Venus', Serena's, and Roddick's racquets.

All i want to know is how much lead tape do i put on the top of the handle, and is it around 9 inches from the butt?
 
it will depend on you try .25oz- .5oz Personally I suggest you keep the weight right above where your hand will be.

Now if the racket feels odd or unstable you should at 1g of lead to the very very tip
 
whoa...my head hurts after reading through half this thread....so the bottom line question i have is...does this weighting system of adding weight above the handle work!?:confused:

is there a whole conspiracy with the ATP sabotageing players with their racquets?:rolleyes:
 
Prince Tour Diablo Mid

Has anyone tried these weighting techniques on a prince tour diablo mid? I realize that there is no "right and wrong" or "works or does not work" But i am looking for any suggestions to help improve my racquet. Right now it is a stock frame, besides the leather grip that added a little bit to the weight. It is already at 13.0 oz, so i don't know if adding much more weight would be a good idea. But am am very curious to find out how any added weight will help. Thanks, Rob
 
rustsurfr said:
Has anyone tried these weighting techniques on a prince tour diablo mid? I realize that there is no "right and wrong" or "works or does not work" But i am looking for any suggestions to help improve my racquet. Right now it is a stock frame, besides the leather grip that added a little bit to the weight. It is already at 13.0 oz, so i don't know if adding much more weight would be a good idea. But am am very curious to find out how any added weight will help. Thanks, Rob
Click to expand...


John said that their racket were really polarized, so I would guess putting .25oz right above hand and then some weight around the hoop say 1-2g on each side anywhere from below 3 & 9 to down into the throat, and if you just want to try it stretch the hoop you may like it.

I suggest trying not to pass 13.5oz or a sw of 340, try to stay below that.
 
jackson vile said:
John said that their racket were really polarized, so I would guess putting .25oz right above hand and then some weight around the hoop say 1-2g on each side anywhere from below 3 & 9 to down into the throat, and if you just want to try it stretch the hoop you may like it.

I suggest trying not to pass 13.5oz or a sw of 340, try to stay below that.
Click to expand...

Thanks man, ill give it a shot when i get a chance!
 
Arrow Shape?

Oh yeah, and while adding weight above the hand, would you recommend that arrow shape that everyone was talking about earlier in the thread?
 
rustsurfr said:
Oh yeah, and while adding weight above the hand, would you recommend that arrow shape that everyone was talking about earlier in the thread?
Click to expand...


Yes that is fine, I just wraped the lead in a fashion so that majority was lower and then extended up.

Like said you can go to roofing suppy store or maybe even home depot lowes ect and get some lead sheeting and cut those out.

These concepts are good ideas to get down what you want, just remeber the more lead you put in the hoop the more powerful it will get and thus the tighter the strings will be. And the more head light you make the racket the less powerful it will be.
 
so did john say that the Nblade is good and takes on the good weighting or that it is bad? Because i have the demo sitting beside me but i am yet to hit with it and really want to know.
 
The nBlade has the feel of a good wooden racquet from the 60's. I added extra weight to the bottom of the shaft of 70's style racquets. Wilson used my idea, and it created modern tennis.

Wilson was bought by a foreign company, and Jim Baugh, who thankfully understood and introduced my idea, though I didn't get credit for it, was fired. The new owners of Wilson discontinued the Hammer and removed my idea from the Pro Staff, making the nBlade.

Here is the idea I showed Wilson. Weight was added to the lower shaft. That's only 3/4 ounce. The weight of the handle was extended higher up the shaft. It made the racquet respond faster, and dramatically improved people's tennis.

PICT0019-1.jpg


Here is the Pro Staff compared to the nBlade.

a0efb772.jpg
fae2e923.jpg


Though they claimed not to be using my idea and didn't pay me for it, they neatly removed my idea from the nBlade, but the nBlade isn't taking the pro tour by storm. Wilson's hot racquet is the nTour that still has my idea. I think the new K90 has the handle higher up the shaft, too.


I have John Bosco's racquet that I promised, finished, sitting here, which hits real good, but I'm not confident enough to send it to him, yet. I keep improving it. I am real slow when it comes to making racquets perfect, since that racquet can be used to prove everything I have said. I want it to blow him away when he hits with it.

The nBlade feels flexible and solid, comfortable, but when you are pressured, it will be slow to respond. You will be overpowered by some shots. My idea, removed from the nBlade fixes that problem and produces the tennis we have today, where players return everything. Insiders who are buying companies and firing presidents want to slow the response of racquets down and take us back to the fifties. The nBlade feels great when you have time. It can be overpowered by a fast shot because it responds slower than a Pro Staff or Hammer.
 
Last edited:
i dont get it, you are saying your leading the string bridge makes the racquet more unpredictable?
Can you please explain the whole thing in easy speak?
 
By having a heavier stringbridge, you center the force in one place.

But a light string bridge with weight at the top of the head, like Prince racquets gives you a high polar moment of inertia.

With one weight centered at the stringbridge, when it is set in one direction you can't change it. Although it feels solid you can't direct it like you can by manipulating two weights of a high polar moment of inertia setup.

By adding more weight to the top of the handle like I have done with this O3 Red, you spread the weight out from the stringbridge even more, putting it at the top of the head and the top of the handle. You get even more control.

PICT0024.jpg


See the lead at the top of the grip? Imagine bringing that weight and the Triple Treat weights together at the stringbridge. You get the same power but much less control, due to a low polar moment of intertia, which is centered at the stringbridge.

My added weight dramatically increases control, adding even more umph to the Prince weighting theory, which is based on having a light stringbridge.
 
Quote from johncauthen:"Wilson was bought by a foreign company, and Jim Baugh, who thankfully understood and introduced my idea, though I didn't get credit for it, was fired. The new owners of Wilson discontinued the Hammer and removed my idea from the Pro Staff, making the nBlade."

johncauthen, Why do you write these things? Jim Baugh was NOT fired. Jim retired from Wilson. I told you this before.

Also this foreign company as you call it that owns Wilson is called Amer Sports. Amer Sports has owned Wilson Sports since March 1989. So there is no new owners. Jim Baugh worked for Wilson for 17 years and was President from 1996-2003. What you have said john is just wrong.
 
Last edited:
Jim Baugh left, and they discontinued the Hammer their #1 seller, which Jim Baugh created, so there was some kind of upheaval at Wilson.

Jim Baugh didn't just decide to leave, saying, "I think I will quit my job as the most powerful man in tennis industry." But your information that they have been owned by the new people since 1989 gives me new insight.

I showed Wilson my racquet in April 1988. When I was there, Jim Baugh told me they had a new secret racquet he couldn’t tell me anything about. They were working on the Profile. He had a list of about 10 names on the blackboard in his office that I didn’t read, but I could see they were searching for a name.

The next day, waiting in the hotel while they tested my racquet, I was watching bowling. They used Hammer balls and I suggested the name Hammer.

They told me they were not interested in me or my ideas and I went home to Rock Hill. The Profile came out the next month, May. The Profile had the weight centered at the stringbridge, where the profile shape was widest, with weight removed from the handle.

But it flopped. Then they added my idea, weight at the top of the handle to the Profile and called it the Hammer. It was an immediate success.

Their plans were to come out with a modern racquet that had weight centered at the stringbridge. 1950’s racquets had their weight centered at the stringbridge/shoulders.

f77179ae.jpg


See how the weight is concentrated at the reinforced shoulders? That type of weighting is what limited the ability to return serve and brought on serve and volley tennis. But the T-2000 that Jimmy Connors used did not have thick shoulders. He added a lot of lead to the top of the head, which was not 1950’s style balance. Jimmy dominated from the baseline. All the new racquets had weight at the top of the head, not in the shoulders or stringbridge and tennis has been played from the baseline since the 70's.

In 1988, they wanted to reintroduce 50’s weighting, so they made the Profile. But it didn’t sell.

My idea added to the Profile made it work. Why? Because with a weight centered at the stringbridge and another weight at the top of the handle you got two concentrations of weight and a high polar moment of inertia that allows you to control the racquet. My idea, when added to the Profile made baseline tennis even stronger. In 1989 the Hammer became the #1 selling racquet. The people who wanted to introduce 1950’s weighting back to tennis had no idea that some guy from Rock Hill, South Carolina would drive up and destroy all of their plans to take balance back to the 1950’s.

It was then that the company was bought. The new owners could not argue with success, the Hammer made money, but they wanted to get rid of the Hammer to bring back serve and volley. No wonder I could not get a job at Wilson even though I had helped them create a #1 seller. The new owners were waiting for the right time. In about 2004, or 05, they discontinued the Hammer and Jim Baugh left.

They came out with the n1, which is big and thick at the stringbridge, just like the Profile. Their purpose was to concentrate all the weight at the stringbridge to limit groundstrokes to bring back serve and volley. They guessed Venus and Serena could win anyway, even if the new racquets weren’t as effective on groundstrokes. But Venus and Serena couldn’t win with the new racquets.
 
Yes, the bowties are cool. Take a piece of overgrip and loop it over two main strings. Twist it and wrap it back, looping one side over the bottom cross string, then just tie it with a half knot.
 
john, Jim Baugh retired and moved to Florida. He is a Director of the USTA and also runs PE4LIFE his charitable foundations. Jim Baugh was the President of Wilson Sports, the whole company from 1996-2003. Not just the tennis division but all of Wilson Sports. There is no upheaval at Wilson. Wilson is still the number 1 tennis racquet brand in the world.

Amer Sports has owned Wilson for almost 18 years that is hardly new.

Profile was a huge hit and the whole industry over night changed to the widebody craze.

Look believe what you want but don't spread lies about a very fine and nice guy like Jim Baugh.
 
I know what I did. I know I wasn't paid for it. I know that was Jim Baugh's fault. I am his age and delivering a paper route right now.

My stomach hurts because of bad food. The people I am close to have no idea that the food at the thrifty grocery store is not good; but they also could not feel the response of a tennis racquet well enough to set up a racquet that impressed Wilson.

What Jim Baugh did was rob me of the thing I have to offer.

Yes, I always had faith that since Wilson used my idea I could use that to get ahead. But no one ever understood it except Wilson.

I told the story of setting up the racquet for the high school girl who won the championship. That should have made me a hero at the tennis shop I worked at; instead, he only saw me as a competitor who could take something from him. He refused to let me set up any more racquets my way (stretched head) which people here have substantiated works.

Low class working people only live to protect their territory. I was stringing racquets at a tennis shop. I make a lot of customers happy in a way the shop owner cannot, but that only gets me in trouble because I threaten his territory. Also, he could not fully conceive how a racquet could cause someone to play better tennis. Wilson recognized the value of what I did, and they promoted it. But they won't pay me.

My state of hopelessness goes deeper. My grandfather was once governor of South Carolina. He created the first statewide cable TV system in the world, in other words, my grandfather invented cable TV. It was pretty normal in our family for me to develop a tennis racquet weighting concept that changed tennis. I would have to be recognized already as one of the elite to be respected and paid for it. Otherwise, it just seemed like I got lucky.

But I am one of the elite people. My grandfather had been governor of a state. My father moved away from the power he was born into to prove he could he make it starting from the bottom.

It is true that my grandfather had to quit school in the Eight Grade to help support his poor family. His father was a failed Methodist preacher. My grandfather and his brother got jobs at the newspaper. His brother ended up as Editor in Chief and my grandfather became one of the most powerful politicians in South Carolina. Two brothers, my grandfather and uncle controlled the press and politics in South Carolina starting from the bottom with nothing. But the world was different then.

My father had to prove he could do it too, so he left the privileges, got a job in a mill when I was 3 and he rose to Division Manager of Burlington Industries by the time I was 12. But he gets very mad if anyone says that his father was president of the most powerful textile lobby in the South and maybe that had something to do with his meteoric rise from millworker to vice president in 9 years.

The truth is, I did it too. With nothing, I developed a tennis racquet that dominates tennis right now, but today people don't get a job at the newspaper and become Editor in Chief, or governor. And in the ‘fifties, they couldn't start as a millworker and become Vice President of a company in 9 years unless their father had been governor of the state. (Google, John K Cauthen).

And they don’t walk off the street from nowhere and are recognized for good ideas. I walked in off the street and gave Jim Baugh a racquet that changed tennis. Jim Baugh became president on the back of the Hammer (I suggested the name). He even stole my vibration device.

Here is the very racquet I showed him. See the big chunk of tape at the top of the grip? It looks like the hilt of a Roman sword. I was so poor I wrapped black vinyl tape around the strings to make a vibration dampener. Look how similar it is to the hard rubber Wilson W. I realized the vibration device didn't need to be made of soft vibration absorbing material, so I used black vinyl tape. He understood and made the hard rubber W, which looks like my dampener. He copied the name I suggested. He copied my weighting concept, and he even copied my vibration device, but paid me nothing.

04aa7117.jpg
 
Last edited:
I want to customize a Dunlop M-fil 200 plus 2006 using John's method.

All I have to do is..
1. Add weight to the top of the handle
2. Stretch the hoop

Someone help me out here..
 
Last edited:
john,

All I did was correct information that you have wrong. Certain facts I know. All I can say is good luck in your new weighting system. It is not something I am interested in. I have found a weight, balance, and swing weight that is great for my game. I hope you feel better and have success in the future.
 
The weight added to the top of the handle has to be set up precisely to get the right effect.

That's the big problem, which shrouds this whole thing. I am working on a universal weight that gives the right effect without having to be precise. Actually, I have it. I'm not sure enough of it, yet.

As for stretching the hoop, I developed that when I was stringing with a two-point mounting system and a crank tensioner. All the racquets were coming out with the heads compressed. I strung the cross strings tighter so the heads would come out the same length they went in, and here's what I learned:

My racquets performed much better for thirty minutes. I remembered pros only use their strings for thirty minutes and I assume pro racquets are strung to the right length. But still, they stay good enough for pro tennis for only thirty minutes.

I studied why the racquets only stayed good for thirty minutes and found out everything that naturally happens to a racquet makes the cross string looser. The main strings pull the head down. So I started to string the cross strings tighter to let the head pull down to the right length. That required stringing the crosses 14 lbs tighter than the mains on the two-point system: a radical departure, but it worked. After a thirty minute break-in period where the racquet felt "tinny", the racquets would soften up, get solid and stay good for a long time. I had hit upon a stringing method where the racquets would feel like pro racquets for the life of the strings.

When I tried it on a six-point machine, it didn't work because the machine didn't allow the head to flex around. When the racquet came out of the six-point machine, the mains on the outside would be much tighter than the mains in the middle, so I can't recommend stringing racquets that way if you use a six-point system.

But stringing on a two-point machine, the racquets will outperform the best six-point stringing if you string the crosses much tighter.

I ended up putting the mains in at 45 and stringing the crosses at whatever tension I wanted, from 60 lbs upwards. The crosses tightened the mains to about 55 or 60, putting a dynamic tension on them through the frame. It produces very responsive string jobs and anybody can do it. It's close to fool proof, but you have to use a two-point mounting system.

At this point I wish I had a job with someone because I have a stringing method that works better than anything, and I can demonstrate the value of my weight in person when I have the ability to fine tune it if they mount it wrong.

What I can do is offer strung and weighted racquets that will be as good as pro racquets. If I worked with someone who distributed racquets, we could sell an Aero Pro or old style Pure Drive for $300, strung with Big Banger mains, Technifibre or Wilson NXT Tour crosses. That’s $100 more than strung racquets normally cost, but players will pay that much for them. Anyone can do the stringing and apply the weight as long as they know exactly how to do it.

We can do it with a lot of other racquets, too.

Try the Dunlop with tighter crosses but with no added weight even if you have a six-point machine.
 
Last edited:
johncauthen said:
The weight added to the top of the handle has to be set up precisely to get the right effect.

That's the big problem, which shrouds this whole thing. I am working on a universal weight that gives the right effect without having to be precise. Actually, I have it. I'm not sure enough of it, yet.

As for stretching the hoop, I developed that when I was stringing with a two-point mounting system and a crank tensioner. All the racquets were coming out with the heads compressed. I strung the cross strings tighter so the heads would come out the same length they went in, and here's what I learned:

My racquets performed much better for thirty minutes. I remembered pros only use their strings for thirty minutes and I assume pro racquets are strung to the right length. But still, they stay good enough for pro tennis for only thirty minutes.

I studied why the racquets only stayed good for thirty minutes and found out everything that naturally happens to a racquet makes the cross string looser. The main strings pull the head down. So I started to string the cross strings tighter to let the head pull down to the right length. That required stringing the crosses 14 lbs tighter than the mains on the two-point system: a radical departure, but it worked. After a thirty minute break-in period where the racquet felt "tinny", the racquets would soften up, get solid and stay good for a long time. I had hit upon a stringing method where the racquets would feel like pro racquets for the life of the strings.

When I tried it on a six-point machine, it didn't work because the machine didn't allow the head to flex around. When the racquet came out of the six-point machine, the mains on the outside would be much tighter than the mains in the middle, so I can't recommend stringing racquets that way if you use a six-point system.

But stringing on a two-point machine, the racquets will outperform the best six-point stringing if you string the crosses much tighter.

I ended up putting the mains in at 45 and stringing the crosses at whatever tension I wanted, from 60 lbs upwards. The crosses tightened the mains to about 55 or 60, putting a dynamic tension on them through the frame. It produces very responsive string jobs and anybody can do it. It's close to fool proof, but you have to use a two-point mounting system.

At this point I wish I had a job with someone because I have a stringing method that works better than anything, and I can demonstrate the value of my weight in person when I have the ability to fine tune it if they mount it wrong.

What I can do is offer strung and weighted racquets that will be as good as pro racquets. If I worked with someone who distributed racquets, we could sell an Aero Pro or old style Pure Drive for $300, strung with Big Banger mains, Technifibre or Wilson NXT Tour crosses. That’s $100 more than strung racquets normally cost, but players will pay that much for them. Anyone can do the stringing and apply the weight as long as they know exactly how to do it.

We can do it with a lot of other racquets, too.

Try the Dunlop with tighter crosses but with no added weight even if you have a six-point machine.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot.
 
johncauthen,

There is one thing I don't understand. Your prototype that you showed a picture of the Wilson aluminum racquet with your weighting system must be over 12.5 oz. with a head light balance because of the weight you put at the top of the grip. The Wilson Hammer line of that was sold to the public by Wilson weighs 10 oz with a very head heavy balance. How did Wilson take your idea of 12+ oz. racquet with weight in the top of the handle to racquets Wilson sold at 10 oz. strung with no weight in the handle and with the weight concentrated at the very tip of the racquet?
 
Last edited:
John questions for you?

Can i purchase some ideal modified rackets from you. I would be very interested in trying this out and spreading the word about you and your genius understanding of racket science?


Background of me: Just finished college tennis after playing for 4 years at D2 school. Ive taught tennis forever and learned the game on my own. Relearning different forms over and over. Ive also questioned tennis equipment a great deal. Ive experimented with equipment way more than most, but not nearly on the same level that you have.


Ive worked for Rick Flach, brother of Ken Flach as a teaching pro. He and his children insist on oversize rackets, stretch rackets, and looose strings at 38 lbs. He majored in engineering so i went ahead and accepted his advise and have been using it ever since. He also played professional tennis competitively. I use luxilon big banger string. The best string ive ever used.


So my questions are:

1. Can i buy some modified rackets from you?

2. What do you think about loose string tension(in the 40 lb range.)?

3. I am pretty certain that you are onto something that will change hte future of tennis. How can i attribute to help you progress your findings? I do have friends that own a couple racket shops in the area.


Thanks,
BT

PS: i dont really work either. I play poker for a living online. I spend my other time researching whatever is my interest at the time. I like to find hte most efficient ways to do things.




johncauthen said:
The weight added to the top of the handle has to be set up precisely to get the right effect.

That's the big problem, which shrouds this whole thing. I am working on a universal weight that gives the right effect without having to be precise. Actually, I have it. I'm not sure enough of it, yet.

As for stretching the hoop, I developed that when I was stringing with a two-point mounting system and a crank tensioner. All the racquets were coming out with the heads compressed. I strung the cross strings tighter so the heads would come out the same length they went in, and here's what I learned:

My racquets performed much better for thirty minutes. I remembered pros only use their strings for thirty minutes and I assume pro racquets are strung to the right length. But still, they stay good enough for pro tennis for only thirty minutes.

I studied why the racquets only stayed good for thirty minutes and found out everything that naturally happens to a racquet makes the cross string looser. The main strings pull the head down. So I started to string the cross strings tighter to let the head pull down to the right length. That required stringing the crosses 14 lbs tighter than the mains on the two-point system: a radical departure, but it worked. After a thirty minute break-in period where the racquet felt "tinny", the racquets would soften up, get solid and stay good for a long time. I had hit upon a stringing method where the racquets would feel like pro racquets for the life of the strings.

When I tried it on a six-point machine, it didn't work because the machine didn't allow the head to flex around. When the racquet came out of the six-point machine, the mains on the outside would be much tighter than the mains in the middle, so I can't recommend stringing racquets that way if you use a six-point system.

But stringing on a two-point machine, the racquets will outperform the best six-point stringing if you string the crosses much tighter.

I ended up putting the mains in at 45 and stringing the crosses at whatever tension I wanted, from 60 lbs upwards. The crosses tightened the mains to about 55 or 60, putting a dynamic tension on them through the frame. It produces very responsive string jobs and anybody can do it. It's close to fool proof, but you have to use a two-point mounting system.

At this point I wish I had a job with someone because I have a stringing method that works better than anything, and I can demonstrate the value of my weight in person when I have the ability to fine tune it if they mount it wrong.

What I can do is offer strung and weighted racquets that will be as good as pro racquets. If I worked with someone who distributed racquets, we could sell an Aero Pro or old style Pure Drive for $300, strung with Big Banger mains, Technifibre or Wilson NXT Tour crosses. That’s $100 more than strung racquets normally cost, but players will pay that much for them. Anyone can do the stringing and apply the weight as long as they know exactly how to do it.

We can do it with a lot of other racquets, too.

Try the Dunlop with tighter crosses but with no added weight even if you have a six-point machine.
Click to expand...
 
John, if your method of setting up racquets is enjoyed by everyone who tries it, and Wilson know this method, why would they not be releasing racquets like this yet? It sounds stupid to me to keep something off the market that will improve peoples enjoyment of the game.
 
Same ole same ole.

I've been 'into' three sports for a long time now, tennis, basketball and downhill mountain biking, and i've therefore visited many forums dedicated to each sport, be it to ask technical questions or to just chew the fat. What i have found is that as soon as someone mentions something that others do not agree with they pounce, unrelenetless and sometime agressive in their manner. It's absolutely despicable. Half the people who have reacted agressively at some of the things said on this forum, i'm sure are mild mannered individuals who suddenly use the safety and annonimity of the internet to vent their frustrations at others.

It might seem contradictory to some, since i'm essentially doing the same to those i'm criticising, but as and active follower of this post, who keeps having his flow in reading some of the entries interrupted by immature idiots, i've thought enough is enough. So before you respond to this, in anger, know that if you do, there are people here who are thinking exactly what i'm thinking, that you re a pric* for doing so!
 
Side Note:

Johncauthen and Macksomethingorother, have you two ever considered either, individually, or together, just going into the racket industry and creating your own? If y'all are rights about your finds, making ideal rackets and selling them would be very lucrative, and would eventually overthrow the conspiracy.

dobelm@gmail.com is my email address, would love to hear about any plans of this, anything said to me can be assumed to not be repeated.
 
i am interested in the idea that you have but reading some of your posts i have grown a weird feeling that you just simply want recognition for youer works instead of bettering the community. I respect that you work on further developing a racquets engineering but if possible, avoid the anecdotes and get to the point =/ i hardly could grasp the concept of your idea and most would simply turn away if they did not get the story immediately. but other than that i like your ideas and believe it is a great concept.
 
THis is for Mr Cauthen I do not doubt any thing you say is untrue, with regards to your modifications to the H 6.3 does it work for the both the oversize and 95" versions or do you have to do modify them differently. I going to try this for my wife who is fed up being beaten by some of her peers.
 
It doesn't work for the oversize, because it's easy to make the OS head too long when you string the crosses tighter. My weight works well on the oversize 6.3. Send me your address, and I will send you a set of weights to try.

To make the oversize 6.3 hit best, measure the racquet length when it's unstrung, and make sure it comes out the same length when strung. But it benefits from more weight.

I have improved the weights so they are beginning to work without tinkering.
 
Last edited:
johncauthen said:
It doesn't work for the oversize, because it's easy to make the OS head too long when you string the crosses tighter. My weight works well on the oversize 6.3. Send me your address, and I will send you a set of weights to try.

To make the oversize 6.3 hit best, measure the racquet length when it's unstrung, and make sure it comes out the same length when strung. But it benefits from more weight.

I have improved the weights so they are beginning to work without tinkering.
Click to expand...

hey, took me a good couple of days to digest most of the information on this thread. I'm curious to try this out. I'm trying to gather some infomrmation to play aorund with the following sticks

1. Prince Synergy Lite (slight head heavy stick, wide beam, MP) seems like a good candiate to try this. I would add weight right above the handle to counter the weight at the head

2. Prince Triple Threat Graphite OS. I know it's OS but i'm tempted to try the 43/60 main/cross combo as you have suggested

3. Prince turbo shark MP (i would also like to try the string combo with some additional weight at right above the handle

Please let me know what you think. Seems like you've turned off your e-mail so would it be possible to e-mail me @ sapient007@hotmail.com?? i would def be interested to test out your weight system if possible.
 
Will this work on the RDS001 mid plus?


johncauthen said:
I did answer the RDX500 question on page 13, right after BJ asked it.


That's all you have to do. Don't add any weight, just string it that way. Make the head longer and it works like a charm. Try it more extreme than I suggested. String the mains at 40, the crosses at 64 and 67.

You don't have to worry about the sixth string slipping when you string the seventh 3 lbs tighter. It doesn't matter. By stringing the top six looser, the top of the head will not be boardy, and the shape will look good.

The RDX500 is not a great racquet, but it can be fixed with that stringing method. Don't add any weight to it.

------------------------------

I also used those lead pipes with flashing, at first, and then found some 2.5 lb density lead sheet in a roll, 30" by 30". Ask for “three pound density lead sheet” at a roofing contractor’s supply store.

-------------------------------

The first Pro Staffs without the headguards were the best. When they added the headguard, they messed it up. The first ones were designed by Rich Janes, who must have overseen their quality when he worked at Wilson. He left Wilson and went to Dunlop where he designed the very successful Revelation racquets. Then, he went to Penn. I am pretty sure he helped design the Babolat Pure Drive. I talked to him on the phone when he worked at Penn, before the Pure Drive came out. I think he designed the Pure Drive because it feels like the original PS and the Revelation, and I think Penn had some connections with Babolat. If he did design all three racquets as I believe, he is the best racquet designer there is.

One of my best racquets is an ultra-light 235 gram Pure Drive that you can't buy (called VS Drive, designed by Rich Janes, I believe, the same person who designed the basic frames Sampras used). It has my newset weight added to it and my stringing method and weighs 305 grams modified. Newton said he stood on the shoulders of giants.

I have another racquet that is as good, or better. Its design evolved out of Hammer weighting, being influenced by the old Pro Staff but it's different, not exactly like a Rich Janes design: it has a shorter handle, nine inches long. I think this is the frame Federer is painting: it's the best Wilson racquet, ever: a Hammer 6.3 Mid. Federer's version is modified with extra handle weight; and my version is modified with my newest weighting techniques and my stringing techniques. Wilson still manufacturers the 255 gram frame. My modified version weighs 314 grams. With the right connections, I could sell that racquet to pros and regular players. If I do, other pros besides Federer can have a racquet that is as good as Federer's. We could truly see if it's the racquet.

The Davis Cup match that Roddick lost, because he couldn't win a match point, then got sick, was a debacle of bad racquet balance. There were many mistakes. Neither player could hit shots when they needed to. Maybe you don't believe racquets are important, but at least there needs to be someone who is providing tennis players with good racquets because most all tennis players, even top pros are fighting against bad racquet balance. Sometimes, it even makes them nauseous. That can’t be good for tennis.
Click to expand...
 
Stringing help before tourney.

Also will the stringing work on the K factor surge? I really need to try it out before my tournament starts? Does someone know? It starts in 2 weeks. I'm going to string it either today or tomorrow, depends how quick I get a response. email is tlcno_scrubs@hotmail.com. Thanks guys.

t_e_n_n_i_s said:
Will this work on the RDS001 mid plus?
Click to expand...
 
stretching the hoop !

well ive let a friend of mine who owns a two point machine string my instinct tour xl s one at mains 40 pounds and crosses 69 for the first six and 67 for the remaining and honestly i didn know what to expect but the result has been nothing short to outstanding ! besides the getting used to this setup the power and speed coming of the string was amazing and the ball pocketing was great i felt like the ball stayed on the strings an extra split second or two making it a breeze to hit a passing shot down the line or outright winners from the baseline . even my backhand onehanded which is my by far weakest shot has imroved both slice and topspin . my other racket will be strung 45 at the mains and 69/67 for first six crosses and 67 for the rest now if this is working and feeling this good im scared what the weight johncauthien has would feel like . anybody not believing this should try for themselves before making any quick judgment i guarentee you wont regret it.

thank you mr johncauthien for coming up with this great method

regards t-swede
 
John,

About 5 years ago use to play with a Wilson Prostaff 6.0 Org. 95 sq in, I added weight to 12, 9, and 3 o'clock positions and it played great. However, I had problems with my backhand slice floating.

I ended up switching to Head i. Prestige mid 93 sq inch. I have much more control on my backhand slice and it does not float anymore. However, I feel as if something is lacking in the racquet. The prosaff just felt better for some reason.

What is your opinion of the Head i. Prestige and how can I improve it using your methods?

Thank you.
 
Wow, monster thread. That said I'm curious as I have been recently experimenting with lead tape and before coming accross this thread had added about an ounce of lead tape just above the grip. Just felt right, more stable, slightly more head light balance. This seems to be similar to what John is advocating. I have read a fair bit of this but to summarise:

- Weight (up to two ounces it would seem) in the area at the top of the grip/handle
- Some weight right at the top at 12

Is that right?
 
johncauthen said:
I had an eye-opening experience when I tried modifying an nTour 90 by stretching the head, which works for most racquets. I realized the high location of the stringbridge caused it to feel equally good if stretched or not stretched.

I realized this was the secret to the Pro Staff 85. The secret is a higher stringbridge. If you make the stringbridge a little higher than on a Six-One 95, you get the Pro Staff 85 feel.

The eye-opening experience was when I tried the nTour 90 next to the Hammer 6.3. I discovered they had exactly the same personality. The Hammer 6.3 was a light version of the nTour 90. They both felt the same, but the Hammer was lighter.

Because of the location of the stringbridge, the stretched nTour 90 didn't perforn any better or any worse than the unstretched version of the nTour 90. And I've found the same to be true for the Head Prestige.

Because of the higher stringbridge location, the heads of the nTour 90 and Hammer 6.3 can be stretched or not stretched, and players like them, whereas stretching the head of a mFil 300 (27.0 inch) about 1/8 inch or more dramatically improves it. The same is true for all Babolats.

I prefer stretching the head of the Hammer 6.3, but the nTour 90 is so heavy, it works best as it is. The amazing thing is they are essentially the same racquet, they have the same feel.

I started to notice Federer uses a racquet with rounded edges, as well as a racquet with square edges. The Hammer 6.3 and nTour 90 have the same feel, but the Hammer, being equally powerful, especially when modified like I do, is much lighter.

8a605b51.jpg
0c1b3e23.jpg


They have the exact same feel and Federer seems to be using two different racquets: one with rounded edges, and one with square edges. The two racquets are also different colors.

How does that relate to setting up an nTour 90? First, the nTour 90 isn't improved dramatically by stretching it because the stringbridge is high enough so it acts like part of the top of the head. The stringbridge location is most of the secret to the "Pete Sampras PS 85", and the "Safin Prestige": the two racquets that produce the highest level of tennis we've seen. The Federer nTour 90 and possibly some kind of secret Hammer 6.3 mutation that Federer is using produce the same performance. The Hammer 6.3 that we have available to us is the racquet with the most potential, when modified.

This would be a wonderful product for TW to offer; if I can show my ideas work.

The nTour 90 has a lot of weight everywhere in the frame. You shouldn't add weight to it, or stretch it. So that's the answer to how to modify an nTour 90. Don't modify that racquet. Modify a Hammer 6.3 by stringing the cross strings tighter and putting weight at the top of the grip. You get a better version of the nTour 90. Maybe that is what Wilson is working on right now with Federer and a new racquet that hasn't been revealed yet.

And the dark truth that we know is, they may never offer it, keeping it a secret. Why are all these pro racquets different from the racquets we have? Wouldn't it be good to offer a product that is close to what a pro actually uses? I have a Hammer 6.3, and now a Aero Pro Drive that fit the bill.

I have some great hitting racquets, but don't want to claim I have the answers. I discover things that work, and wish I could work with someone big, so we can try them together.

I am working hard on the weights to get them perfect. It's a big challenge to create a universal weight, but I might actually succeed.
Click to expand...

can all of you guys really tell that federer is actually using 2 different racquets in this picture or other pictures of other matches? I can't tell the rounded edges on the first pic, but i can tell the square edges of the 2nd pic.
 
jackson_vile: which racquet were you talking about. wilson 6.3?

jackson vile said:
I am extremely excited about this, so bare with me here if anything seems to ramble/incoherent ect.

*It sucks up the heavy balls very well, an amazingly stable racket, so naturally it deals with it all, and the sweet spot is high and a different shape that I have never felt before, It is just in the dream spot if you know what I mean and it relatively large...


*Yes, it just puts the spin on the serve for you, and it just has such a feel, so that you can feel the end of the stick and as you whip it you can feel more and more weight, but in the direction you are hitting, ie it feels very easy. And I mean you can crank this thing, I am just so suprised. I hit with a heavy enough pace and spin at times to tear the racket out of the opponents hands, that is when I am doing this on purpose after being extrememly warmed up and it is still hard to do, but to the point, it handles it solid, it just pockets and then rockets on out.

Another thing that is weird is that it can go from feel lowpowered like a 90sqin to high powered depending on how you whip it and how you spin. So it handles paceless balls realy well, makes them no problem


*As for not working underpressure that is just simply the player, the racket can't do everything, other wise there has been 0 complications that I can think of, I put it throught the test and the more I tested the more amazing I thought it was.

* with the momentum coment you are making, that is a hammer based racket, this is stable 100%. I would compare it to doing everything a tweener does and everything a players does, I know this sounds weird and I think so also, but that is what it does, I guess I could yell at it and argue with it:confused:

* It could over take my 200gMW90sqin, but do all sorts of things that racket just can't.

I strung the mains 50lbs and the crosses 64lbs with uniqe irradiated (it was left over) I would like to thin it out even more so that it is a skinny as my MW90sqin and use gut int he crosses and NXT max-tour in the crosses, and keep the first crosses at 62-60lbs.


As for the weighting I did not make is scientific, I had some lead tape I took off an old frame wrapped it around the handle so that it was just barly above my hand and then too some Bab lead strips that were left over and put them on the nose. Just really messing around, but it turned out to be just right, so that the SW is not too high and the racket does not fell too heavy, the racket feels heavy in a sense, but you really can't feel it affecting your wrist, you would just have to experience it.


I am just so suprised, I realy don't believe it:confused:
Click to expand...


what racquet were you talking about here. It's been a long time...but do you still use this setup? where in the world did this thread go?? :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Serena's Racquet....
Replies
2
Views
896
danniflava
D
travlerajm
Roddick Signature Racquet Specs are not Roddick's Actual Specs!
Replies
11
Views
3K
BattleAxe
B
C
Customizing Wilson Pro Staff 97 Countveil
Replies
0
Views
429
crobison
C
Andy Zarzuela
Venus and Serena's Solid Black frames back in the late 90s?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Brettolius
Brettolius
Andy Zarzuela
Comparing Venus and Serena's games yet again...
Replies
5
Views
943
anointedone
anointedone
Back
Top