Discussion in 'Racquets' started by 2ndServe, Jan 19, 2012.
any tips? Thx
Trajectory comes from technique. Lead tape doesn't solve all your problems. They either amplify your problems or complement your correct technique.
Yeah, there's no easy fix for that. You have to drive through the ball more instead of looping your swing path.
Any lead tape on the head should help coupled with a flatter swing.
There actually is an easy fix. String higher or use poly.
Put the lead tape on the ball if you want a lower trajectory.
You need to increase stringbed stiffness to get flatter trajectory (more tension and or thicker string).
You can also REMOVE lead from loop to flatten trajectory (ball doesn't dig as far into the stringbed)
not true, take any open pattern racket and compare it to any closed pattern racket with same string/tension - you'll notice one hits considerably flatter ball with same technique.
Anton is right, tighter string = lower trajectory. A lot of people mistake trajectory for power. Looser strings create higher trajectory, tighter strings lower trajectory, has to do with ball dwell time vs the arc of the swing.
If you string 1 each of the same racquet at 45lbs and 65lbs respectively, the 65lb will hit the ball much lower than the 45. The ball speed will actually be nearly the same, but the trajectory may differ by as much as 100% depending on the racquet and the swing arc.
It also depends. Now i reckon technique is the biggest factor. Look. Compare hitting continental to a semi western.
grip/stroke change is in the works but in golf if I want a higher trajectory in my shorter irons using the same swing I've grooved I can add tape to the lower part of the head. In the longer irons I prefer a lower trajectory so I'd add tape more towards the topline.
Now for tennis is there something similar is what I'm asking, holding the swing/grip constant. And I've got kevlar at 65lbs so tighter might not be an option.
If you've got Kevlar at 65, your either a massive troll, or your stupid.
I recommend that you quit tennis right now if your not seeing the low trajectory on kevlar strings.
Lead anywhere in the head. Higher swingweight = greater ACOR = lower launch angle = lower flight trajectory.
Stiffer stringbed (higher tension and/or stiffer material and/or denser string pattern).
Main strings that do not slide or snap back: Deeply notched syngut, gummy polyurethane-based multis (biphase, et al.), glued intersections, etc.
Talk about lead tape,for me a more depolarized setup will give a lower trajectory.I play with a polarized setup. I usually begin with lead at 12 in the hoop & at handle end. This setup will give high trajectory.
To tone it down I usually do these :
- Remove (reduce) lead from the 12 o'clock
- Add lead at 3 & 9 o'clock
- Move the lead from handle end towards the handle top
I don't have an answer for you but a question....
Kevlar is quite inelastic. As far as I know -- it's the least elastic of all strings. So that stiffness coupled with (I'd guess) max frame recommended string tension 65 lbs. It has to be quite painful to bash a ball around for an hour with that.
So my question is: What is the size of your racquet in square inches? Kevlar at 65 I'd want to have a 130+ square inch head to get some flex out of the strings.
Use racquet with dense string pattern. It works for me...
This is not true - adding lead to the head increases launch angle, because the ball digs deeper into the stringbed as the racket deflects less on impact.
My feeling on this, would be that lead at 12 will slow down your accelleration...and accelleration translates into spin a lot of the time. Hence lead at 12 will probably translate into a more natural lower and flatter trajectory stroke...having a headlight racket, will make one brush up on the ball easier and arguably have more natural height trajectory.
I struggle more with a racket which has a head heavy balance to get shorter, lower angled shots...but i think depth, power and a lower trajectory is easier to generate with slightly more weight at the top.
good and simple tip...
I had to learn to play flatter with a smaller head frame with a dencer pattern. It just feels like that kind of racket suits that kind of play more...whereas a larger head with open pattern, almost suits higher trajectory shots.
I've tried lots of poly, just too powerful, so I went back to playing the strings I used as a kid. Kevlar gives me more control and durability, I switched to a 110 because I mostly play dubs now but I played an 85sq in. at 65lbs+ for 6 days a week at 16, never a problem.
I agree a dense string pattern is good but I like the racket I'm using now and they only make it in 16x19. I think adding tape to the throat did make it launch slightly lower but I have no scientific reasoning to back it up. Jfish why move tape from the bottom of the handle to the top of handle?
Quoted for truth.
Tape will not do anything but make the ball launch even higher given same technique.
You are down to a single factor in your equipment- string gauge, try to go thicker.
I'd say try this string at around 67:
Luxilon Big Banger XP 15L
If this is still too loopy you need to change your technique (go more western on the grip) or change your racket (light 110" frame with 65lb kevlar? you're asking for arm damage)
OK, got a reference to support your opinion? :wink:
Yeah, that sounds good to me. Mostly agree with the posts above.
But that's not what we're talking about. I presume the OP has a certain grip already set in their muscles and whatnot-you can't just "change grips" after playing for as long as a time as they have. Technique in this sense is more about swing path, contact point, etc.
This post taught me that hot coffee can indeed burn the inside of your nostrils if it's laughed out hard enough. Seriously, I can't smell anything, but I'm very amused!
On another serious note, chill out, bro. Or whatever the kids say these days. :roll:
Too bad tennis players don't live in a vacuum...
^^^We're not robots. Adding mass to the racquet WILL affect technique.
You actually believe 65 pounds kevlar, isn't going to lower his trajectory? I think he mean spin. He wants more spin to dip the ball down maybe?
If you want a lower trajectory try a 18x20 pattern. If that doesnt help, then gg find a coach.
Totally missed my point. And I mean totally.
Ok how about this - of the fifty or so rackets I've added lead to, the balls I was hitting were more loopy, cleared the net at higher point came in at steeper angle, and bounced higher on the other side.
Maybe because the racket was giving more power I was adjusting my technique for more vertical swing velocity - but when I add lead I expect more loopy balls and looser feeling string bed with more force acting on the strings (they pop faster too)
That may be true for you, but at the same time you may have been adjusting your technique. All mechanics the same, if he added lead tape on the head the ball should gain more velocity and a lower trajectory.
This is why I said earlier in the thread that a flatter swing path plus more mass in the head would be best.
In the handle. It probably depends on the frame and strokes but that is my experience for sure. Anything that makes it more head light makes my ball go lower and shorter. Anything that makes it more head heavy makes it go higher and longer.
well lets see him try it and see what happens.
I agree with this; when I hit with dunlop 200 series, I hit flatter since its about 0.7 oz heavier than my standard racquet and has a denser string bed.
Are you sure? I feel only really subtle differences between my KPS88 and K Blade 98. The KPS88 is open pattern, the K Blade is closed.
Although, on the contrary, I tend to hit flatter with the KPS88. Hitting flat is partially due to the design of the racquet. String pattern will affect spin, but there are several other factors. The KPS88, for instance, is a more depolarized racquet, whereas my K Blade is relatively polar. If you had truly modern technique, it would be easier to access spin with the polarized racquet, obviously, regardless of the string pattern.
Spin mainly comes from technique. There's no other way around it, Anton. Your racquet will only go so far in complementing your technique. Thinking you get more spin from an open string pattern compared to a closed pattern on an entirely different racquet is merely a psychological effect. I would understand if you were given two racquets with the same specs, you'd get more spin from the one with the open pattern, obviously. However, you can still hit relatively heavy spin with both.
Higher? Are you kidding me? If this were true, you'd see pros scattering shots to the moon.
This may be true for you, but you must consider that guys like Djoko, Murray, Federer, Nadal hit the net sometimes on regular groundstrokes, too.
While I'm sure empirical research will support that the launch angle will be different with a wide variety of variables on the racquet, we have to understand, as players, that people utilize topspin to compensate for such minute changes. In reality, the majority of tennis players out there hit rather flat, and thus have a greater difficulty of adjusting. A lot of people will think a solely loopy ball is decent topspin. This is obviously false. Good topspin is easily visible; you will be able to see the change in the ball's velocity, included with the noticeable kick.
For the OP: don't worry about your racquet. If anything, get something with a comfortable weight, swingweight, feel, string pattern, and balance, and stick with it. Trajectory can be changed by the racquet, but in the end it's how you use the racquet. Why adjust the racquet when it's cheaper and easier to just adjust how high you aim above the net?
yes I'm sure.
though you have to look at actual string density 16x19 on 90" frame may not be any more open then 18x20 on 98"
You are conflating spin and launch angle - you can hit a high arch shot with zero spin on it, right?
Well they go together. They aren't mutually exclusive. You can hit a shot with loads of topspin and it can skirt right over the net. Or you could hit a flat shot and have it fly 10 feet above the net. Put trajectory and spin together and you get infinite variables.
Yes, headsize is a factor. In the end, it's not too much of a big one. As a player, it mostly depends on what you're comfortable with. Just look at Federer or some open era guy.
You can't take any two racquets with different string patterns and say one has the potential to produce more spin than the other. That was my contention. Those are two very different racquets.
Additionally, the variables where you base spin potential are too limited. While I agree with the above statement, you must consider the weight and swingweight of the racquet. In fact, these tend to be the main contributors to the potential spin generated by the player.
Just look at Federer; his has a smaller headsize than Nadal's racquet, yet Federer hits just as heavy shots as the rest of the top 50 players, if not more.
I never mentioned launch angle in that quote you quoted. Where are you coming from? I was referring to your quote on the string pattern and spin. You, yourself, never mentioned launch angle either.
And yes, you can certainly hit a high arch shot with little spin; that was even mentioned later in my post. Loopy shots don't necessarily mean a considerable amount of topspin was applied.
thx for the input always something to think about. I know there are a million variables.
What I'm asking is, if you had a machine swing a forehand with the same racket, same low to high forehand swing/angle/speed etc. All these variables constant, how would you decrease launch angle using lead tape or simple racket customization, or if you could even do it?
I'm no expert when it comes to tennis equipment.
It's all based on my personal experience. I have tried many setups. When I use a lot of lead tape in the handle top & 3+9 (much more in the handle top) my shots are flatter. Often times I hit the net.
Once a friend borrowed my stick to play me for 2 sets. I noticed he hit with a higher trajectory than his normal shot trajectory. I can't scientifically confirm that my polarized stick contributed to the higher trajectory, off course. BTW, his regular stick is a 16x19 pattern. My stick that he played with is an 18x20, co-poly.
Try (different setups) and you will know whether or not I works for you. It's that simple.
To those who say spin is mostly technique:
I respectfully disagree. A lot of it is technique, but I gave one of my regular hitting partners two different racquets-one a 105", 16x19 frame, and the other a 95" 18x20. I knew that this guy would be a good test for the effect of a racquet upon spin as he doesn't know a Big Bubba from a BLX90, and his technique has been set in stone for the last 30 years. The difference was remarkable-the shots with the former frame kicked visually and up to my torso, while balls for the latter stayed below my knees. For that reason, I won't ever believe the people who say that spin comes from technique, not the racquet.
That being said, grips and whatnot will affect spin. Someone with a violent windshield wiper motion will obviously impart more spin on the ball than someone with the forehand technique of Stefan Edberg. But that's not what we're talking about here-these posters won't be radically changing their technique to produce more spin. Why do that when you can change a much simpler variable?
That being said, with the same technique shot-for-shot, your equipment can have a huge impact on the amount of spin you hit.
Nobody in this thread has said that spin cannot come from equipment. You're arguing against a nonexistent opposition.
Again, there are too many factors for you to judge from just one small experiment from one small case. I'm certain the 95" had a lower swingweight and/or weight. ("Control" or "player" frames tend to have lower swingweights to compensate for the technique of the players who wield them.) Obviously, both swingweight and weight contributes a lot to how much force one can apply to a ball.
For you to imply that the headsize and/or the string patterns solely contributed to the spin potential is ignorant of other, more important racquet factors.
We don't know the specs of the two racquets you've handed the guy, nor do we know how this guy hits. We don't know the wind conditions, the string patterns, how worn out the strings were, how notched they were, etc. But that's irrelevant.
Nobody ever said that spin is not equipment related. I said so myself that I tend to hit flatter with my KPS88 than my leaded KB98.
I find it funny of you to say that spin comes mainly from the equipment, though. If anybody could create spin in the first place, it would come from technique. Just look at the top pros; they can all create heavy spin if they want to, yet their racquets are all rather different; some guys use open and close patterns, some guys have big and small headsizes.
Yes, equipment can affect spin, because of the simple fact that equipment may or may not COMPLEMENT one's technique, in effect, to generate the spin.
Racquets can bring spin potential. However, being able to attain that spin is highly dependent on technique. It's very obviously to all of us that you're not going to get the heavy kicking spin from a kiddy racquet, as opposed to the heavier, customized pro stock racquets on the ATP tour.
In the end, the different between the spin from two guys wielding the same exact racquet will be from each of their technique repertoires. That's the prime difference between your regular club player and the ATP pros.
I should rephrase: while spin is not mostly equipment, I would venture to say that it's not 95%/5% technique:spin like it's made to be sometimes.
Here is a post from my "opposition".
However, I stand by my original opinion. The difference is that you're examining spin on a multi-player to one-equipment basis, while I'm looking at it from a mono-player to multi-equipment basis. I do agree with your bolded sentence; that's vey reasonable and very correct. However, I think it's more useful to analyze this argument from my point of view, as the OP isn't going to radically change their technique to alter spin. We're looking at variables we can change in regards to one player, which are things like racquet, string, lead set-up, etc. Your argument focuses on multiple players, in which only technique matters. It's a fairly obvious statement to make, but the argument truly lies in what equipment does for one player and one player alone.
I also would prefer to keep this discussion related to us mere mortals. The reason professionals can generate heavy spin with their equipment of choice is because they're professionals-they do this stuff for a living and they're the best players around at it. That's why they're kicking butt and taking names on the tour, not us. But for anyone who isn't a pro or even semi-pro, equipment can make a difference.
Care to elaborate on your second and third to last paragraphs?
Sorry if this seems a bit abstract, my apologies!
Oh, and the 95" had a swingweight of over 330 while the 105"'s was in the 290s. And if it's irrelevant, why even bring it up?
Spin should be around 50:50, Technique : equipment.
Lower swingweight should equal more spin as well since you can whip it faster through the air.
Then I would agree with you. However, it would be in the best interest of the OP to develop better technique rather than optimize their equipment. I merely refer to higher level players because, in reality, a great number of them don't need to reflect on equipment as much we do. Their technique, by itself, allows them to generate powerful shots regardless of string pattern, weight, swingweight.
Thus, to me, it makes sense that equipment is only a secondary element. Would it be so much simpler to aim to achieve a technique where one could generate a maximum potential of spin, as opposed to bothering oneself with something as small as string patterns? For an individual case, being able to generate massive spin from inhibiting equipment is certainly better for player development.
Yes, equipment can help your game. Equipment is a confounding variable to an individual player's development. The main factor, though, is technique. If so, why not just focus on technique? I make the contention that the OP can and should change their technique for the better. For the player, alone, that would be the best advice: "Learn to hit better topspin," not "Get a new racquet."
Chyeah, you realize that there are plenty of players with high swingweights and heavy spin, right?
The equipment does make a huge difference, but it's not the equipment that directly imparts spin. It's the difference in swingweights, and to a much smaller degree the gauge/type of string and openness of string pattern. The weight of a racquet, balance, and overall swingweight will affect how quickly a player can whip the racquet and the swing speed. Those two variables (technique) have the greatest affect on spin of anything else. You already know this though...
So yes, equipment matters but it won't change your trajectory. The way you alter your swing as a result of the change in equipment will. There's your answer. Everyone put their collective minds together to arrive at that conclusion. And even if it doesn't seem like everyone is agreeing (which some of us are admitting to agreeing), we all are. It's just a matter of semantics whether you say it's technique or equipment. So, 50/50 like chyeaah said could be correct.
And to answer the machine swinging thing... if the machine swings with the same speed, same path, same technique for every piece of equipment it uses, the only minute difference in trajectory would be, again, the string and string pattern. Open string pattern is less predictable and the ball may sometimes launch higher. Oh, and also the flex of the racquet, if anyone cares to put their two cents into that.
You mentioned two variables
1 - frame square inches -- 105 vs. 95
2 - string pattern -- 16x19 vs. 18x20
I wish you had given him two frames with only one of the variables changed above. But I'm still curious. Could you elaborate more on what made the difference? Which is a "better" stick for your buddy to use against you?
I think this is a good discussion.
Great post. I think your advice is spot on, and I need to make something clear: in all cases, technique is a lot more important than equipment in the grand scheme of things, but equipment can still give you an edge if your setup is optimized for what you want. If someone has bad technique, no equipment is going to "fix" them and they should spend more time on mechanics than on string setups. That being said, equipment can still make a big difference in what you get out of the racquet.
I gave both variables because spin isn't merely a result of string pattern-it's a result of spacing. You can have a 16x19 with a denser pattern in the sweetspot than an 18x20, so I provided both to show that in the 105", the stringed was wide open while the 95" was a pretty tight pattern.
The surprising thing is that my buddy still had a similar amount of pace, control, and consistency on his shots, but spin (and depth) were definitely different. His shots were deeper and much, much flatter with the 95", but his shots with the 105" landed a meter or two shorter but had a lot more kick. As for me, I love a good chest-height ball so the 105" was a better stick for me to play against But the 95" hit such a low ball that it was a pain trying to dig them out all the time.
Separate names with a comma.