Why don't experts talk more about shortening a racquet as a possibility to get more control?

This is a revised question I first asked a customization expert:

Why don't racquet experts talk more about shortening a racquet as a possibility to get more control? The usual response I hear from most is tighten the stringbed or use poly strings.
I started playing tennis as an adult 4-5 years ago. Since I decided to play tennis regularly and started looking for a higher quality racquet, I've been seeking more control as I have very little issue generating my own power.
After trying more than a bunch of racquets and strings over these years, I got the courage to experiment, as others have done, with a shorter length racquet. I didn't want to cut any of my current racquets as this was the first attempt, so I bought an inexpensive 26" junior racquet. It's very light in stock form, but I knew after a few hits with it that I should have tried a shorter racquet sooner. I have since added weight (at about 12 oz now, and 11 points head light) for stability and comfort, and I play much better. I now have the confidence to take a full swing and feel like I can actually develop my game far better than before. Far less balls go long, and if a ball does, I can figure out what to do better on court.
Furthermore, my arm is feeling better. Serving has been far less stressful on my shoulder, and my elbow is nagging me less and less. I've heard a few of your podcasts, and it's evident you care about the health of players, especially when it comes to polyester, and which is why I'm asking you first.
I know there's a stigma to shorter racquets. I experienced it when I considered a "junior" racquet in my own mind and with others. Initially, I felt a little strange, wimpy maybe, walking around with a junior racquet, even with the added weight on the court. Also, I took different racquet (26.5") to my stringer today, and, basically, he was laughing at the idea. Sometimes, for better or worse, marketing really works i guess?!
Nevertheless, the results are undeniable to me. And with the added benefit of my arm getting better, I don't see myself using a 27" racquet anytime soon as my top choice. Time is needed to adjust, and I don't have the reach I once had, but gains far out weigh these changes. FYI, I don't
know where I'll land on length, but somewhere just beyond 26" is my guess at the moment.
Now considering this topic, I think we can keep racquet and string companies aside at the moment too? To me, a customizer that uses this option as a possible solution could, of example, give someone a shorter racquet to try before cutting a racquet. Or take off the buttcap, and make a faux buttcap at the base in order for a client to get an idea of how it would play. Yet, basically, I only hear about this option on the internet deep in a tennis forum.
I see this as a clear, relatively simple, and safe solution that is under-utilized to gain more control. What's going on? What are your thoughts?

Thanks in advance!
 

jmacdaununder2

Hall of Fame
While shorter racquets are great for juniors and/or players that aren’t strong enough or have the preparation to use standard length or longer models, and they are certainly beneficial in terms of torque reduction, the resultant loss of leverage and power, particularly on serve, no doubt limits their wider adoption, more than marketing per se.
 

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
You can always grip it higher up.
This is what I do. If I'm at the net i'll choke up a bit to get more maneuverability but that way it still allows me to move my grip down and get reach if I need it. Similarly if I'm blocking back strong serves, choking up gives me some added control and maneuverability. Then when i'm in a rally and want power and spin, the leverage is there by sliding my grip down.

With a short frame, what you see is what you get. You gain control but you can't add reach back for stretched out shots and serves.
 

HBK4life

Semi-Pro
I have done it with old rackets. Didn’t really notice a difference. More dense string pattern is what I would do.
 
While shorter racquets are great for juniors and/or players that aren’t strong enough or have the preparation to use standard length or longer models, and they are certainly beneficial in terms of torque reduction, the resultant loss of leverage and power, particularly on serve, no doubt limits their wider adoption, more than marketing per se.
First, just so it's clear, I'm speaking about racquet techs, experts, stringers, etc. that are offering solutions and not about companies or marketers. It seems companies tried various lengths in years past, but do so far less today.

And no, it's not for everyone. If my arm could handle a poly, maybe I would have never performed the experiment. What I got was less power and more comfort. I very well could be wrong, but I do think there are others that want this as well.

Another way to consider this is there are so many different bodies, yet, basically, 27" is supposed to be good for most adults? 5'2" or 6'2", 135lbs or 235lbs people should use the same length?
 
Last edited:
This is what I do. If I'm at the net i'll choke up a bit to get more maneuverability but that way it still allows me to move my grip down and get reach if I need it. Similarly if I'm blocking back strong serves, choking up gives me some added control and maneuverability. Then when i'm in a rally and want power and spin, the leverage is there by sliding my grip down.

With a short frame, what you see is what you get. You gain control but you can't add reach back for stretched out shots and serves.
Very good. Then are you suggesting that if someone wants less power from the baseline with their rally ball, you would recommend to choke up there too?

Choking up to volley and block back shots is good, but not so much on full swings IME.
 

lim

Semi-Pro
Shot in the dark but..probably because cutting your handle down is irreversible? You can always cut your strings out or peel lead off if the SW is too high but once your hairpin is cut down you're stuck with that and good luck selling it if all goes south
 
Shot in the dark but..probably because cutting your handle down is irreversible? You can always cut your strings out or peel lead off if the SW is too high but once your hairpin is cut down you're stuck with that and good luck selling it if all goes south
I've already addressed this, so cutting the racquet wouldn't be the first test. After a first or multiple less expensive tests and alterations, the person looking for a change would then decide if it's worth it or not.
 

golden chicken

Hall of Fame
I'm curious what the stiffness of your frame is. I was able to track down my first racket on the big auction site and put it on an RDC. It was a $20 racket from a box store. It has a stiffness rating of 48! Combined with its light weight, oversize head, and synthetic gut strings, it's quite comfortable to play with and very easy to swing.

As far as temporarily modifying a racket to see if a shorter length would work for you, perhaps get an extra buttcap and cut the bottom out of it. Then you can slide it up or down the handle without cutting the hairpin. Just tape it in place and wrap your grip over it. Then you can grip it the same as you always do, but it'll be further up the handle.
 
I'm curious what the stiffness of your frame is. I was able to track down my first racket on the big auction site and put it on an RDC. It was a $20 racket from a box store. It has a stiffness rating of 48! Combined with its light weight, oversize head, and synthetic gut strings, it's quite comfortable to play with and very easy to swing.

As far as temporarily modifying a racket to see if a shorter length would work for you, perhaps get an extra buttcap and cut the bottom out of it. Then you can slide it up or down the handle without cutting the hairpin. Just tape it in place and wrap your grip over it. Then you can grip it the same as you always do, but it'll be further up the handle.
I bought a Prince Air Response 26" on the same auction site. I couldn't find a stiffness rating online, but I went ahead anyway since it was about $20 and had a 16x18 string pattern, which I may seem to like now too. It didn't seem overly stiff when placing it on a table and pressing the throat, but it sends a lot of vibrations to my arm without the added weight. There's copper, titanium, and tungsten in the racquet which may or may not explain the vibrations.

I like your idea about the buttcap, so thanks for sharing that option too!
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
I'm curious what the stiffness of your frame is. I was able to track down my first racket on the big auction site and put it on an RDC. It was a $20 racket from a box store. It has a stiffness rating of 48! Combined with its light weight, oversize head, and synthetic gut strings, it's quite comfortable to play with and very easy to swing.

As far as temporarily modifying a racket to see if a shorter length would work for you, perhaps get an extra buttcap and cut the bottom out of it. Then you can slide it up or down the handle without cutting the hairpin. Just tape it in place and wrap your grip over it. Then you can grip it the same as you always do, but it'll be further up the handle.
I’ve done this often, and this approach in general doesn’t give as nice and solid a result as a cutdown frame. That’s because the extra weight sticking out beyond the new buttcap matters - it must be balanced by additional weight elsewhere on the frame.

I played 26.5 to 26.75” frames for about a 10-year period. The shorter frames abolutely give better control on volleys, blocked returns, slices, touch shots, lobs, and any other shots hit with short strokes. The shorter frames are also extremely elbow comfy. My level fluctuated between 4.5 and 5.0 during that time.

The down side to going short is that it’s difficult to serve offensively. And groundstrokes on both wings must be hit with more leg drive to deliver good weight transfer when you want to hit for power, which requires excellent footwork and uses more energy.

I am back up to 27.25” now, and finding good success with the advantages of easier power on serves and groundies. But I still have a soft spot for shorter frames.
 
I’ve done this often, and this approach in general doesn’t give as nice and solid a result as a cutdown frame. That’s because the extra weight sticking out beyond the new buttcap matters - it must be balanced by additional weight elsewhere on the frame.

I played 26.5 to 26.75” frames for about a 10-year period. The shorter frames abolutely give better control on volleys, blocked returns, slices, touch shots, lobs, and any other shots hit with short strokes. The shorter frames are also extremely elbow comfy. My level fluctuated between 4.5 and 5.0 during that time.

The down side to going short is that it’s difficult to serve offensively. And groundstrokes on both wings must be hit with more leg drive to deliver good weight transfer when you want to hit for power, which requires excellent footwork and uses more energy.

I am back up to 27.25” now, and finding good success with the advantages of easier power on serves and groundies. But I still have a soft spot for shorter frames.
What inspired you try a shorter frame? How long ago was this?
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
What inspired you try a shorter frame? How long ago was this?
I grew up in high school and through my 20s playing a S&V style that was heavily reliant on having a dominating heavy spin serve (a la Edberg and Rafter). Even though I was a 5.0 player, my self-taught forehand was very weak (basically no better form wise than a typically 3.5 forehand).

When I hit my 30s, my serve reliability started to decline because the huge serve of my youth was built around getting power and height angle by jumping a foot off the ground and landing 6 feet inside the court (a la Battistone). As I got older, the jump serve was more likely to result in knee tendinitis and pulled calf muscles than service winners. And S&V-ing without a huge serve is just another way to lose fast. I started losing to guys I used to beat easily.

I’m a competitive guy, and I really hate losing. So I had to reinvent my style of play in order to find a way to win consistently again. I still had set of speedy wheels, so I transformed myself from an offensive quick-strike player into a defensive-minded counterpuncher.

With my new defense-based style, I kept tweaking my racquet choices to enhance my control. Especially, I looked for ways to cover up for my weak chicken-wing forehand. This led me to shortened frames. After several years of sitting on the fence going back and forth between shorties and standard, I went all in on the shorties. I also went all in on slicing every forehand return. With these changes, my return game success rate went up a lot. I was compromising my service game a bit, but now my confidence in my game was based on the ability to defend well and keep the ball in play against any type of attack. The shorties really helped my forehand passing shot and lob depth accuracy, as well as my ability to volley confidently on my counterattack chances.

Today, after using the COVID break to experiment, I’m going longer again and playing a more varied style. But now my forehand is much-improved, partly because my shorty phase helped improve my poor technique like training wheels on a bicycle.
 
I grew up in high school and through my 20s playing a S&V style that was heavily reliant on having a dominating heavy spin serve (a la Edberg and Rafter). Even though I was a 5.0 player, my self-taught forehand was very weak (basically no better form wise than a typically 3.5 forehand).

When I hit my 30s, my serve reliability started to decline because the huge serve of my youth was built around getting power and height angle by jumping a foot off the ground and landing 6 feet inside the court (a la Battistone). As I got older, the jump serve was more likely to result in knee tendinitis and pulled calf muscles than service winners. And S&V-ing without a huge serve is just another way to lose fast. I started losing to guys I used to beat easily.

I’m a competitive guy, and I really hate losing. So I had to reinvent my style of play in order to find a way to win consistently again. I still had set of speedy wheels, so I transformed myself from an offensive quick-strike player into a defensive-minded counterpuncher.

With my new defense-based style, I kept tweaking my racquet choices to enhance my control. Especially, I looked for ways to cover up for my weak chicken-wing forehand. This led me to shortened frames. After several years of sitting on the fence going back and forth between shorties and standard, I went all in on the shorties. I also went all in on slicing every forehand return. With these changes, my return game success rate went up a lot. I was compromising my service game a bit, but now my confidence in my game was based on the ability to defend well and keep the ball in play against any type of attack. The shorties really helped my forehand passing shot and lob depth accuracy, as well as my ability to volley confidently on my counterattack chances.

Today, after using the COVID break to experiment, I’m going longer again and playing a more varied style. But now my forehand is much-improved, partly because my shorty phase helped improve my poor technique like training wheels on a bicycle.
I know what you mean about the training wheels. Part of my decision to try a shorter racquet was thinking if younger players use them to develop, maybe it would help me as well. While hitting, I could tell right away that I can develop better form since more of my body is required.
 

graycrait

Hall of Fame
@matchpointread , Unless you're young and/or financially challenged get a hacksaw, a small compressor, yard stick that is in inches and mm, kitchen scale in grams and ounces, and a narrow crown stapler. You might want to get some Blue Tac and lead tape too. I've chopped so many rackets from 28" and on down to nearly 26" it is not probably considered "sane." But I had fun. Now I know what I didn't know before hand. Don't buy a balance beam, just use the straight edge of a table to measure balance. There is no "majick" formula that someone else will be able to tell you. Sure there those who think they can, but ultimately it is you who needs to decide.

Frankly, if I could order rackets I would just get them in 27&3/8" no matter the weight, balance, headsize, stiffness, swingweight. Even better would be all rackets come as a handle blank 29", with adjustable pallets, hairpin lengths, grips etc. Instead some great tennis marketing gurus have divined that all tennis players should use 27" rackets (with a few exceptions), when in fact 27&3/8" is the perfect mass market racket length:)
 

Louis33

Rookie
I think at a lower level having a shorter racquet might help players with consistency and accuracy but as you continue to improve and the game gets quicker it very likely will turn into a liability on serve and groundstrokes.
 

jxs653

Semi-Pro
Tennis racquet longer than 29 inches is illegal, and as far as I know there is no rule for limiting how far it can get short. This seems to show going short is disadvantage than advantage.
 

SinneGOAT

Professional
This is a revised question I first asked a customization expert:

Why don't racquet experts talk more about shortening a racquet as a possibility to get more control? The usual response I hear from most is tighten the stringbed or use poly strings.
I started playing tennis as an adult 4-5 years ago. Since I decided to play tennis regularly and started looking for a higher quality racquet, I've been seeking more control as I have very little issue generating my own power.
After trying more than a bunch of racquets and strings over these years, I got the courage to experiment, as others have done, with a shorter length racquet. I didn't want to cut any of my current racquets as this was the first attempt, so I bought an inexpensive 26" junior racquet. It's very light in stock form, but I knew after a few hits with it that I should have tried a shorter racquet sooner. I have since added weight (at about 12 oz now, and 11 points head light) for stability and comfort, and I play much better. I now have the confidence to take a full swing and feel like I can actually develop my game far better than before. Far less balls go long, and if a ball does, I can figure out what to do better on court.
Furthermore, my arm is feeling better. Serving has been far less stressful on my shoulder, and my elbow is nagging me less and less. I've heard a few of your podcasts, and it's evident you care about the health of players, especially when it comes to polyester, and which is why I'm asking you first.
I know there's a stigma to shorter racquets. I experienced it when I considered a "junior" racquet in my own mind and with others. Initially, I felt a little strange, wimpy maybe, walking around with a junior racquet, even with the added weight on the court. Also, I took different racquet (26.5") to my stringer today, and, basically, he was laughing at the idea. Sometimes, for better or worse, marketing really works i guess?!
Nevertheless, the results are undeniable to me. And with the added benefit of my arm getting better, I don't see myself using a 27" racquet anytime soon as my top choice. Time is needed to adjust, and I don't have the reach I once had, but gains far out weigh these changes. FYI, I don't
know where I'll land on length, but somewhere just beyond 26" is my guess at the moment.
Now considering this topic, I think we can keep racquet and string companies aside at the moment too? To me, a customizer that uses this option as a possible solution could, of example, give someone a shorter racquet to try before cutting a racquet. Or take off the buttcap, and make a faux buttcap at the base in order for a client to get an idea of how it would play. Yet, basically, I only hear about this option on the internet deep in a tennis forum.
I see this as a clear, relatively simple, and safe solution that is under-utilized to gain more control. What's going on? What are your thoughts?

Thanks in advance!
Because it would absolutely decimate your serve :-D Imagine serving with a 26 inch kids racquet, much harder than the standard 27 for anybody under 5’10.
 

Lorenn

Rookie
I just think most options are easier and likely effective. Changing tension/strings would fix most control issues. If not that then maybe a denser string pattern...If not that then denser string pattern with control oriented strings. Low powered racquets. Personally I find a wide range of racquets playable and adjust my swing to how the racquet plays...versus searching for a racquet that adapts to me.
 

First3Shots

New User
Good post. The fact that we’ve settled on 27 as the magical length for all adults makes no sense. For all of you saying that longer is better, why not 28? 29? The best length is going to vary for everyone. I can only guess that 27 was settled on because manufacturers want to simplify their product lines.

One need only look at baseball to see how nonsensical it is. Professional players use bats that vary dramatically in length. Various lengths are also available to consumers. What is the relevant difference?
 
Last edited:

Lorenn

Rookie
Good post. The fact that we’ve settled on 27 as the magical length for all adults makes no sense. Why not 28? 29? The best length is going to vary for everyone. I can only guess it is because manufacturers want to simplify their product lines.

One need only look at baseball to see how nonsensical it is. Professional players use bats that vary dramatically in length. Various lengths are also available to consumers. What is the relevant difference?
They make longer racquets up to 29 inches.(assuming you care about regulations) SO the standard range is 27-29. You can get smaller if you are willing to use a Junior racquet, some of which are reasonably quality. The issue is the cost of having five grip sizes and different lengths as standard in a Retail store is the main issue. If you really need a extra length racquet you can buy a extended model or have most racquets extended slightly.
 
I grew up in high school and through my 20s playing a S&V style that was heavily reliant on having a dominating heavy spin serve (a la Edberg and Rafter). Even though I was a 5.0 player, my self-taught forehand was very weak (basically no better form wise than a typically 3.5 forehand).

When I hit my 30s, my serve reliability started to decline because the huge serve of my youth was built around getting power and height angle by jumping a foot off the ground and landing 6 feet inside the court (a la Battistone). As I got older, the jump serve was more likely to result in knee tendinitis and pulled calf muscles than service winners. And S&V-ing without a huge serve is just another way to lose fast. I started losing to guys I used to beat easily.

I’m a competitive guy, and I really hate losing. So I had to reinvent my style of play in order to find a way to win consistently again. I still had set of speedy wheels, so I transformed myself from an offensive quick-strike player into a defensive-minded counterpuncher.

With my new defense-based style, I kept tweaking my racquet choices to enhance my control. Especially, I looked for ways to cover up for my weak chicken-wing forehand. This led me to shortened frames. After several years of sitting on the fence going back and forth between shorties and standard, I went all in on the shorties. I also went all in on slicing every forehand return. With these changes, my return game success rate went up a lot. I was compromising my service game a bit, but now my confidence in my game was based on the ability to defend well and keep the ball in play against any type of attack. The shorties really helped my forehand passing shot and lob depth accuracy, as well as my ability to volley confidently on my counterattack chances.

Today, after using the COVID break to experiment, I’m going longer again and playing a more varied style. But now my forehand is much-improved, partly because my shorty phase helped improve my poor technique like training wheels on a bicycle.
Reposting because I didn't "reply" to the message:

And how did you know that a shorter racquet was even an option? Did you know anyone that did something similar?
 

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
Very good. Then are you suggesting that if someone wants less power from the baseline with their rally ball, you would recommend to choke up there too?

Choking up to volley and block back shots is good, but not so much on full swings IME.
If you are already compromising power for control, Choked up full swings shouldn't be all that different than a shorter frame. I do it all the time for golf if I want to take 5 yds off my iron distance.

I can see an issue if you like to hold a racket with the butt cap in the palm of your hand, but that's more a personal issue than a technical one.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
How did you extend your UTs up to 27.25"? XTP buttcap?
No. I just use a 1/4” spacer (from one of my 40 or so cutdown frames). The type of Wilson buttcap on the UT has a larger radius lip. This lip is useful for extending, because I can use 2”-wide stretchy transparent packing tape and wrap it tightly around the handle and buttcap a few times. The lip provides a big enough feature for the tape to grab with a mechanical lock, so that the buttcap can’t slide outward on a serve and will stay securely.
 
They make longer racquets up to 29 inches.(assuming you care about regulations) SO the standard range is 27-29. You can get smaller if you are willing to use a Junior racquet, some of which are reasonably quality. The issue is the cost of having five grip sizes and different lengths as standard in a Retail store is the main issue. If you really need a extra length racquet you can buy a extended model or have most racquets extended slightly.
Manufacturing and retailers do not directly relate to my original question, but the point from first3shots is addressing more of the mindset of those involved in tennis as a whole IMO.

That standard mindset when it comes to length is more based on age in tennis than anything else.

IMO, it's a pretty rigid way of thinking and I'm surprised experts and techs, not marketers, don't mention length change as a possibility.
 
@matchpointread , Unless you're young and/or financially challenged get a hacksaw, a small compressor, yard stick that is in inches and mm, kitchen scale in grams and ounces, and a narrow crown stapler. You might want to get some Blue Tac and lead tape too. I've chopped so many rackets from 28" and on down to nearly 26" it is not probably considered "sane." But I had fun. Now I know what I didn't know before hand. Don't buy a balance beam, just use the straight edge of a table to measure balance. There is no "majick" formula that someone else will be able to tell you. Sure there those who think they can, but ultimately it is you who needs to decide.

Frankly, if I could order rackets I would just get them in 27&3/8" no matter the weight, balance, headsize, stiffness, swingweight. Even better would be all rackets come as a handle blank 29", with adjustable pallets, hairpin lengths, grips etc. Instead some great tennis marketing gurus have divined that all tennis players should use 27" rackets (with a few exceptions), when in fact 27&3/8" is the perfect mass market racket length:)
Since you addressed me directly, I'll say you didn't really respond to my question.

Said in a different way, why don't people in tennis, especially techs and experts, talk more about changing racquet length as an option?

If I wasn't tinkering and researching on this forum, I would have probably never had tried it.
 
There is no logical explanation. People are fixated on static weight, swing weight, twist weight, beam size, grip size, head size, stiffness, etc., but just blindly accept 27. It makes no sense.
The old ways seem pretty firm in most people's minds. But what surprises me is the people that could and "should" inform players, techs and experts, basically don't bring it up.

I've been trying do get more control for years with racquets and strings. I'm getting over thinking I should have been informed earlier, to now hoping getting the idea out more could help others with the same issue sooner.
 

HBK4life

Semi-Pro
What made you consider trying the experiment? How did you get the idea? What were you trying to achieve?

Btw, my experience was far different, and, yet I'm glad to know what you thought of yours. I think different tastes make tennis more interesting.
I read it somewhere maybe a blog. Maybe hear. Thought I’d try. I still have the racket.
 

graycrait

Hall of Fame
@matchpointread , Bottom line up front: I have never heard someone immediately say to another adult player, "Eureka! All you need is a racket shorter than 27." I have also never heard, "All you need is a racket longer than 27." Maybe you could get a clear answer from a true expert in racket customization like Roman Prokes at R P N Y in New York.

I see you have already looked at the short racket thread.

As noted in the short racket thread I have cut a few rackets below 27." For me any gain was short term and also involved worsening my serve. But it was fun finding out what I didn't know beforehand. Every racket I cut shorter than 27" is gone now. I wonder why? I know I didn't sell any.
 

Lorenn

Rookie
Manufacturing and retailers do not directly relate to my original question, but the point from first3shots is addressing more of the mindset of those involved in tennis as a whole IMO.

That standard mindset when it comes to length is more based on age in tennis than anything else.

IMO, it's a pretty rigid way of thinking and I'm surprised experts and techs, not marketers, don't mention length change as a possibility.
Thread and thoughts kinda flow how they flow...

There is a limit on how many different racquets can be stocked. You therefore pick a "best size". Most coaches/players will discuss what is on the shelves. Highest quality racquets tend to be in the 27-28 inch range. As long as I have been playing tennis players use longer racquets to increase power...The reverse is always implied. The question is it better to use a smaller racquet to gain control or use a less powerful racquet. How much control do you need? Anyways maybe you can invent a racquet design that allows one to change the Pallet easily to change size up or down. This will counter the stock issue. If a majority of players wanted adult twenty six inch premium frames they would exist. I never have had a player saying they need more control then existing low powered racquets. Those who want such frames can buy a 26 inch racquet or cut down whatever racquet they buy. Just doesn't seem to be much demand.
 
@matchpointread , Bottom line up front: I have never heard someone immediately say to another adult player, "Eureka! All you need is a racket shorter than 27." I have also never heard, "All you need is a racket longer than 27." Maybe you could get a clear answer from a true expert in racket customization like Roman Prokes at R P N Y in New York.
I'll just consider myself trolled here, and...
 
@matchpointread ,

As noted in the short racket thread I have cut a few rackets below 27." For me any gain was short term and also involved worsening my serve. But it was fun finding out what I didn't know beforehand. Every racket I cut shorter than 27" is gone now. I wonder why? I know I didn't sell any.
Thanks for sharing your personal experience
 

Crocodile

Legend
I don’t think one should cut down a racquet to make it shorter because the way it was balanced, sound harmonised and flex engineered was for its intended length. If you make it shorter you stuff it all up.
Some pros like Brenda Shultz had their’’s specially made as a pro stock shorter and that’s the way to go. TW had one of her frames for sale in the vintage section a while ago and it was a heavy stick as well.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
I don’t think one should cut down a racquet to make it shorter because the way it was balanced, sound harmonised and flex engineered was for its intended length. If you make it shorter you stuff it all up.
Some pros like Brenda Shultz had their’’s specially made as a pro stock shorter and that’s the way to go. TW had one of her frames for sale in the vintage section a while ago and it was a heavy stick as well.
You are giving too much credit to the engineers who design the racquets!
 
Top