Why do pros use such high swingweights?

[anubis]

Some of them, such as Berdych and Murray have swingweights that approach 400. Almost all of the top 30 or 40 males use swingweights north of 365, which Federer probably having the lowest of most of them. I'm pretty sure Sampras had well over 400 for swingweight, since his stick was almost 14 oz.

I know a lot of TT'ers like to tinker with swingweight, but it's mostly a novelty I think for us. Whether I use a 300 or 330 swingweight, I'm not likely going to lose or win a match purely because of that swingweight.

So why is it so important for pros to have such massive racquets?

Just curious! thanks

 

[spaceman_spiff]

Bigger sweetspot than a lower SW on the same frame. Better directional control. More mass to counter the momentum from their opponents' heavy shots. Less shock in the arm.

I personally prefer a really high SW because it allows me to get the same power with a slower, smoother swing, and that leads me to make fewer unforced errors. But I doubt many pros are worried about that particular issue.

 

[LeeD]

Pros face a heavier shot, all the time, from other pros, as said above.

 

[sureshs]

Return of serve is the main reason

 

[Chico]

Because they are strong enough to wield such a weapon, and as said above higher SW will make it easier to handle heavier shots (i.e. what spaceman_spiff).

 

[anubis]

thanks everyone.

 

[kalic]

Because they play against heavy balls

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

And they want to hit heavy balls.

Anubis, you say that changing your swingweight would not affect your results. You'd be surprised. Give Djokovic my racket and he'd struggle to keep up with the other top players. His shots would be nowhere near as heavy. Basically, with a lower swingweight you NEED to hit with less topspin, to achieve good depth. A high swingweight allows you to hit with good topspin and good pace at the same time.
Only if you're good enough to swing it freely and comfortably of course. For me at the moment around 325-330 seems ideal.

Another option nowadays is to substitute swingweight with racket stiffness for that extra power. But playing against other heavy hitters, pros still do need the extra mass in the head, otherwise a stiff (and powerful) but light racket will be pushed around like a little toy, resulting in unpredictable hitting directions.

 

[movdqa]

> Another option nowadays is to substitute swingweight
> with racket stiffness for that extra power. But playing
> against other heavy hitters, pros still do need the extra
> mass in the head, otherwise a stiff (and powerful)

Even the pros with stiff frames have pretty high swingweights. Tsonga puts an incredible amount of lead tape on his Babolat.

The WTA would probably be a better comparison for good male players here - and they do use lower swingweight racquets (though some do use very high swingweights too). If you spend some time hitting with a high swingweight racquet, you can have a better appreciation for how the pros hit the shots that they do and how incredibly fit they are.

A decent amount of that "easy power" that they're always talking about on television is due to high swingweights.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Even the pros with stiff frames have pretty high swingweights.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

By the way I see you carry quite a healthy swingweight, what sort of game do you play with it?

 

[movdqa]

I've moved from an all-court game to more of a baseline topspin and slice game. The high swingweight is nice from the backcourt, especially against high, topspin shots to my backhand. The high swingweight costs me some pace on my serve. I'm able to hit faster serves with my YT Prestige MPs at 372 SW. The IGs are much more stable though (due to the IG stuff, not the added swingweight).

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

I tried leading my old frame to around 360 swingweight and it was so hard to play with, I was late on everything and couldn't create any topspin.

 

[movdqa]

The move up was gradual for me. KPS88 at 345, YT Prestige MP - just added lead tape over time to get it stable and it wound up with a high swingweight. My optimal game is probably at a lower swingweight but I just don't feel like changing the set of racquets that I have.

 

[anubis]

I tried leading my old frame to around 360 swingweight and it was so hard to play with, I was late on everything and couldn't create any topspin.

Did you re-balance your frame by adding the same amount of weight near the butt cap? If you don't, then you've made the frame very head heavy. That can make it very difficult to wield, especially at the net.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

I did keep about the same balance. Added plenty to the buttcap along with the hoop, but also, most of my lead was in the throat of the racket, in order not to affect the balance much. I could have possibly gone even more headlight, I haven't really experimented with the effect of adding weight to the buttcap only. I find it hard to imagine it would make the racket easier to wield?

 

[movdqa]

I think that the polarized setup is the most efficient to maximize swingweight without pushing static weight up really fast. One thing that I've noticed with the big bashers is that they like two strips at 3 and at 9 and they tend to hit flatter. 3/9 looks better for hitting flatter shots and it also provide stability which is important because those lighter hairpins can result in an unstable frame which needs the lead at 3/9 for stability as well as weight.

When I was playing with the KPS88s at 345, adding a few grams made it feel quite heavy. Bumping up the weight is not something that you can do quickly and it can result in injuries if done too fast.

 

[anubis]

I did keep about the same balance. Added plenty to the buttcap along with the hoop, but also, most of my lead was in the throat of the racket, in order not to affect the balance much. I could have possibly gone even more headlight, I haven't really experimented with the effect of adding weight to the buttcap only. I find it hard to imagine it would make the racket easier to wield?

I would suggest not adding any weight to the throat or center of the frame. Perhaps start with 5 grams at noon and 5 grams wrapped around the end of the handle, just above the butt cap (under the grip). That will raise your SW by about 15 points, and keep the balance the same as it was before.

 

[corners]

Everyone else hit the important points, but one: high swingweight gives the hitter a greater ability to change the direction of the ball. The ball trajectory off your racquet is dependent on the incoming ball velocity and direction, and the angle and speed of your own swing. But having a high swingweight (more mass in the head of the racquet) makes it so that the outgoing trajectory is more heavily dependent on your swing than on the incoming ball speed and trajectory. So you can more easily hit a crosscourt shot down the line, or more accurately, I should say, with a higher swingweight. If you have a low swingweight, and want to return your opponent's crosscourt shot down the line, you will have to aim differently depending on whether your opponent's shot is slow or fast. But if your swingweight is high you can swing more similarly in each case and get the same result. Basically, high swingweight means that you get a more consistent rebound angle regardless of the incoming ball speed and angle, so you have to make fewer adjustments to your opponent's ball to hit where you want to.

This is true on volleys too, and very helpful, as you can more easily place the volley where you want to regardless of the speed and spin of your opponent's attempted pass. For the pros, this is more important than the loss of maneuverability that comes with high swingweight.

 

[Power Player]

Higher weight in general seems to really help with consistency and save energy out there as well. Provided you can still generate the racquet head speed. Letting the racquet do the work is the path to having a loose arm.

 

[spaceman_spiff]

Everyone else hit the important points, but one: high swingweight gives the hitter a greater ability to change the direction of the ball. The ball trajectory off your racquet is dependent on the incoming ball velocity and direction, and the angle and speed of your own swing. But having a high swingweight (more mass in the head of the racquet) makes it so that the outgoing trajectory is more heavily dependent on your swing than on the incoming ball speed and trajectory. So you can more easily hit a crosscourt shot down the line, or more accurately, I should say, with a higher swingweight. If you have a low swingweight, and want to return your opponent's crosscourt shot down the line, you will have to aim differently depending on whether your opponent's shot is slow or fast. But if your swingweight is high you can swing more similarly in each case and get the same result. Basically, high swingweight means that you get a more consistent rebound angle regardless of the incoming ball speed and angle, so you have to make fewer adjustments to your opponent's ball to hit where you want to.

This is true on volleys too, and very helpful, as you can more easily place the volley where you want to regardless of the speed and spin of your opponent's attempted pass. For the pros, this is more important than the loss of maneuverability that comes with high swingweight.

Good point. Changing directions and directing volleys seems a lot easier for me than for some of my buddies who are bigger and stronger but use much lighter frames.

Hitting on the rise seems easier as well. It feels easier to control the height and direction of my shot, and the bigger sweet spot (and smoother swing that it allows) gives me more room for error.

 

[rufus_smith]

I've tried it. Anything over say 370 grams puts quite a strain on the wrist and elbow and serving can deteriorate. The ATP guys have the arms to do it but it is not for everybody.

 

[HeadStart]

I think swingweights and pro racquets on this forum are over-rated by too many people. A higher swingweight means that the player has to swing harder to create the same racquet head speed but will produce a heavier ball. Looking at the professionals especially players that use a lot of topspin say Verdasco and Nadal and also players that use one-handed backhands ie Federer, Gasquet and Wawrinka its extremely clear that their swingweights are clearly not much higher than around 340 at most.

Do you really think it is possible for professionals to wield these gigantic swingweights that people carelessly throw about out without any reliable sources to support their statements?? Firstly the pros train day in and day out for numerous hours each day and then during tournaments they face numerous opponents some matches going to 5 sets. If I Recall in the US Open 2013, Richard Gasquet played Raonic and Ferrer one after each other both matches lasted 5 sets of the highest order and Gasquet prevailed with the win in both matches. It's just not possible for tennis players to have extremely high swingweights that are stupidly thrown about here otherwise they'd be getting tired and injured all the time. The swings the pros possess are very fast and not sluggish one bit.

Secondly look at the way Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal play. Federer is known for his cheeky half-volleys off the baseline and his outstanding instinct to come to the net. If his swingweight was north of 340 he would NOT be able to do these things. This coupled with the way he snaps his wrist, generates a flawless easy swing motion highly suggests that he doesn't have an extremely excessive swingweight but rather he encoportates all his major bodily muscles into his stroke to produce strokes of venom ie a very heavy ball and high topspin. This is the same with Nadal. Do really think it is possible that Nadal has an extremely high swingweight? Especially his swing motion of a steep low-to-high motion his shoulder would get trashed if his swingweight was excessively high. Nadal is known again for his last-minute passing shots that are poised with perfection! The way he generates his spin and again flicks his wrist is impossible with an excessive swingweight.

Lastly look at the physiques of the top players like Gilles Simon, Davdenko, Federer, Dolgopolov, Wawrinka, Djokovic, Gasquet, Del Potro. They're not that big at all; their upper bodies are fairly slim but they all have good lower musculature which is where the power is generated. Their serves would all be hampered if their swingweights was like 370, 380 etc, its just not possible. However extremely good technique is the basis for why the pros hit so hard. Look at powerlifters, they lift twice and three times their own body weight yet some of them don't even look big.

Finally it is a well known premise that professionals don't like to change their rackets that have actually got them to the professional scene, therefore they use a paintjob to endorse racquets sold by the major companies. Most pros hit the professional stage in their late teens. I highly doubt that a teenager of 17, 18, 19 would be able to wield swingweights of 360, 370, 380 etc successfully to have progressed to the pro scene. So why would they suddenly drastically change their racquet from a lighter swingweight from their early teens to their late teens?!

Watch the professionals hitting on youtube and some of you wannabees will be surprised how easy they create power and they do it so relaxed. Yes professionals do use paintjobs, but you would be surprised about how similar some of the retail frames are compared to the ones the professionals use. Think about the market tennis warehouse is trying to appeal to. Most of the very best racquets on tennis warehouse say that the specific racket is for 4.5 players and above etc. Racquet head speed creates spin as well as power, most of the people on here have their swingweights extremely high which is why I know they may not be a good player since playing good tennis is not a function of swingweight but mostly technique and timing. And most people have full time jobs, so they wouldn't be able to hack huge swingweights effectively with the limited time they have.

 

[Power Player]

How are the swing weights "stupidly thrown around" when the specs discussed originated from pro stringers who measured them on an RDC?

I agree with the high SW thing. It never worked for me. Close to 330 is just fine for me, but many of the pros are using high SWs, and there are pics of their racquets on RDC machines if you look around more.

There are also articles about racquets customization which explain this in more detail online.

 

[dominikk1985]

I think the biggest reason is mostly stability against hard shots.if you hit slightly off center the heavier racket twists less. and since pros always face hard strokes it makes sense to use such a racket.

I think for most rec players a lighter racket is suited very well because they don't face super heavy shots.

you can hit just as hard by swinging a lighter racket faster.

 

[movdqa]

> How are the swing weights "stupidly thrown around" when the
> specs discussed originated from pro stringers who measured
> them on an RDC?

It's pretty hard to argue with objective information.

There's a picture of Tsonga's racquet showing the lead tape.

There are several pictures of Djokovic's racquets showing the lead tape. Clear caps make that a lot easier.

There are pictures of Federer's racquet showing the lead tape.

Some of us actually have a bunch of pro racquets and know what they feel like. They're actually not that hard to get if you have the $$$.

 

[movdqa]

I think the biggest reason is mostly stability against hard shots.if you hit slightly off center the heavier racket twists less. and since pros always face hard strokes it makes sense to use such a racket.

I think for most rec players a lighter racket is suited very well because they don't face super heavy shots.

you can hit just as hard by swinging a lighter racket faster.

Lead at 3/9 gives you more stability and power. If you look at Berdych who has SW, probably 390-400, it looks to me that he uses it for the power. You can get stability at much lower swingweights.

Djokovic's setup definitely adds stability.

Nadal and Federer seem to have setups for power - they add lead at 12:00 (Nadal) and 10:00 - 2:00 (Federer). These locations don't add a lot of stability.

 

[corners]

I think swingweights and pro racquets on this forum are over-rated by too many people. A higher swingweight means that the player has to swing harder to create the same racquet head speed but will produce a heavier ball. Looking at the professionals especially players that use a lot of topspin say Verdasco and Nadal and also players that use one-handed backhands ie Federer, Gasquet and Wawrinka its extremely clear that their swingweights are clearly not much higher than around 340 at most.

The facts contradict what seems so clear to you. Consider Gasquet: Greg Raven took down his specs in 2009 at Indian Wells: 361 grams, 32.4 cm balance, 381 swingweight.

Raven measured Nadal's swingweight at the same tournament: 350. Since then Nadal added 3 grams at 12, bringing his swingweight to around 360, a figure confirmed by another source this year. Take a look at the list of ATP specs Raven collected - only two (Chardy and Melzer) had swing weights below 340. Below 340 is the exception rather than the rule, and has been for many, many years. Lendl, Becker and Sampras all swung over 380, and although average swing weights for top pros may be declining somewhat these days, specs collected by reliable sources at tournaments suggest that that decline might be pretty modest. There are still many players swinging 380+: Djokovic, Gasquet, Soderling, Murray, etc.

Do you really think it is possible for professionals to wield these gigantic swingweights that people carelessly throw about out without any reliable sources to support their statements??

Of course it is! Look at the list linked above, as well as the other spec logs Raven has collected; there are plenty of women players, quite slender ones at that, swinging around 350.

Ivanovic: 348
Kirilenko: 349
S. Williams: 354
V. Williams: 380!
Henin (5'6"!): 355

 

[movdqa]

> There are still many players swinging 380+: Djokovic, Gasquet,
> Soderling, Murray, etc.

Djokovic is at 370 from the last specs that I looked at. Murray was over 400 at one point but I think that he's a lot lower today - nobody has a verified reading though.

Kimiko Date's racquet weighs 385 grams! I don't know what her swingweight is and I haven't seen any pictures with lead tape placement but I'd guess that her swingweight is pretty high.

 

[Lefty78]

I think swingweights and pro racquets on this forum are over-rated by too many people. A higher swingweight means that the player has to swing harder to create the same racquet head speed but will produce a heavier ball. Looking at the professionals especially players that use a lot of topspin say Verdasco and Nadal and also players that use one-handed backhands ie Federer, Gasquet and Wawrinka its extremely clear that their swingweights are clearly not much higher than around 340 at most.

Do you really think it is possible for professionals to wield these gigantic swingweights that people carelessly throw about out without any reliable sources to support their statements?? Firstly the pros train day in and day out for numerous hours each day and then during tournaments they face numerous opponents some matches going to 5 sets. If I Recall in the US Open 2013, Richard Gasquet played Raonic and Ferrer one after each other both matches lasted 5 sets of the highest order and Gasquet prevailed with the win in both matches. It's just not possible for tennis players to have extremely high swingweights that are stupidly thrown about here otherwise they'd be getting tired and injured all the time. The swings the pros possess are very fast and not sluggish one bit.

Secondly look at the way Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal play. Federer is known for his cheeky half-volleys off the baseline and his outstanding instinct to come to the net. If his swingweight was north of 340 he would NOT be able to do these things. This coupled with the way he snaps his wrist, generates a flawless easy swing motion highly suggests that he doesn't have an extremely excessive swingweight but rather he encoportates all his major bodily muscles into his stroke to produce strokes of venom ie a very heavy ball and high topspin. This is the same with Nadal. Do really think it is possible that Nadal has an extremely high swingweight? Especially his swing motion of a steep low-to-high motion his shoulder would get trashed if his swingweight was excessively high. Nadal is known again for his last-minute passing shots that are poised with perfection! The way he generates his spin and again flicks his wrist is impossible with an excessive swingweight.

Lastly look at the physiques of the top players like Gilles Simon, Davdenko, Federer, Dolgopolov, Wawrinka, Djokovic, Gasquet, Del Potro. They're not that big at all; their upper bodies are fairly slim but they all have good lower musculature which is where the power is generated. Their serves would all be hampered if their swingweights was like 370, 380 etc, its just not possible. However extremely good technique is the basis for why the pros hit so hard. Look at powerlifters, they lift twice and three times their own body weight yet some of them don't even look big.

Finally it is a well known premise that professionals don't like to change their rackets that have actually got them to the professional scene, therefore they use a paintjob to endorse racquets sold by the major companies. Most pros hit the professional stage in their late teens. I highly doubt that a teenager of 17, 18, 19 would be able to wield swingweights of 360, 370, 380 etc successfully to have progressed to the pro scene. So why would they suddenly drastically change their racquet from a lighter swingweight from their early teens to their late teens?!

Watch the professionals hitting on youtube and some of you wannabees will be surprised how easy they create power and they do it so relaxed. Yes professionals do use paintjobs, but you would be surprised about how similar some of the retail frames are compared to the ones the professionals use. Think about the market tennis warehouse is trying to appeal to. Most of the very best racquets on tennis warehouse say that the specific racket is for 4.5 players and above etc. Racquet head speed creates spin as well as power, most of the people on here have their swingweights extremely high which is why I know they may not be a good player since playing good tennis is not a function of swingweight but mostly technique and timing. And most people have full time jobs, so they wouldn't be able to hack huge swingweights effectively with the limited time they have.

I ran this gem through Google translate and this is what it spit out:

I can't play with a high swingweight. When I watch pros on tv I can't imagine how they could pull off these shots with a high swingweight either. Therefore, there's no way they can be using more than say, maybe SW 340??!!

 

[Fuji]

I think swingweights and pro racquets on this forum are over-rated by too many people. A higher swingweight means that the player has to swing harder to create the same racquet head speed but will produce a heavier ball. Looking at the professionals especially players that use a lot of topspin say Verdasco and Nadal and also players that use one-handed backhands ie Federer, Gasquet and Wawrinka its extremely clear that their swingweights are clearly not much higher than around 340 at most.

Do you really think it is possible for professionals to wield these gigantic swingweights that people carelessly throw about out without any reliable sources to support their statements?? Firstly the pros train day in and day out for numerous hours each day and then during tournaments they face numerous opponents some matches going to 5 sets. If I Recall in the US Open 2013, Richard Gasquet played Raonic and Ferrer one after each other both matches lasted 5 sets of the highest order and Gasquet prevailed with the win in both matches. It's just not possible for tennis players to have extremely high swingweights that are stupidly thrown about here otherwise they'd be getting tired and injured all the time. The swings the pros possess are very fast and not sluggish one bit.

Secondly look at the way Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal play. Federer is known for his cheeky half-volleys off the baseline and his outstanding instinct to come to the net. If his swingweight was north of 340 he would NOT be able to do these things. This coupled with the way he snaps his wrist, generates a flawless easy swing motion highly suggests that he doesn't have an extremely excessive swingweight but rather he encoportates all his major bodily muscles into his stroke to produce strokes of venom ie a very heavy ball and high topspin. This is the same with Nadal. Do really think it is possible that Nadal has an extremely high swingweight? Especially his swing motion of a steep low-to-high motion his shoulder would get trashed if his swingweight was excessively high. Nadal is known again for his last-minute passing shots that are poised with perfection! The way he generates his spin and again flicks his wrist is impossible with an excessive swingweight.

Lastly look at the physiques of the top players like Gilles Simon, Davdenko, Federer, Dolgopolov, Wawrinka, Djokovic, Gasquet, Del Potro. They're not that big at all; their upper bodies are fairly slim but they all have good lower musculature which is where the power is generated. Their serves would all be hampered if their swingweights was like 370, 380 etc, its just not possible. However extremely good technique is the basis for why the pros hit so hard. Look at powerlifters, they lift twice and three times their own body weight yet some of them don't even look big.

Finally it is a well known premise that professionals don't like to change their rackets that have actually got them to the professional scene, therefore they use a paintjob to endorse racquets sold by the major companies. Most pros hit the professional stage in their late teens. I highly doubt that a teenager of 17, 18, 19 would be able to wield swingweights of 360, 370, 380 etc successfully to have progressed to the pro scene. So why would they suddenly drastically change their racquet from a lighter swingweight from their early teens to their late teens?!

Watch the professionals hitting on youtube and some of you wannabees will be surprised how easy they create power and they do it so relaxed. Yes professionals do use paintjobs, but you would be surprised about how similar some of the retail frames are compared to the ones the professionals use. Think about the market tennis warehouse is trying to appeal to. Most of the very best racquets on tennis warehouse say that the specific racket is for 4.5 players and above etc. Racquet head speed creates spin as well as power, most of the people on here have their swingweights extremely high which is why I know they may not be a good player since playing good tennis is not a function of swingweight but mostly technique and timing. And most people have full time jobs, so they wouldn't be able to hack huge swingweights effectively with the limited time they have.

One of my buddies who trained ATP was 16-17 when he was playing futures. His swingweight is close to 400, and his frames are over 13oz, and he had no trouble swinging them around day in day out when he was playing all the time. It's not that difficult to get used to a higher swingweight when you play guys who hit the ball as hard as pros, since you really need stability.

-Fuji

 

[PrinceMoron]

Muhammad Saad al-Beshi uses a high swing weight. I would not call him a hacker.

 

[Shroud]

One of my buddies who trained ATP was 16-17 when he was playing futures. His swingweight is close to 400, and his frames are over 13oz, and he had no trouble swinging them around day in day out when he was playing all the time. It's not that difficult to get used to a higher swingweight when you play guys who hit the ball as hard as pros, since you really need stability.

-Fuji

I can hit for hours with rackets that have a SW from 360-400 and weigh from 15oz-16.3oz. I don't doubt for a second that the pros can wield heavy clubs for long periods.

I am fat, old and slow....

 

[Fuji]

I can hit for hours with rackets that have a SW from 360-400 and weigh from 15oz-16.3oz. I don't doubt for a second that the pros can wield heavy clubs for long periods.

I am fat, old and slow....

Hahaha, it just takes an adjustment period, but virtually everyone can adjust to a heavier bat or swingweight. The biggest thing is just finding what's optimal for your game. If a SW of 400 works for you, go hard. I used to use 380+ and I've slowly moved down after a shoulder injury that was unrelated to tennis, but even now so my rackets are in the 340 range and I use them for up to 8 hours a day of hitting. Without a doubt I could go higher, but I find that for my level right now, it's perfect.

-Fuji

 

[tennisblog365]

They use them , because as of a physical stand point of view for the serve and the return of serve, the weight of the racket acts as a hitter and blocker much better, than if its lighter. You have to generate your own pace with super acceleration and use a lot more muscle on a lighter racquet. And with a heavier racket, even if you are 12 feet behind the baseline, you can still hit a really strong, deep ball, as of a lighter racquet you can't as much.

 

[Overdrive]

Hahaha, it just takes an adjustment period, but virtually everyone can adjust to a heavier bat or swingweight. The biggest thing is just finding what's optimal for your game. If a SW of 400 works for you, go hard. I used to use 380+ and I've slowly moved down after a shoulder injury that was unrelated to tennis, but even now so my rackets are in the 340 range and I use them for up to 8 hours a day of hitting. Without a doubt I could go higher, but I find that for my level right now, it's perfect.

-Fuji

Doesn't the high SWs deteriorate your arm?

 

[Lukhas]

Doesn't the high SWs deteriorate your arm?

I know I'm not the guy you asked this, but anyway.
If you have a smooth and long stroke properly using your core muscles, not that much because the acceleration is gradual and the racquet does a part of the job for you, so you don't always have to try as hard to get the same pace. However if you have issues with technique, it doesn't forgive. Especially on serve.

 

[movdqa]

Here's me hitting with SW 386 racquet. Note the flick backhand topspin shot starting at 1:20. Also note the racquet doing a lot of the work in generating pace. If a TW hack like me can do this with SW 386, it should be a piece of cake for an ATP pro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMJ65FQ79hs&feature=youtu.be

 

[Praetorian]

I ran this gem through Google translate and this is what it spit out:

I can't play with a high swingweight. When I watch pros on tv I can't imagine how they could pull off these shots with a high swingweight either. Therefore, there's no way they can be using more than say, maybe SW 340??!!

Haha... quoted for truth :twisted::twisted::twisted:

 

[HeadStart]

> How are the swing weights "stupidly thrown around" when the
> specs discussed originated from pro stringers who measured
> them on an RDC?

It's pretty hard to argue with objective information.

There's a picture of Tsonga's racquet showing the lead tape.

There are several pictures of Djokovic's racquets showing the lead tape. Clear caps make that a lot easier.

There are pictures of Federer's racquet showing the lead tape.

Some of us actually have a bunch of pro racquets and know what they feel like. They're actually not that hard to get if you have the $$$.

Yes it is pretty hard to argue with objective information, and I'm very grateful to some of the posters here that do supply information to all of us its absolutely superb. Especially the high calibre athletes of the ATP Pro Tour, ie Federer, nadal , djokovic their specs are clearly correct and makes a lot of sense since people actually take their time to get their racquet specs. But for lesser known tennis players, people state their swingweights etc and its like how do you even know that lol and most people don't show photos or support their information with reliable evidence, I'm sure you'd agree!

 

[HeadStart]

One of my buddies who trained ATP was 16-17 when he was playing futures. His swingweight is close to 400, and his frames are over 13oz, and he had no trouble swinging them around day in day out when he was playing all the time. It's not that difficult to get used to a higher swingweight when you play guys who hit the ball as hard as pros, since you really need stability.

-Fuji

What the hell lol that is beastly. That makes me want to try out a heavier racket now. I think I've gotten used to the way retail play's and a heavier racket could be just what I need to ignite an advancement in my game haha.

 

[movdqa]

> But for lesser known tennis players, people state their
> swingweights etc and its like how do you even know that lol
> and most people don't show photos or support their information
> with reliable evidence, I'm sure you'd agree!

There's an interesting place called string forums where people buy, sell and trade pro stocks. Some of the people from there post here. There are some high-volume sellers and traders too.

Sometimes the SWs are provided when you buy pro stocks. Sometimes you can tell by hitting with frames where you know the SWs for the frames where you don't have an RDC measurement. Or you could use the TW approach. The frames that I currently use were from a set of about 15 and the seller provided a lot of detail on them including the SW. There is a very long thread on this particular set of frames with a lot of details. Many were reluctant to buy them because of the high SW.

 

[HeadStart]

The facts contradict what seems so clear to you. Consider Gasquet: Greg Raven took down his specs in 2009 at Indian Wells: 361 grams, 32.4 cm balance, 381 swingweight.

Raven measured Nadal's swingweight at the same tournament: 350. Since then Nadal added 3 grams at 12, bringing his swingweight to around 360, a figure confirmed by another source this year. Take a look at the list of ATP specs Raven collected - only two (Chardy and Melzer) had swing weights below 340. Below 340 is the exception rather than the rule, and has been for many, many years. Lendl, Becker and Sampras all swung over 380, and although average swing weights for top pros may be declining somewhat these days, specs collected by reliable sources at tournaments suggest that that decline might be pretty modest. There are still many players swinging 380+: Djokovic, Gasquet, Soderling, Murray, etc.



Of course it is! Look at the list linked above, as well as the other spec logs Raven has collected; there are plenty of women players, quite slender ones at that, swinging around 350.

Ivanovic: 348
Kirilenko: 349
S. Williams: 354
V. Williams: 380!
Henin (5'6"!): 355

Cheers for the info dude much appreciated! The Greg Raven website is awesome and most of all is extremely believable since it is his own business and therefore valid. I wish all posters that posted numbers could provide solid proof like this haha. After all these responses I'm very tempted to increase the weight and swingweight of my racket that I intend to buy after my ACL surgery.

 

[Fuji]

Doesn't the high SWs deteriorate your arm?

What do you mean? 345ish isn't that high at all. It doesn't bother my arm. I have my prostock prestige mids at around 380ish right now and they aren't bad either. They are like 13.5oz but 12points headlight. It swings smoothly and doesn't really tire out my arm at all. Don't forget that my strokes are very smooth and very flat however, so I don't really have a lot going on technique wise that can go wrong. If you have hitches or oddities in your stroke, you're going to notice high swingweight and static weight as well.

-Fuji

 

[Fuji]

What the hell lol that is beastly. That makes me want to try out a heavier racket now. I think I've gotten used to the way retail play's and a heavier racket could be just what I need to ignite an advancement in my game haha.

Definitely! His is above average of course, but he has the smoothest strokes I've ever seen in person. It's just ridiculous since he has his specs basically perfected for his game. Crazy cool stuff.

-Fuji

 

[Overdrive]

What do you mean? 345ish isn't that high at all. It doesn't bother my arm. I have my prostock prestige mids at around 380ish right now and they aren't bad either. They are like 13.5oz but 12points headlight. It swings smoothly and doesn't really tire out my arm at all. Don't forget that my strokes are very smooth and very flat however, so I don't really have a lot going on technique wise that can go wrong. If you have hitches or oddities in your stroke, you're going to notice high swingweight and static weight as well.

-Fuji

GOAT of swing weights.

 

[Fuji]

GOAT of swing weights.

Hahaha oh yes.

The thing is, obviously you hit a point of diminishing returns with swing weight, and it's most noticeable on serves. Once you hit a certain swingweight you start to decelerate on your service motion and begin to lose spin and pace. Like I can hit monstrous bombs with a swingweight of around 400, but I just cannot generate enough racket head speed to hit a half decent kicker that high. In the 380s I still can generate enough torque to hit a good twist which is the trade off. In the 340s I get insane whip and racket head speed in comparison to the 380s, so IMO my serve is best rounded around 350 +/- 10.

They key is just finding on what works best for you. Since my serve basically makes or breaks my game I need to optimize that stroke the most, then my forehand next. My backhand or volleys don't really have to be optimized spec wise since they don't require a lot of effort in regards to the technicality of the stroke. My backhand and volleys are the simplest strokes I hit, then my forehand has a bit more going on, and the serve the most.

-Fuji

 

[HRB]

Off the top of my head I'd say strength, power, world class hand eye coordination and movement. The very ability that defines them as Pros...that's why the high swingweights...simply put...they can!