 
Also brought up the MGR/I very close to 21 by adding a few layers lead tape at 8.25" (just above where I put my overgrip sticker) and then covering it up with electric tape, but I'm not quite sure if I feel any difference. Is there any way in particular I can look for subtle or obvious signs that I am benefiting from the MGR/I? MGR/I in general seems like it takes a lot of tinkering with weight just to get it up a small amount.. so I've had to add ~5g static weight just to get it from 20.7 to 20.9, which then prompts the question of whether if it is worth the investment of increased static weight to improve MGR/I by .2? From a numbers standpoint it doesn't seem as efficient, especially if the recoil weight setup is pretty good, but then if the MGR/I is somewhere in the low 20's (20.2~20.3), it seems like it would require a substantial amount of static weight increase to get it up close to 21 (unless I'm missing something in this assumption)...
Also brought up the MGR/I very close to 21 by adding a few layers lead tape at 8.25" (just above where I put my overgrip sticker) and then covering it up with electric tape, but I'm not quite sure if I feel any difference. Is there any way in particular I can look for subtle or obvious signs that I am benefiting from the MGR/I? MGR/I in general seems like it takes a lot of tinkering with weight just to get it up a small amount.. so I've had to add ~5g static weight just to get it from 20.7 to 20.9, which then prompts the question of whether if it is worth the investment of increased static weight to improve MGR/I by .2? From a numbers standpoint it doesn't seem as efficient, especially if the recoil weight setup is pretty good, but then if the MGR/I is somewhere in the low 20's (20.2~20.3), it seems like it would require a substantial amount of static weight increase to get it up close to 21 (unless I'm missing something in this assumption)...
Last edited:
Another quick update and question - I am liking the setup of my Yonex SV98 at ~340 SW and ~170 RW with ~31.9cm balance, and the increase in SW came from lead tape at the top stretching from 11:00 to 1:00 and some bluetack in the handle and lead tape near the top of the handle. I am going to try out the SV95 this week in the hopes that I can get a slightly improved feel due to its lower flex/vibration rating, but I realize that there is a major twist weight difference between the 98 (13.8) and the 95 (12.9). So naturally I am looking to add weight at the 3:00 and 9:00, and 7" position on the handle.
I realize how the racquet plays out in person is the most important, but from a psychological standpoint , I still don't quite grasp what exactly I'm getting with the weight at the 3:00 and 9:00 besides the increase in stability and expanded sweet spot. If I had the SV98 with the above specs, and matched it with the SV95, with the only difference being the position of the weights (tip and bottom vs 3/9 and 7"), are there any factors to think about besides the twist weight? (for example, loss or gain of spin potential, which I'm still not sure if weight at 3/9 increases or decreases spin potential). And is it generally not advisable to add weight at the tip to increase SW if I am already committed to the 3/9 positions?
I realize how the racquet plays out in person is the most important, but from a psychological standpoint , I still don't quite grasp what exactly I'm getting with the weight at the 3:00 and 9:00 besides the increase in stability and expanded sweet spot. If I had the SV98 with the above specs, and matched it with the SV95, with the only difference being the position of the weights (tip and bottom vs 3/9 and 7"), are there any factors to think about besides the twist weight? (for example, loss or gain of spin potential, which I'm still not sure if weight at 3/9 increases or decreases spin potential). And is it generally not advisable to add weight at the tip to increase SW if I am already committed to the 3/9 positions?
zalive
Hall of Fame
Following up on my experience with poly/zx hybrid setup - Strung up Babolat RPM team 16 at 57 mains and Monogut ZX at 55 crosses and experienced no arm pain or soreness. Despite the relatively high poly main tension, the 170 recoil weight definitely held up and I'm very pleased with the results! After I play with this setup for another week or two I will likely venture out into the wacky kevlar/zx hybrid and hopefully I'll get closer to my racquet's "final form"
Also brought up the MGR/I very close to 21 by adding a few layers lead tape at 8.25" (just above where I put my overgrip sticker) and then covering it up with electric tape, but I'm not quite sure if I feel any difference. Is there any way in particular I can look for subtle or obvious signs that I am benefiting from the MGR/I? MGR/I in general seems like it takes a lot of tinkering with weight just to get it up a small amount.. so I've had to add ~5g static weight just to get it from 20.7 to 20.9, which then prompts the question of whether if it is worth the investment of increased static weight to improve MGR/I by .2? From a numbers standpoint it doesn't seem as efficient, especially if the recoil weight setup is pretty good, but then if the MGR/I is somewhere in the low 20's (20.2~20.3), it seems like it would require a substantial amount of static weight increase to get it up close to 21 (unless I'm missing something in this assumption)...
It's pointless to seek MgR/I close to 21 with heavily polarized setups. Instead, pro customizers seem to find other MgR/I spots which offer good racquet performance, such as 20 or 20.3, which are much easier to reach with a polarized setup without going high with static weight. This is what available specs data shows for Rafa and Novak, for example. The whole idea for them is to get racquet swing effortlessly and naturally. MgR/I around 21 is not the only spot for that. There may be differences in how those other MgR/I spots feel and play but the important is, those spots are local optimums of racquet's performance. One fine MgR/I spot is somewhere in 20.65-20.7 neighbourhood. So when you see those values, 20.0, 20.3, 20.7, 21...looks like it could be cyclic, right?
Since calculated values are pretty sensitive to accurate measurements of all specs included, and since it's mentioned that players height should also play role for MgR/I spot to a degree, it's obvious that one must not be obsessed by actual value, but rather be lead by feel to finish the customization fine tuning in search for that easy, effortless swing as something inherent to a racquet. In other words, trust how you feel about the swing and hitting with it rather than mathematical value - no one knows which should be it in hundredths or even tenths, anyway, even if those are based on most accurate measurements. Seek for hitting precision, when racquet is never too late on you and your timing with it is natural. Precision and effortless natural swing, those should be your guides to finish the tuning job.
Last edited:
zalive
Hall of Fame
In my view, it's quite personal how much twist stability player needs, and also, narrower racquets should need bit less twist weight for similar stability. With twist weight you get some and you lose some. Quickest, easier to swing and to serve with racquet is one with the lowish twist weight. It's also the best one to add topspin. On the other hand higher TW offers better margin of error for off centres and higher precision for those slighter off centres. So it's about personal needs, playing style and a compromise.
As for spin generation, slight twisting of a racquets face in a direction of closing racquet's face bit more (this torque direction should happen on each sweet spot or at least roughly good hit) will aid spin, with the benefit that harder the incoming ball, higher the torque, so it actually helps. But per se lower twist weight won't increase spin potential, it's all about racquet's face angle (tilt) on impact. We see Novak playing with high TW and 18x20 pattern yet still he doesn't have trouble to provide lot of RPMs because he makes sure racquet's face is closed enough to make it so, the rest is RHS and racquet's SW as always. So let's say you increased the TW with some lead at 3+9 o'clock. SW will consequently increase too. Racqet's torque will close racquet's face less on impact dure to higher twist inertia TW), so effect will be less - given the identical stroke you'll likely lose bit of topspin at least on some hits. But if you adjust racquet's face tilt on contact to compensate for this, there will likely be even more topspin than before because SW has increased. What increased TW helps is launch angle precision.
In my view also, there's no reason why not add lead both at 12 o'clock and 3+9 o'clock - whoever wrote this was wrong. There are pro players doing it. Every time you see a pro player having lead at 3+9 o'clock consider he likely has lead at 12 o'clock too. At least for some players it's known they do both.
Think of this as influencing the platform racquet design. The major reason why using lead at 3+9 o'clock is improving racquet's twist stability. So you apply ideally minimum quantity you need there to be satisfied with its stability. The major reason why using lead at 12 o'clock (11-1 o'clock zone actually) is improbing racquet's recoil weight (recoil stability) plus increasing its SW in a most efficient way, with least added grams and without influencing the twist weight.
So after racquet has been modded for desired TW and SW, then you use the handle side to modify how it swings and its balance, plus to finish the RW increase stabilization. There's likely more finesse within knowledge of rare customization bards and masters, but roughly, most important stuff should be here: TW, SW, RW, balance and how racquet swings.
Just trying to improve at reading and evaluating racquet data... when it comes to the sweet zone, if one's intention is to customize, is this something that will be constantly changing depending on the lead tape placement?
For example, the Yonex Duel G 310 sweet zone is showing 90.3 while the Yonex SV 95 is 103 while having a slightly smaller head size and the same twist weight, and I'm not sure how to assess this difference in how the racquets will perform compared to one another. But I do see that the Duel G has a lower swingweight, so is that where the difference in the sweet zone data comes from, and does this in essence make a lower sweet zone racquet less forgiving despite having a slightly larger headsize?
For example, the Yonex Duel G 310 sweet zone is showing 90.3 while the Yonex SV 95 is 103 while having a slightly smaller head size and the same twist weight, and I'm not sure how to assess this difference in how the racquets will perform compared to one another. But I do see that the Duel G has a lower swingweight, so is that where the difference in the sweet zone data comes from, and does this in essence make a lower sweet zone racquet less forgiving despite having a slightly larger headsize?
fivesixseven
New User
Hi everyone, can someone help clarify if my understanding below is correct.
Say I have a racket at strung specs (aka those listed on the product page) with a balance point of 6 HL.
I have now added an overgrip on it, which adds about 6 grams to the handle and makes my racket about 1 or 1.5 points more headlight aka it is now 7 points Headlight.
This means that if I want to "depolarise" my racket, when adding 6 grams of weight I should only do so at the 3 and 9 o clock (3 grams each). I should not be counter adding weight to the handle, correct? Because the overgrip already serves that purpose.
Hence in theory, after adding this 6 grams I should be bringing the balance back to approximately 6HL as it was before?
So if I wanted to preserve the original balance, I'd do so in increments like this:
Add 6 grams at 3 and 9 o clock : Add nothing at the handle
Add 9 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 3 grams at handle
Add 12 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 6 grams at the handle
So that I always make sure that -6g deficit by the overgrip is neutralised, right?
Thanks!
Say I have a racket at strung specs (aka those listed on the product page) with a balance point of 6 HL.
I have now added an overgrip on it, which adds about 6 grams to the handle and makes my racket about 1 or 1.5 points more headlight aka it is now 7 points Headlight.
This means that if I want to "depolarise" my racket, when adding 6 grams of weight I should only do so at the 3 and 9 o clock (3 grams each). I should not be counter adding weight to the handle, correct? Because the overgrip already serves that purpose.
Hence in theory, after adding this 6 grams I should be bringing the balance back to approximately 6HL as it was before?
So if I wanted to preserve the original balance, I'd do so in increments like this:
Add 6 grams at 3 and 9 o clock : Add nothing at the handle
Add 9 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 3 grams at handle
Add 12 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 6 grams at the handle
So that I always make sure that -6g deficit by the overgrip is neutralised, right?
Thanks!
Last edited:
Simplicius
Semi-Pro
Hi everyone, can someone help clarify if my understanding below is correct.
Say I have a racket at strung specs (aka those listed on the product page) with a balance point of 6 HL.
I have now added an overgrip on it, which adds about 6 grams to the handle and makes my racket about 1 or 1.5 points more headlight aka it is now 7 points Headlight.
This means that if I want to "depolarise" my racket, when adding 6 grams of weight I should only do so at the 3 and 9 o clock (3 grams each). I should not be counter adding weight to the handle, correct? Because the overgrip already serves that purpose.
Hence in theory, after adding this 6 grams I should be bringing the balance back to approximately 6HL as it was before?
So if I wanted to preserve the original balance, I'd do so in increments like this:
Add 6 grams at 3 and 9 o clock : Add nothing at the handle
Add 9 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 3 grams at handle
Add 12 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 6 grams at the handle
So that I always make sure that -6g deficit by the overgrip is neutralised, right?
Thanks!
Yes, that's the idea, if you want to keep the balance as it was before overgrip placement.
But do you realy want to keep this?
When you add so much weight on 9-3 position you raise the swingweight a lot.
+10 sw points for 6g, +15 for 9g and +20 points for 12g.
This is going to make big changes in the racquet's maneuverability...
To keep the maneuverability as it was before you have to raise the weight in the handle in order to make the racquet more headlight.
eg. if your starting specs were 6HL and 315 sw you have to go for a 10HL and 335 sw in order to have an equal maneuverability feel.
fivesixseven
New User
Yes, that's the idea, if you want to keep the balance as it was before overgrip placement.
But do you realy want to keep this?
When you add so much weight on 9-3 position you raise the swingweight a lot.
+10 sw points for 6g, +15 for 9g and +20 points for 12g.
This is going to make big changes in the racquet's maneuverability...
To keep the maneuverability as it was before you have to raise the weight in the handle in order to make the racquet more headlight.
eg. if your starting specs were 6HL and 315 sw you have to go for a 10HL and 335 sw in order to have an equal maneuverability feel.
hmm well i think its easiest way for me to add weight like that to try it out first, given that it perfectly achieves the stock balance.
thanks for pointing out the swingweight difference though, i did not know that.
i'd ideally want something around 7pts HL, but it'll take a little more calculating to figure out how to work that out, given that I'm using TW's tungsten tape which comes in 3 strips of 3 grams. might have to cut them all up into 1 gram pieces.
whereas if i just stuck on 6 grams in total at the 3 and 9 o clock i could call it a day
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Actually no you are wrong sorry to say. Anytime you increase the Recoil weight of a racket (aka inertia at the center of mass) you are making the racket more polar. The only way you can possibly depolarize a racket is to take weight off. Add an OG and inertia goes up. Add mass at 3&9 and inertia goes up. Every time inertia goes up the racket is more polar.Hi everyone, can someone help clarify if my understanding below is correct.
Say I have a racket at strung specs (aka those listed on the product page) with a balance point of 6 HL.
I have now added an overgrip on it, which adds about 6 grams to the handle and makes my racket about 1 or 1.5 points more headlight aka it is now 7 points Headlight.
This means that if I want to "depolarise" my racket, when adding 6 grams of weight I should only do so at the 3 and 9 o clock (3 grams each). I should not be counter adding weight to the handle, correct? Because the overgrip already serves that purpose.
Hence in theory, after adding this 6 grams I should be bringing the balance back to approximately 6HL as it was before?
So if I wanted to preserve the original balance, I'd do so in increments like this:
Add 6 grams at 3 and 9 o clock : Add nothing at the handle
Add 9 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 3 grams at handle
Add 12 grams at 3 and 9 o clock: Add 6 grams at the handle
So that I always make sure that -6g deficit by the overgrip is neutralised, right?
Thanks!
Let’s look at the racket before you add the OG. You say your racket is 6 points HL and you add an OG. How far the balance moves depend on the mass you had before. It won’t be the same for a 350 g racket as it is for 1 200 g racket. It won’t be the same for a 29” racket as it is for a 25” racket.
EDIT: Even if you add mass at the balance point inertia is going to go up because it is impossible to add mass that has no dimension or size.
fivesixseven
New User
It's the Yonex Ezone DR 98. Strung weight 325g, 6pts HL. But I'm using a demo version (don't want to take the OG off because the shop is quite picky about making sure it comes back as it left). Just an overgrip on it - no dampeners etc.
I weighed it and its currently 330g (about 5g for the OG, that's about right) and it is 8 pts HL (measured manually using a ruler and hanging off the table method, so its not 100% accurate but I'd say its about 75 accurate).
My target is to get it to feel similar to my 2012 Head Youtek IG Prestige midplus, which (with an overgrip and strung) is 340g and 7pts HL. I am switching because the 18x20 is making it very difficult to generate topspin.
I've tried the DR 98 for a couple of sessions now and am liking the "whip" i get to add topspin, but miss the heft of the prestige. On mishits, this DR 98 feels a little less stable hence why I was planning on adding weight at 3 and 9 o'clock.
But I wasn't aware of this:
I'm guessing the swingweight is pretty important in trying to replicate the "feel" of my prestige, but unfortunately I'm pretty neanderthal and all i can accurately measure is static weight and balance.
As a side note, I'm doing my head in trying to work out the maths in the de-polarization thread by travlerajm. I thought I'd just have to add weight at the 3 and 9, but I've also got to specifically place it somewhere on the handle - simply placing it in the buttcap (which is what I was planning on doing) won't work. I'm pretty sure I've screwed up my formula somewhere because it keeps telling me to add tape 20 inches from the racket butt. Should have paid more attention in my math classes
Anyway I'm not adding any weight to this demo, I just wanted to find out how i would do it if i did decide to buy this racket because I like most things about it except the weight.
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
You like the ‘whip’ because you get more topspin. Hummm that understandable the faster the racket move at an angle brushing up on the ball and the more open the pattern is the greater the spin is going to be. When you add mass to 3&9 you increase Twist Weight and Swing Weight. Inertia is additive so when the racket face is traveling at an angle to a line perpendicular to the string bed you going to make it harder to accelerate the racket. If the racket is has too low an inertia for you adding mass will help and give you more plow. If it’s pretty close to you limit now it’s just going to slow you down giving you less spin but more plow.
BTW you can’t make a racket more maneuverable by adding mass no matter where you put it. It may make the feel better and that feel (balance and mass) may give you the feeling it’s easier to maneuver but it’s not. You still have to move everything that was there before in addition to whatever you add.
Karma Tennis
Legend
Try the extended length DR98+. A lot of reviews suggest that might be right in your wheelhouse based on what you have said.
fivesixseven
New User
Thanks. I was also looking into the Vcore duel g 97 310 (lightrr version of wawrinka's stick).
I feel like the slightly tighter string pattern may give more control than the 16x19 DR98, but also more spin potential than my 18x20 prestige MP.
fivesixseven
New User
Thanks - Ok now i an starting to understand.
Right now it doesn't feel close to my limit. I like the "whippyness", but find it a little hard to control at tines.
I.e. i have to really focus on hitting over the ball in order to keep them in, because the racket is a little light to swing.
But this may also be due to the launch angle of the 16x19 string pattern, since i i used to the 18x20 on my Prestige.
Hence why i thought the VCore Duelg 97 310 seemed in the middle, with its 16x20 pattern. I might take that for a demo too
fivesixseven
New User
I'm just slightly concerned about the plus length and how it takes makes it much less manoeuvrable, particularly at the net.
In theory, would I be able to achieve the same benefits of the 98+ by simply adding weight to the 98 ? Most of the reviewers said they enjoyed the increased swingweight. Based on what simplicus said above, i should easily be able to achieve the higher swingweight at a similar balance, yet keeping a standard 27inch length with this stick.
Simplicius
Semi-Pro
Two different racquets with the same specs it is not possible to have a similar feel.
And when I'm talking about specs I mean more critical specs than the static weight and the balance which you have mention.
Even if they have similar static weight, balance, swing weight, twist weight, stiffness, etc etc etc they will play different! Just forget that idea!
Materials type and materials weight distribution within the racquet are enought to change many things.
Btw, you can use coins and electric tape to hold them on the racquet, as you experiment with the weight and the places on your racquet. Use lead only when you make the final decition...
Finally, DR 98 has nothing to do with IGPMP... I'm also an ex 2012 Head Youtek IG Prestige MP (18x20) long time user and I've recently found success with the Volkl PB10 Mid. It's a "bigger" 93 sqi as IGPMP is a "smaller" 98 sqi. - meaning that both of them are close to 95 sqi.
You have to try that Volkl. It has the comfort, the power and the spin that lacks from IGPMP, but you can say that has similar "playing style".
Thats my two cents...
Last edited:
fivesixseven
New User
I know that, but when I said I missed the "heft" i meant the actual swingweight of it.
thanks for this idea
. i tried this today with some small coin weighing 3 grams each. initially put 1 each at 3 and 9 oclock, to counter the overgrip and return to "stock" balance. it was a game changer! i immediately could appreciate the difference when swinging hard at shots. it allowed me to take bigger cuts at the ball without sacrificing control or overhitting things.i then wanted it to be heavier, so i added another coin (+3grams) at 12 o clock. It felt better still. but i'm curious as to how different it would feel if I had added that extra weight at 3 and 9 o clock instead. I'm a little restrained now because all I have are coins. I'm getting some tungsten tape later this week, so I can split those up into little 1g pieces to make it easier to adjust weight overall.
Now my only issue is as you said, it is feeling slightly less manevourable due to increased swingweight (but stilll "whippy" enough for me to generate decent kick on my serves and groundstrokes). I might try to make it more Headlight by adding tape to the handle. Only thing is i'm not sure where exactly on the handle to add it. The link provided in the very first post of this thread has led me to use some formulas, but I'm pretty sure I've messed up the maths. I understand that any weight I add should be above the middle of the handle (because that's where I actually grip the racket). So, it seems like adding weight in the racket trapdoor would be rather pointless.
But all in all, a very positive improvement - it has made a world of difference!
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
@fivesixseven just a thought but why at mass at 3&9 and 12 also. Adding mass at 3&9 adds TW and SW, while adding mass at 12 adds to SW and just slightly to TW. Why not add at just one location in between 3-12-9 like 10&2 And keep all your mass hidden under the bumper and do the same thing. Figure out how much mass you want to add and what you want for SW. say you want to add 10 g and you want to add 25 points to your SW. if you add mass at 3&9 then go to 12 and add more you’ll confuse yourself because each change the other. We know 50*50*0.01 is 25. Just add 5 g (on each side) centered at a point 50 cm from the 10 cm point. Your SW never goes higher than you want, and you’re increasing stability at the same time.
