The Pro Shop by Justin diFeliciantonio - Monday Mailbag: Traditional Frames, Manufacturing Variances
TENNIS.com
Home       About Justin diFeliciantonio       Contact        RSS Categories       Archive
Monday Mailbag: Traditional Frames, Manufacturing Variances 02/07/2012 - 11:33 AM

TENNIS.com gear editor Justin diFeliciantonio and his technical advisers answer your equipment questions every Monday in the Mailbag. Click here to send in a question of your own.

*****

201201260418155354727-p2@stats_comHi. I would like to ask: Should I get the Wilson Pro Staff BLX Six.One Tour 90? I'm 15 years old, and have just started to play tennis. I know you will say it's got a small head, and is too difficult to use. But I have good hand-eye coordination and timing from playing cricket for years. Also you will probably say it's too heavy. But I'm an active 15-year-old who is quite strong and fit. Can you recommend that I use that racquet?—Adam

Sorry to say, Adam, but I can't advise you to buy the Pro Staff Six.One 90 BLX if you're just starting to learn. Roger Federer may make it look easy to swing, but it's an extremely difficult racquet to use, because of, like you said, its heavy weight and inordinately small head size. Even experienced players have trouble employing it. I'm 24 years old, was on the varsity tennis team in college, and have played my whole life, and still the Six.One 90 is far too difficult for me to use; when out of position with it, I can't get near enough pace and depth on the ball. Even the majority of professional players choose to use a racquet with a bigger and more forgiving head size. Look, for instance, at the ATP Top 20; pretty much all the guys, with the exception of Federer, use racquets with head sizes that are between 95 and 100 sq. in. (612 and 645 sq. cm.).

Long story short: If you’re a good athlete who’s just starting out, I’d recommend that you try out a bunch of different “tweeners”: racquets that blend the playing characteristics of beginner and intermediate sticks—which typically feature 10-11 ounce weights, 100+ sq. in. head sizes, even to head-heavy balances, and a relatively wide beam—with those of advanced players’ sticks, which tend to be heavier, more head-light, and have thinner beam widths.

*****

Interesting take on the changes to Rafa's racquet. While I appreciate the help understanding the concept of swingweight, one question remains: How can two racquets with identical lengths, weights, and balance points have different swingweights? A quick scan through any of the online retailers’ racquet specifications shows plenty of variety in swingweight between otherwise identical racquets.—Jared

Good question, Jared. While it may seem counterintuitive, two racquets with identical lengths, weights, and balance points can have different swingweights and thus feel totally different when swung. Why is this?

First, remember that a racquet’s swingweight depends on two variables: (1) mass and (2) how that mass is distributed throughout the racquet. Now, let’s consider the following example. Say we want to add 20 grams of additional mass to a 280 gram, evenly balanced, 27-inch racquet. Of course, simply adding those 20 grams to the racquet, regardless of where it’s placed, will make the stick feel heavier to swing.

But how much heavier will depend on how that weight is divvied up and distributed along the shaft. If we take those 20 grams and place them equidistant from both ends: the racquet will be 300 grams, the balance point will remain even, and the swingweight will increase from 287 kgcm2 to 299 kgcm2. On the other hand, if we place 10 grams on each end of the racquet: the racquet will still be 300 grams, the balance point will still remain even, but the swingweight will increase from 287 kgcm2 to 324 kgcm2. The second racquet, insofar as it has a higher swingweight, will feel heavier to swing.

Why is this the case? Why does the swingweight increase more for the latter racquet? Rod Cross and Crawford Lindsey, in Technical Tennis, offer the following explanation:

“When you swing a rod or a racquet, you rotate it about a point near the handle end. That means the tip will travel faster than the handle. It also means that if you add 20 grams at the tip, then the extra 20 grams will travel faster than if you put it at the handle end. To accelerate the 20 grams faster, you have to push harder on the handle. The 20 grams will feel heaviest at the tip, lightest at the hand, and in between in the middle of the racquet.” 

One more thing to keep in mind, as you compare the specifications on retailers’ websites, is that there are small variances in racquet manufacturing—they don’t all come out of the factory the same. Buying two sticks of the same exact make and model, in other words, does not guarantee that they will have the same weight, balance, and swingweight. To compensate for such manufacturing variances, many professionals pay qualified racquet technicians to strategically add weight in order to match all of their racquets to the weight, balance, and swingweight they prefer.

*****

As an older player (64), I resist the current wisdom that racquet technology has improved. It may have improved for—or even created—the extreme-topspin, high -acquet-head-speed game that’s taught today. But there are few racquets made for us traditional players anymore. I played with the Wilson Pro Staff 6.0 95 for years. When it was discontinued, I searched for a racquet with similar stats and playing characteristics, and settled on the Tecnifibre TFight 335. Now that the TFight 335 has been discontinued, I am searching again. What did these rackets offer me? Comfort, control, and injury prevention. I’ve tried lighter, 100 square inch frames as I’ve gotten older. But I'll gladly sacrifice power for the comfort and control of a more traditional frame. Roger D. Miller

I wouldn’t say, Roger, that racquet technology hasn’t improved; today’s graphite racquets are certainly made (and play) better than the graphite models released, say, ten years ago. But it’s true that most of the major racquet manufacturers have, in recent years, released fewer so-called “traditional” frames—i.e., heavily-weighted sticks with head-light balances and relatively flexible beams—in favor of racquets with lighter weights, more even balances, and stiffer beams. And it’s likely, as you suggest, that these modern racquets have indeed improved the game for today’s power baseliners; easier to whip around and with the weight distributed more toward the frames’ tip, these racquets are a great match for fast-swinging baseliners who, because of their extreme western grips, make contact with the ball in the upper regions of the stringbed.

That’s not to say, however, that manufacturers have totally forgotten about players with all-court games and classic grips. While the Wilson Pro Staff 6.0 95 was indeed discontinued some years back, its nephew, the new Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 95 BLX, retains many traditional playing characteristics: a head-light profile (7 points HL, strung) with a relatively flexible construction (18 mm beam width). While it may feel a little light for your liking (11.5 ounces, strung), you could easily add weight in the form of lead tape to the hoop and/or handle, depending on what you want to the stick’s final balance to be. Also check out some of Technifibre’s new TFight racquets, specifically the TFight 325 VO2Max. It’s heavy (nearly 12 ounces, strung) and head-light, and could also be easily customized with a few strips of lead tape.

*****

Hi, I really enjoy reading the gear articles on the website and am disappointed there haven't been any recently. Any chance of a new one soon?—Earl

Sorry, Earl, for the dearth of gear commentary in recent weeks. The editors and I at TENNIS have been working hard to review over thirty new racquets for our upcoming spring gear guide, which will debut, in print as well as online, in early April. Look for new gear articles to appear regularly again starting next week. Thanks again for reading.


 
36
Comments

1 2     Next >>

Posted by Mr. Truth 02/07/2012 at 02:10 AM

Dude....all my life I have been looking for someone who has more letter in their last name than me(mine has 14). And you, Justin....you have 15....

What a glorious day. Congratulations on your first post my friend.

Posted by Fmplayer 02/07/2012 at 02:17 AM

Sorry but in the answer to Jared, you made a huge mistake. Swingweight depends not only on length, balance and weight. It is also a matter of mass distribution. Say your racquet is 27 inches long and its mass of 300 g is located right in the middle (it's not realistic but it helps understand). The balance will be even. Take another racquet in which the mass of 300g is equally distributed at the tip and at the bottom (150 g each). The weight, the length and the balance are the same in both cases, but the second racquet will have a much more bigger swingweight. See mathematic formulas for more information.
So 2 racquets from different manufacturers can have different swingweights, all other specs beeing equal.
Industrial variability lies in: first, the overal mass (average +- 10g around the typical value, about 3%) and second, the distribution. Pros racquets are made from standard frames, which are first measured (weight, balance, swingweight) and then lead is added either by the manufacturer or by a third party technician, such as Priority One or Roman Prokes's shop in NY. The only rule is that you can only match two racquets by adding weight, so you must first buy 2 lighter racquets of the same model, than add weight to make them similar. The procedure is explained on the Tennis Warehouse University website.

Posted by Boris_ 02/07/2012 at 03:51 AM

In my opinion, the Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 90 BLX is an aberration, even for Roger Federer.
Roger did not win all his grand slams thanks to this racket but despite this racket !
The point is that Roger is totally convinced that he plays better with this racket because he feels a lot of control.
It is true provided he is perfectly on position to hit the ball. Which is the case against many players on the tour. But not vs Rafa, Djoko or Murray who can hit the ball very hard and/or with topspin on his backhand.
For sure, Roger should have changed racket a long time ago to get more power and spin.
His tactic at the last australian open vs Rafa was good: hitting the ball very early after rebound on his backhand. But it would have been much more easy and effective with a bigger frame.
Moreover, his racket is too heavy which makes it difficult to handle and does not add much power. As a matter of fact, racket's power is provided by the total lenght of the strings. The more surface of string there is, the more power there is. And it also reduces shanking.

Posted by Steven Finch 02/07/2012 at 04:45 AM

Here is another great view for the Pro Staff Six One BLX 90 - http://thetennistimes.com/wilson-2012-tennis-racket-prostaff-six-one-blx-90/

Posted by senshu 02/07/2012 at 05:57 AM

Luckily for some of those old codgers who just can't let go of the Prostaff (I know a few personally), tennis warehouse now sells the original 6.0.

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpage-W6085.html

A perfect choice for those unwilling to adjust to the newer racquets.

Posted by D 02/07/2012 at 06:11 AM

I was going to say the same thing as Fmplayer: identical balance points do not equate to the same distribution of mass. Distribution of mass is a continuous value, as opposed to discreet (like a balance point is). The mathematics of this are simple (in theory), I'll just remind everyone of the "lever rule" ;)

Posted by D 02/07/2012 at 07:00 AM

Pardon my ignorance of English, "level rule" I referred to is apparently "the law of the lever" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lever#Law_of_the_lever).

Posted by nastase 02/07/2012 at 07:34 AM

"two racquets with identical lengths, weights, and balance points will have identical swingweights" -- WRONG!!!!

Posted by John 02/07/2012 at 09:30 AM

I am college tennis player just pass 19. The current racket that Federer is extremly hard to use for sure. I have been always using Wilson K-Six.One 95 for 3 years. Then I switch to BLX90 version for some reason I have found the racket makes me feel putting ball where I wanted, but is much harder to use for sure, the weight of the racket makes a lot of difference. My forehand have been more misplace, while my backhand(one-hand) is getting more and more accurate, not sure why.

Posted by Game Lover 02/07/2012 at 10:53 AM

John (and Justin),

While I am in a similar position with you (having been used both 6.1.95 both Kfactor and now BLX versions for the last 3 years and only tried the 6.1.90 Kfactor and BLX), here is my two cents on the subject:

1. You are saying that the 6.1.90 is heavier then the 6.1.95 and while that is true in terms of overall weight, it may be that 6.1.90 may be easier to swing due to its lower…swing weight. Have you looked into that?

2. 6.1.95 is at the end of the line so to speak with the BLX model, b/c the new one ProStaff 6.1.95 is way lighter (similar to what the 6.1. team used to be), while the other model the Juice is also lighter and a tad longer…

3. The new 6.1.90 Pro Staff while apparently with a lower swing weight then the 6.1.90 BLX, is also less stable according to people that have tried it.

4. What players frames with a 100 sq inches are there with a similar weight to the 6.1.95 BLX?

Posted by Justin 02/07/2012 at 11:38 AM

Hello all: See above edits in the answer to Jared's question w/r/t swingweight. My apologies for quite the mental gaff. -Justin

Posted by d 02/07/2012 at 12:52 PM

does anyone know the effect of adding weight to the handle of a racquet? as I understand it, even though the weight increases, this modification doesn't add much swingweight. the balance point comes down I guess.

would all of this tend to make the racquet more or less powerful? harder or easier to swing?

the reason I ask is that I once bought a racquet from a tennis buddy and found that it played like a magic wand. I later noticed that he'd evidently gotten a very small grip size and to adjust it to his hand size, had put two grips on the racquet. the extra grip added a fair bit of weight to the handle end of the racquet - hence my question.

Posted by stari 02/07/2012 at 01:10 PM

Could someone take a look at this one?
If all of them for last 10 years or so John, Pete, Roger and Marat were able to win with small frames and different stile why small frames are not winning today??? (Roger and Andy)

Posted by QRock 02/07/2012 at 02:25 PM

FMPlayer,

While your discussion is true from a mathematical/physics point of view, it doesn't help a tennis player much because mass distribution is not the sort of data that manufacturers publish about their racquets.

So, the author essentially got the question right.

Posted by Pedro Rivas, M.D. 02/07/2012 at 03:04 PM

Adam, if you are just starting to learn, then the Federer 90 racquet is a great choice. A wooden Dunlop Maxply is even better. Don't be fooled into using a racquet that will reward you for bad preparation and bad form. Learn the correct way to play tennis because it is harder to "unlearn" what you have learned. Your bad habits will be with you for a long time. The reason the top 20 don't use it so much is because the Slams surfaces have all slowed down and made it possible for the evolution of a very physical and boring game of extreme spins. This is not the reality of the rest of the world. True form is the goal. Once you are a 4.5 or above, then you can make the switch to the larger frame if you wish.

Posted by nastase 02/07/2012 at 06:05 PM

I wholeheartedly second Dr. Rivas's position. A smaller head, heavier racquet will force you into the correct technique to achieve power and ball penetration. I am partial to head graphite edge, which can be had used for little money and plays just as well as a wilson k90.

Posted by Krakondack 02/07/2012 at 07:21 PM

I wonder if Roger knows he's been using the wrong racket all these years.

Posted by TallkissCom 02/07/2012 at 09:56 PM

My best friend ,she
just met a Tall man and they fell in
love..they met via

T'a'l'l'k'i's's'.C'o'M

------- it's where for men and women looking for companionship for
a fabulous lifestyle. It worth atry. Maybe you want to check it out :)

Posted by www.theracquetshack.com 02/07/2012 at 11:09 PM

Don't be confused by swingweight. The best example is a baseball bat. Take two identical bats. Hold one the normal way and swing it. Lots of swingweight. So much so that if you are good enough, you can hit a baseball 500 feet! Take the other bat and turn it around, holding it by the fat end. Swing it. Not very much swingweight. In fact, the best hitters in the world would not come close to being able to hit a home run with it!

Posted by Fmplayer 02/08/2012 at 02:26 AM

To d
Putting some weight at the handle just increases the overall mass and the balance (more headlight) and does not affect swt, which is measured assuming the rotation center at 10 cm from the butt cap.

To nastase
Sorry man, but that's physics. Swingweight is defined according to the aforementioned point. The more towards the tip weight is added, the more the swt increases

For those interested by this topic, just have a look at the US Racquet Stringer Association website (racquettech) in the non member section

Posted by Fmplayer 02/08/2012 at 02:48 AM

To QRock,

Of course, and they just can't do it. A racquet is a complex tube of carbon fibers and the thickness can't be exactly the same everywhere. The amount of carbon fiber used to mold the frame gives the weight plus minus a 3% variability (which is too big in my opinion: nowadays, an industrial process should be able to give a 1% adequacy). The only way to improve the specs would be to build the frame from 2 halves (maybe Prince does this but I'm not sure)
That's why you need to measure your racquet. As I mentioned, a simple procedure is described on the TWU website. And that's useful for the tennis player because it allows customization.
Personnally, I switched from a [K]Blade Tour to a Pure Drive and then to a customized Pure Drive Lite. All of my frames had a 325 kgcm2 swingweight which is my preferred value. Of course, mass reduction was about 45g and that's what I was looking for. My goal was to increase racquet head speed in order to put more spin, and the decrease in power from the [K]Blade was compensated by the increase due to the larger stringbed, and the control added by the extra spin compensates the lost due to stringed reduction.
And last but not least, I'm not a professional... Everyone can do the same

Posted by d 02/08/2012 at 09:20 AM

Fmplayer -- thanks, that what I thought might be the case. so adding weight to the handle raises overall weight, does not change swingweight, and lowers the balance point.

do you (or anyone on this board) have an opinion as to what that does to the playing characteristics of the racquet?

Posted by mario 02/08/2012 at 11:54 AM

haha. check out the tennis warehouse forums and essential tennis forums, that adam kid has been banned from them both for making tons of threads asking about the tour 90. i think he should get it and stop wasting peoples time.

Posted by www.theracquetshack.com 02/08/2012 at 11:15 PM

Anyone have any experience and/or thoughts on the inordinate rate of frame breaks on the Babolat Pure Storm Tour? I am researching this stick and am amazed at how many people seem to be breaking it in the act of normal play...

Posted by calvin 02/09/2012 at 04:59 AM

I think Federer's racket has helped him win a lot of majors. If he is going to come over the backhand on the return or hit it "flat" and not slice (chip) backhand returns he should be using a lighter and or more powerful racket. Just getting back serves against Nadal and Djokovic isn't working anymore. With that said, his serve is as good as ever and I think the weight of the racket helps. Against slower players a more control oriented racket is probably better where you have time to go on offense while against faster players a more powerful racket is better. Federer's racket may actually be a better beginner racket than a lighter less control oriented frame especially for an adult.

1 2     Next >>

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Leave a Comment



<<  Racquet Review: Dunlop Biomimetic 700 Monday Mailbag: Rafa's Racquet Redux  >>




Racket Around Gear Land
Midweek Mailbag: Junior Racquets, Hybrid Tensions, Grip Changes
Gear Talk: Janko Tipsarevic
Midweek Mailbag: Cooked Strings, Drop Weights, Gloves
Djokovic Splits with Sergio Tacchini
Racquet Science: The Inch That Changed Everything
Gear Talk: Ron Rocchi
This blog has 243 entries and 3206 comments.
More
More Video
Daily Spin