Why are new racket frames so thick?

[Deleted member 793875]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

Why the change?

 

[Soundbyte]

You picked the wrong rackets to try out.

Gravity Pro, Prokennex, others have thinner beams (20mm). They're out there.

 

[esgee48]

There are few frames <20 mm. There are many frames 20-22 mm and even more up to 25 mm. This was true 8 years ago. Now days, with less mass, beams have to be thicker and there are even more frames between 24-28 mm.

 

[Rally]

Friendly reminder that TW still has the Pro Staff 85 in stock. 12 ounces of 17mm goodness.

 

[2ndServe]

You should try a prince racket. They are thin

 

[SupahMan5000]

If I’m not mistaken the original post seems to be surprised about the general trend of frames having wider beams more so rather than there are no thin beam options.

It is true the game has gotten faster and as such heavier, low powered thin beam, power frames are not in demand as much as they used to. Simply put it’s much easier to be defensive and hit with pace with these wider beam, more powerful, often stiffer frames

 

[makinao]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

I thought you were writing about the 80s, when the Wilson Profile and Prince Widebodies were the thing. The are still lots of thin rackets available. Prestiges and Prostaffs are still around. And if you don't like the new ones, go used.

What has disappeared are heavy rackets. The 13-16 oz caveman clubs I grew up with in the 70s are gone. Nowadays the 50-somethings in my club are shocked by my 12oz+ Radical Tour Austria. The heaviest Radical available now is only 11.1 unstrung.

 

[Power Player]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

Why the change?

I came back around 2008 and I had the same thoughts. I initially hated it and went thin beam and denied the thick beam goodness. But I have gotten used to them and really enjoy them now. Took me quite a while.

Best thing to do is demo some thin beam frames and try a thick boi and see how you like it. If you prefer to hit flatter then I'd just stay with the thin stuff. The Gravity series is awesome if you want a bigger frame and a 20mm beam. The advantage of the thicker beam is you get more power and stability at a lighter weight. So it can be a huge energy saver if you are a spin hitter.

 

[Crocodile]

Will be interesting to see what will trend in the next few years. Possibly we may have new materials come into sports equipment and court surfaces and that could change how racquets are made.
I think tennis will need to continue to adopt technologies that will attract and retain both recreational and competitive athletes,
Currently we still have too many tennis players leaving the game due to injuries and this would benefit other competing sports,
Let’s see what happens.

 

[Fintft]

The thickest I've tried is so that it can....Shift.

 

[Strayfire]

My secret confession is that I actually really like thicc beams and I cannot lie.

My Bridgestone RS 300 has been really nice to serve with.

But once you're invested with 5 VCP HDs, it does make it hard to switch...

 

[tennisfan2166]

I guess OP was not around for Wilson Profile

 

[socallefty]

Thick beams have been around since the late Eighties. If you want thin beams, there are enough around between 11.5 to 12 ozs. What has almost died out are 12.5 to 13 oz thin beams.

 

[Username_]

Because people from the racquet manufacturers have terrible aesthetic sense

 

[Casper777]

Because people from the racquet manufacturers have terrible aesthetic sense

Maybe because good players don't chose their frame based on aesthetics...

 

[oldmanyellingatcloud]

I'm confused. there have always been thinner and thicker beam racquets

 

[Username_]

Maybe because good players don't chose their frame based on aesthetics...

im a 1.0 player

 

[aus89]

one difference is while the beams are a bit thicker, the racquets are more flexible still - its not like a few years ago when the racquets were all going thick and stiff (#phrasing) - ie: when Head went downhill for a few years with their racquet lineups, now arm friendliness and flex seems to be the style of the time and the thicker beams are there to increase stability while keeping them flexy (ie: Yonex)

 

[justinhaughtmd]

By far the most important advancement in tennis equipment since the use of graphite (40 plus years) has been polyester strings. Tons of spin, not breaking strings every session... This has changed the game forever. Those old-school thin rackets don't perform well with poly, so rackets need to be stiffer (think thicker beam). Then over the past 10 years the tech has been focused on making the stiff beam/poly combo softer.

 

[Purestriker]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

Why the change?

Power. Easy power.

 

[Yamin]

People have become weaker I guess. Suddenly everything is "too heavy".

 

[Rally]

People have become weaker I guess. Suddenly everything is "too heavy".

The game has changed too. There are fewer and fewer of us using Eastern grips (and I'm an extreme Eastern so I barely count), and it's harder to accelerate the mass and generate high topspin and pace with a heavy thin beamed polarized racquet if you play with semi western and full western grips. If you use a 2 handed backhand, you have less of a need for weight there too. We one handers will take the weight with smiles on our faces though.

 

[Yamin]

The game has changed too. There are fewer and fewer of us using Eastern grips (and I'm an extreme Eastern so I barely count), and it's harder to accelerate the mass and generate high topspin and pace with a heavy thin beamed polarized racquet if you play with semi western and full western grips. If you use a 2 handed backhand, you have less of a need for weight there too. We one handers will take the weight with smiles on our faces though.

Having a western grip it's actually much easier swinging thin beam, polarized, and heavy/hl than the thick beam, head heavy, high twist weights of today.

But yeah guess weight was too much for the common players

 

[JustTennis76]

To the OP, I still use the Youtek Prestige Pro. It’s 21 mm straight beam. Sometimes I use the prestige mid that is 19 mm but that has become more challenging now to use.

 

[valentino_ua]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

Why the change?

Because most people play heavy topspin. And they don’t have enough power when all energy goes upstairs into spin not ahead, that’s why they need thick beam which always has been more powerful, defensive play even 20 y ago.

 

[maksp]

Thick beams use less material otherwise it would be too heavy, saving manufacturers money. Simple as that

 

[Crocodile]

If some of you can remember back when Wilson adopted the Kuebler technology and released the wide body Profile. It was very thick and heavy and very stiff and powerful. Prince backed it up with the Thunder stick but then Pro Kennex came up with an idea that kept the positives of the wide body but made these frames more playable for the modern player and designed the Destiny which became the Pure Drive.
The ultra thick frames and larger heads declined once newer generation of carbon graphite was employed with braided graphite and then HM graphite and now nano carbon technology to enable smaller heads and thinner beams to produce enough power.
Moving to the present the racquets are lighter, athletes are faster and techniques are employing more angular momentum for advanced players and if you pair that with a polyester string you are going to end up with somewhat wider and lighter aerodynamic beam to complement your game.
The thinnest beam racquet I own at present is the Volkl PB10 Mid which is about 19.5mm and the racquet weighs about 355g strung with an over grip with a lowish swing weight of 320, so it’s perfect as an S & V racquet in singles against a similar older player on a fast court with not much wind around. That’s how it is.
What has happened however is many of the 20mm C10 Pro type frames with 355 strung weight have been replaced with slightly thicker 21mm or 21.5mm 315g frames with higher SW’s ( say 327 to 335) with a stiffness around 64 to 66. The exceptions are the Phantoms which come in around 59RA but I think that you need to measure their flex both ways to get a better understanding of what racquet manufacturing technologies are being used now. A 59 RA now is different to a 59 RA 5 years ago. The Clash is a case in point. Anyway I think for many people the thin 20mm frame that’s 355g strung at 60RA has been replaced by that 305 to 315 (338g strung ) in a 21 to 21.5 mm beam and 64 RA. Right now if you go this way you could compete with the Pure Drives on a windy day on a slower court with younger, faster advanced players with this set up. Some of the frames right now that fit this genre include the Tecnifibre TF 40 305/315 and Solinco white out 305. These racquets while still having a good precise feel have a bit more power than say a PK Q Tour 315 and are easier to use yet have amount dampening to allow poly use and arm safety.

 

[mhkeuns]

I've been out of the game for about 8 years. Used to play with a Head Youtek Prestige. When I was trying out several new rackets, I was just shocked by how thick the frame of the rackets are.

Why the change?

New Prestige Pro is thin beamed, which looks to be thinner than IG Prestige MP.

As far as the thickness go, I think the cause may be that most popular rackets have gone lighter. Those rackets most likely require thickness in the frame to compensate for the reduction of weight.