TimeToPlaySets
Legend
What are they gaining by giving up a larger sweet spot ?
Doesn't help control?My main two points are : We can gain racket maneuverability, increased acceleration of the racket head...
That was sort of a given, so I didn't even mention that...Doesn't help control?
Nothing's a given for me. Always need to do my research for racket technology haha.That was sort of a given, so I didn't even mention that...
well... usually 93" are head-light balanced, so that plus the smaller head... less resistance...makes it much more meneuverable...Why is 93 more maneuverability? It is lighter?
But the Phantom 93P is a heavy racket.
What are they gaining by giving up a larger sweet spot ?
You’re just trolling.Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
Honest question here. Do you have a brain?That means you can't answer a simple question.
I’ll answer this Q. You SHOULD hit the same inch or two every ball strike, but no one is perfect. Even the pros miss. With a smaller head, you may hit a ton of frame, increasing the chance for error. With a bigger head you may just hit strings outside the sweet spot.Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
Right, so that is an advantage of the 130.
Why would you not use 130 then?
As you said, even pros miss the center
Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
sweet spot strikes will always be more precise with a smaller frame.
.
Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
Very good points. Should you use a shovel or a backhoe?What are they gaining by giving up a larger sweet spot ?
Who does 93 have more control than 130 ?
You are still using the same 2 inches of string where the ball contacts.
In theory, the racket could be a mile wide. You're still only using that 1% of the strings.
So, why does extra unused string surface matter?
Why would string deflection vary, given a constant force?
String deflection should only vary if the ball comes in at a different speed or swing speed changes.
But it should stay constant for a given head size or string pattern, unless those are magically changing during a point!
Delusional machismo.What are they gaining by giving up a larger sweet spot ?
Blades vs cavity back have nothing to do with the size of the racket.
What makes you think this?
Racquet choice is very personal. It is however possible that someone would have more control with a 130 frame vs a 93, based on the other specs of the frame and the skill level of the user.
Definitely trolling, or maybe just clueless?Why would string deflection vary, given a constant force?
String deflection should only vary if the ball comes in at a different speed or swing speed changes.
But it should stay constant for a given head size or string pattern, unless those are magically changing during a point!
Why did anyone even respond???