It’s kind of obvious why TW doesn’t publish info on unstrung specs. This will put most manufacturers in a really bad light since none of these “fancy” Wilsons, Babs, Head etc will meet the announced specs despite averaging 5-10 frames. So these fake strung specs with unknown string and even unknown gauge and type is a coverup. P.S. I love 18x20s, they provide more control (with predictable launch) and letting you swing fuller and faster resulting in more spin. Look at Guga hitting with Prestige Mid 89sq in (18x20) with MASSIVE amounts of spin on clays of Rolland Garros.
I've always wondered why Twarehouse never post the raw unstrung swingweight, nor do they disclose the type of strings they use to test for it. It would help consumers so much more if they did and it takes 0 effort
Yeah my feelings exactly. But I can see why they don't but it still bugs me. Hard to say what the effect of it is but I don't think the reason is "it would be too much hassle to measure these specs when we already do or easily could" There might be some sound logic, like the above comment.
You should try 2023 head gravity tour 18x20 strung in low 40s ( I use 40). This raquect is not available in US but you can get it anywhere around the world. It is stable, 305g unstrung, swing weight around 320, 100sq in. A amazing 18x20 option.
What I’ve figured out over the last month or so is that string breaking is the price of doing business. I’d rather have predictable, reliable performance and have to restring every week than constantly search for something that is more durable but is ultimately a compromise.
I agree completely. But in my case I really truly love these strings and the durability is just a happy effect of the best snapback ever seen. I suppose players who like to hit a flat ball might not love that but I have a friend who hits very well and flat and he likes it! So, that is yet to be proven.
Woops I mixed up videos with my comment but did it even go through? Anyway, I'm glad I found the strings I use now. Increased the performance I wanted and happened to give me more spin. If you're still breaking like once a week maybe give it a try. And if you like topspin I actually bet you'll be totally spoiled by the strings I mentioned. But maybe you've already heard. I wouldn't sacrifice performance for string lifespan. In my case, I get big gains in both with my strings of choice though and that's a wonderful thing.
I did a side by side comparo of Restring Zero, Wasabi Pro Hybrid and one of my old standbys: Head Lynx Tour. Zero wins the title for spinniest by a long way. Wasabi Pro was close and had a little nicer ride, as they say. Silky, almost. I think I’d break it pretty quickly if I kept using it. But I still like the response and the control I get from Lynx Tour. I break it in about 10 days and it plays well up to that point. Zero has a weird twang that bothered me. I don’t use a dampener.
Zero does like being strung a little lower! I know what you mean. My favorite combo of any of these is any of them with Wasabi X in the crosses. I agree that regular Wasabi is a little softer than Zero. I actually would be surprised if you broke any of these as soon as you might think. Wasabi and Zero are both about equally durable, mostly because that super snapback avoids the string damaging itself. It's not like the string is made to be super tough, more so less self-destructive. A point I try to get bettter at making each time I mention it and that might be the best way to say it. Let me know! I'm glad you found the spin to be of such a high bar and appreciate you trying these all and using the codes! Healthy curiousity is great :)
Thanks for your content. In the last few months I moved back to a 16x19 (Gen 3 PS) from an 18x20 TF40. Love the TF40 but wanted something that stands up against higher quality players with easier depth and spin while helping deliver more power on serve (few extra free points).
It does make perfect sense an 18x20 string pattern should have additional weight added to increase plow through and when you consider the additional control you get from an 18x20 I really have to wonder why I'm still using a 16x19!
It does! Haha what are your reasons? I was bent on 18x20 for a while mostly for the density and resistance to breaking and not thinking it was a big sacrifice in spin.
Yes, if you mean the one in Cali. Picking up a tennis home from that airport. Was my first time there. I'm not in SJ ever but I was looking at public courts and seems pretty accommodating. Might take a day in the city if it's safe to park there haha.
@@ZeroLoveTennis the HS used to have its own courts but when I revisited the school 10 years ago they had torn down the courts and replaced it with a wrestling center, odd since they never even had a wrestling team when I attended in the mis 70's - I imagine a big money alum wanted one. The discussion of spin v. drive through is critical for every player and that is the backstory to your video. Personally, I may have ad an over-reliance on spin and depth. I switched from an Eastern FHG grip to a semi-Western FH grip and it produces a safe, steady shot but it lacks sizzle. I have been watching Sampras match highlights and his electric flattish forehand is oe pf the most exciting, explosive shots in the game's history. I'm going to try reverting, at least at times, to an Eastern grip flatter forehand. And as for 18 x 20 I used a Head Prestige Mid (93 head size) from my stash list time I played I did notice less spin, less net clearance but the hitting was smooth, depth and pace were good. I think the Prestige family of rackets is often rated as one of the best rackets, alongside PS .6.0, POG, Max 200G etc
Nice! I see. For flatter shots, technique is really key but racquet is a large part of the equation. Generally, the stability or weight around the 3/9 area makes hitting flatter shots much more accessible with a trade-off on the spin. But for a while, it seems, I can increase that stability to open up flat shots without eating into my spin potential. Past that, it does diminish quickly. You could get an open pattern style racket. I think the PA98 is wonderfully versatile in it's ability to hit massive spin but also flatten out effectively when needed, even with the semi-western grip which I also use.
@@ZeroLoveTennis Stability at 3 and 9 - the Wilson PWS system.... I will add a little lead at 3 and 9 for the Prestige then, thank you. I have too many rackets to consider buying a new one, but thanks for the suggestion. The reason I want flatter, slightly higher paced shots, maybe this is true for everyone, is to prevent some balls from coming back altogether or to induce a weaker ball. I have to end the point as quickly as possible. I turn 62 in less than 2 weeks, a long point gasses me. I think older players need to play first strike tennis, need to be aggressive, force a shot to the corner and take the net. With a long point my anxiety increases - I'm anxious that at any moment the point may slip away.
I see! I think a floppy racquet really only favors the spinny players (and that's floppy relative to the other traits, not just floppy in general) so if that's not quite your style, it could make a nice difference. It'll increase swingweight a bit but more noticeable should be twistweight. I'd try maybe half a gram on each side at first. Adjust accordingly but give yourself a little time to adjust as well. Even if the difference seems too subtle at first, a gram at 3/9 total can make a 5-10% difference in twistweight or so.
Curious your thoughts about trying the shift pro 18x20 strung with a lower tension (44-48) vs the shift 16x20 say at like 52 - would you experience decent pocketing on the pro to say compare its topspin to the 16x20? (Launch angle/net clearance aside) I ask only because between the percept 97d and the shift pro I really thought the shift pro had a lot more top spin but the I currently have 8g of lead tape at 12 o'clock on the 16x20 shift and I really think it's playing closer to the Pure Aero 98 with better feel. Sorry just on the deep dive for a new racquet 😂
I was actually surprised how loose 44 felt on that shift pro. I think 48 is about as low as I'd go. Crazy to say for that pattern but if you compare, it's crosses are VERY open relative to the stringbed and that's probably why. You could get closer to the spin levels but it will probably always lose to it's 16x20
@@ZeroLoveTennis after testing both 99s ngl with the shift pro I don't miss that high net clearance that I get on a 16x19/20. It feels so smooth and hits so clean! That percept though...sheesh! With the poly tour pro strings my serves never sounded so close to a shotgun haha its addicting 🤣
You can get the unmeasured swing weight of a racket at tennis warehouse. All you have to do is call and pay the fee for them to measure it of $30, plus the racket. It’s a way to make more money, that’s all.
Time is money, this is a value added service and the fee charged by TW (and TWE) is more than reasonable. That they even provide such a service should be commended. Most UK tennis retail shops will generally feign ignorance of spec variance and will hide any scale, balance board, swingweight machine or RDC in the back office. It suits their convenience far better if customers think the racquet spec they are getting is what is printed on the stick itself. My own club shop acted surprised when I brought a portable scale with me when buying a Radical Pro, saying, “The weight is right there on the racquet, 315g”. Unless the shop provides racquet customisation services, they have zero interest in wanting to discuss such matters.
Hi, unrelated to this video. But have you been able to try out any of the strings by grapplesnake? Specifically the m8 or tour sniper. Wanted to get your thoughts and opinions. Wondering how they stack up in comparison to restring zero. In terms of how soft, power, control and feel
Didn't care about them much. Wasn't impressed. Very underwhelming performance for anyone that cares about spin. Didn't offer anything standout to me. I wonder why that string often comes up because they are so vastly different that I don't understand how they can come up together in conversation haha. It's definitely not a bad string. It just doesn't offer me anything of interest that another basic name brand poly wouldn't. They market themselves as being really stable. Maybe flatter players with nothing to lose on topspin might find something in there they really like but I have no idea. They might not, either. I don't quite understand what I'm supposed to get about those strings but my game and technique suffers whereas with zero and wasabi etc it really shines. And the strings last so much longer. I just can't find a reason I'd like it. But I will say the guy running is knowledgeable and good at tennis and very enthusiastic. I'm sure the string is really good in some ways but it's lost on me. It's more of less just another nice polyester to me that doesn't come close to what the strings I love can do. But I'm not hating. It just didn't do anything for me
You mean the Rafa Origin? I would say it is whippy but that it's not easy to whip. I actually played well with mine and my kind of tennis but I don't think it's worth the difficulty to weild although it felt much easier than I would have thought given the weight and swingweight.
It seemed really good somehow but I think that's in part due to the low twistweight but then I have to get into a rabbit hole talk about why lower twistweight can give better spin and not everyone is going to follow that but that's my theory.
@@ZeroLoveTennis ah yes, I saw that video of the twistweight, makes a lot of sense, but so far I've struggled a bit to produce heavy shots with the Ezone 98 despite it's the most comfortable racquet I've play with.
Try the graphene 360+ prestige. 18x20 insane spine if u let the racket do the work. Lighter tension in a controlled racket offers more spin than snap back.
@@ZeroLoveTennis I find it to be a cleaner feel, more solid impact, more control, I’ve used the Speed pro for years now, went to the extreme pro for 2 years but ended up back to speed pro and along the way tried a few other 16x19 and to me they just feel ‘loose’ not meaning loose tension but just loose control if you know what I mean 😅. I broke strings almost every set with the extreme pro too which was hell annoying…I’ve just ordered a ball machine and I’m going to try a few different racquets as I was previously obligated to Head via coaches contract, although I have tried others and still prefer the speed pro I’m wanting to try in more length the Babolat pure strike 18x20, Rafas racquet and an rf97
I see. I really like the 16x20 PA98. I think I know what you mean. They are a bit launchy and maybe they sink into the stringbed too deep and fly out? You might also appreiate the Percept options from Yonex. Namely the 97D or possibly the 100 or 97 regular. Maybe even the PA98 from Babolat but that would be on the extreme end but maybe not too far and probably preferable to others of that style of racket. Pure Strike 18x20 is on the extreme end. That one, is super different from the speed pro in my experience. I can get very good spin on a speed pro but somehow very little to none on the Pure Strike. You'll feel the flex more, I think. Try it, lmk. Strange racquet. Sits on one end of the spectrum that most are far from these days so I appreciate it but it's not my style. Too far in that direction but if that's what you want there is only one racquet like it.
@@ZeroLoveTennis ok interesting, appreciate the insight, yes Yonex is one I’m interested in delving into so I’ll try at least one of those recommendations…regarding the pure strike 18x20, would you more compare it to a Radical seeing as you said more flex? I used radicals into my late teens but now I’m no a fan of them so much..yeh launchy could be a way to describe it to, I really need to hit more with different 16x19 I think to make a really fair debate as I’ve only spent time with the extreme pro, the others were just a quick hit so quick first impressions
They are kinda launch prone. The 16x20 pure aero 98 is cool. It gives you some of that juice but tapers it a bit. Just the right amount of everything for me. Yonex is sweet, they set a bar for consistency in their manufacturing and I'd say an elevated sense of quality from them. If you can like a yonex, go for it. Always worth a try. I wouldn't compare it's flex to the radical. Hard to think of a comparison actually but if you try one lmk. Feels old school for the first bit of it's flex and suddenly stiffens up. Very bouncy but kind of dead flex as well. Not a bad thing just a preference. You'll see what I mean maybe
Haha took me long enough. Not really anything breaking it down like that though so I felt alone on this journey to understanding the merit but I think I got it this time.
Very good point on this one, not useless 😂 Got a good one for you though. How many 16x19 300g unstrung rackets have a 330+ sw when strung. Check out the new Head Speed MP 2024. I think TW must have had a really heavy batch
That is wild. Yeah what did they string the MP with? Because it's not super obvious what you should string this with...some racquets it's more obvious but this is one of those where you could justify any kind of string. And that can make a difference of like 7 or so units in SW. Annoying.
I agree with you. Getting more standard info would be nice on the racquets. TW USA should do what TW Europe does with showing unstrung and strung weight. I learned so much more about how the specs change by viewing more complete info. I also feel the moving towards lighter frames overall has ushered in the emphasis of using more spin. The more open patterns with less weight should help players create a more spin friendly swing path. Great video on an interesting topic.
Twe is actually a copy of what tw usa measures. They use their numbers. Unstrung weight is not what he is talking about. He is talking about swing weight
@@LarzB TW USA does not list unstrung weight in the racquet specs. TW Europe does. Standardizing the specs to include unstrung swing weight on an average would be nice. It would be a more complete picture. TW could also state more visibly that the specs are an average.
Interesting, I wonder why they decide to include unstrung specs as well, minus swingweight (which I wish they did but it would only be worth as much as they are clear on exactly what string they used.)
@@b.lakeberg7456 to be honest, static weight and especially the variations of it really is unimportant. 5 or even 10 grams of static weight difference while the swing weight and balance stay the same, you will not notice. Believe me, I've tried. And yes that is possible
18x20 rackets don't always have a higher swing weight designed compared to their counterparts. Blade v8 18x20 and 16x19 are very close and the difference there is only due to the weight of additional string material of the 18x20. The percept or vcp 97D is 10 grams heavier (unstrung) and a noticeable higher swing weight. In that instance you're right. It's by design for a different type of player who prefers an 18x20. My solinco white out 18x20 was very low in swing weight for the kind of racket it is. And i have cx200 tour 95 18x20 dunlops with a swing weight under 310. And i have 16x19 rackets with swing weight close or over 330. So although some higher swing weights with denser string patterns are by design. It is not generally standard the case.
It's generally true. I think I said generally, right? Like way more examples that way then it not that way. Shift Pro, speed pro, prestige whatever the 18x20 is. Pure Strike...
@@ZeroLoveTennis there are more examples where the 18x20 has also other aspects of the racket different to the 16x19. Not only limited to swing weight, but yes also swing weight. A more dense stringbed generally is geared to players who want a more predictable and controllable launch angle. A higher launch angle out of the string bed generally results in a less predictable vertical trajectory and as a result the ball will float more which is more difficult when slicing the ball or hitting flatter through the court. A higher launch angle requires the use of spin to control that launch and for that you need higher racket head speed in vertical direction. For this you need a lower spin weight (which is swing weight + twist weight). As strongly reducing twist weight is impossible, the only way to reduce spin weight noticeably is by reducing the swing weight. Twist weight is most of the time a number between 13 and 14,5. Say swing weight is 330, then spin weight is already closed to 345 which results in regular people having slower head speed in vertical direction. This kind of proves your point, but I'm trying to elaborate a little bit on the why behind it. Most of the time not only the swing weight differs, but also other specs of the racket, like beam width, flex and polarisation of the racket.
Ohh spin weight? Another metric to consider hahahaha oh boyyy here we go. You got me with the crooked crosses before 😂 and I haven't been the same. I never will be, in fact.
@@ZeroLoveTennis haha. Yeah. You have 3 inertia axis to consider. In swing direction (horizontally through the ball), twist direction (around the axis of the racket) and spin weight (vertically perpendicular to the incoming ball). All those weight inertias are a measure of resistance to change in those directions. And with direction i mean the turning of the racket around an axis into a certain direction. The higher the number the more difficult it is to change the speed (acceleration and deceleration) in that direction. And those 3 inertias are linked: Spin weight = swing weight +twist weight
Crazy cool. I plan to test topspin potential to make this point. Any tips on how to best approach that video and elimiate variables? I was thinking of matching balance/swingweight or something with 2 rackets but having the twistweight on one be higher. That way people can't say the difference is due to the difference in swingweight.
I changed from a 16x19 to an 18x20. The increase in control was noticeable but the power seemed to be the same. My assumption is that 1820 string patters have, inherently, less power so a boost in swing weight brings the power back up with plow through. Also, 1820 string beds will be a bit stiffer, and probably harsher, than less dense patters and the added weight will help to take up some of the additional shock. I think there is good reason that the swing weight is higher.
I always liked the idea of less power. I wonder if that's true or only kind of, as in it's harder to get free power. I feel like there's a spectrum of input and output power that's shorter on an 18x20 which is how it gets the control. Which is why I liked lowering the tension, to bring that power back up but keep the range of power a little smaller, still.
I get my depth control from spin largely so it might not be as simple as that but I know what you mean and do agree, which was always part of the attraction to this pattern for me.
I think 18x19 pattern will prevail soon on 98 rackets and 18x20 on 100s 16x19 will remains for comford The good think is that you Can play with swing weight by picking the right string Gut the heaviest multifilament the lightest
Oh dang is Gut heavier than poly generally? I had no idea, never messed with gut. I can see those patterns making a bit of a comeup. I like the 18x20 100 idea.
@@ZeroLoveTennis maybe you should have because is so important on balance and swing weight. Yes natural gut is the heviest Also 1.15 gage is ligther than 1.30
Yeah but I mean they could for their average as a spec they post while they're at it since they measure so many other things. It takes me about 5 seconds to measure swingweight once the racquet is prepped for measuring.
You make a lot of assumptions about tw that you actually don't know. Personally if i would be tennis warehouse i would not string 6 rackets with the same string. I would measure 1 racket without strings, i would string that racket with one standaard 1.25 thickness string (and always the same string) and then measure the strung spec. The difference between unstrung and strung is the difference due to the strings. Then i would measure whatever amount of rackets of that type in stock unstrung, calculate the average unstrung and then add the difference of the strings measured in that 1st racket. This is the cheapest and easiest way to do it (labor and material). On top of that you don't want to damage multiple rackets grommets with stringing them as those rackets still need to be sold (with or without strings). Why do they only show strung specs? As that is what people actually play with, not the unstrung specs. What i am more worried about is that i don't believe they are always completely honest about the average strung spec as i have 1 instances where i think they tweaked it down and the other where they tweaked it up. The first being the gravity pro (360+ version) I have had like 5 in my hand (measured) and they were all 340+ swing weight strung. I actually had contact with head headquarters in Austria where (without giving detailed information why) they sent me a under spec gravity pro in the mail to me and after measurement that under spec stick (according to them) was 334 swing weight. Tennis warehouse has an average swing weight for the gravity pro of 333 or 335 i believe. Why do they tweak it down? If they post it as a 340+ swing weight racket, what will it do with the sales? Right... The same for almost all Dunlop cx like rackets. They have structurally a higher swing weight on tw than my experience and what I've seen online. The cx line structurally is too low in swing weight for that type of racket, but on tw they post it with a little bit higher spec. I don't want to call them liars, but i have my suspicions.
Interesting on the gravity pro 360+ because I figured mine was over spec as it's so unwieldy to move around. Don't have access to SW measuring tool but I know how it feels compared to 5+ other heavy/heavy-ish racquets and their stated SWs and it's a damn club by comparison. I have to be feeling really strong and on point to use any given day and even then I start to fall apart in the second hour or so. But then compared to my old Radical Pro Microgel with the same specs (and possibly same mold), the Radical is so much easier to move around. And then I compare it to my Radical MP 360+'s which I think were advertised as like 326 SW iirc and then I added 5g of lead total at 3,9 and 12 and I imagine those have to be mid 330s now and they feel so much head lighter still than the gravity pro...
Interesting. Well, my assumptions weren't really assumptions. In the video I said I literally asked the "racquet technicians" how they get these numbers. I think the reason they might string 6 racquets anyway is because they will play test it. No idea if they tweak but if they did it honestly but deceptively, they could use a thin multi to lower that number but why not just lie at that point haha.
You surely see the problem in doing unstrung spec measurements when they are already provided by the manufacturer. I mean, I get it. Maybe you just measured 2-3 rackets instead of 7-ish for that particular model, and got a heavy batch and so you can see that the strung specs really change the "official" weight, SW and balance because the real ones were already a little high to start with, but imagine just how it would look if you listed both manufacturer's unstrung weight and measured unstrung weight, or don't list the manufacturer's at all and be the only website to differ in unstrung weight from all the others, even the "official" website of the brand. Tennis nerds like us may love it, but the grand public would find it confusing at the least, probably unprofessional at the most. It would just not fit a store as big as TW.
Yeah good point and that is the kind of thing I was thinking about in my video where I said "it might just raise more questions" and then TW would need to expose the reality of quality control and how much is affects swingweight averages. And then everyone would buy yonex only 🤣
@@ZeroLoveTennis yes exactly that 😂 but a store the size of TW not only has to focus on the "broader public" so to speak, I'm guessing they would be getting calls from Babolat and Wilson if they did that...
Good point, it might raise questions to the degree it affects the perceived integrity of the brands they control a large section of sales for. Better they just don't say anything, maybe. And us lunatics can dig in if we so wish. And if we make a big enough deal of it then that's on us and not tennis warehouse lol.
It’s kind of obvious why TW doesn’t publish info on unstrung specs. This will put most manufacturers in a really bad light since none of these “fancy” Wilsons, Babs, Head etc will meet the announced specs despite averaging 5-10 frames. So these fake strung specs with unknown string and even unknown gauge and type is a coverup. P.S. I love 18x20s, they provide more control (with predictable launch) and letting you swing fuller and faster resulting in more spin. Look at Guga hitting with Prestige Mid 89sq in (18x20) with MASSIVE amounts of spin on clays of Rolland Garros.
I've always wondered why Twarehouse never post the raw unstrung swingweight, nor do they disclose the type of strings they use to test for it. It would help consumers so much more if they did and it takes 0 effort
Yeah my feelings exactly. But I can see why they don't but it still bugs me. Hard to say what the effect of it is but I don't think the reason is "it would be too much hassle to measure these specs when we already do or easily could"
There might be some sound logic, like the above comment.
You should try 2023 head gravity tour 18x20 strung in low 40s ( I use 40). This raquect is not available in US but you can get it anywhere around the world. It is stable, 305g unstrung, swing weight around 320, 100sq in. A amazing 18x20 option.
I almost bought one but decided last second against it. Is the string spacing any more open vs the pro?
What I’ve figured out over the last month or so is that string breaking is the price of doing business. I’d rather have predictable, reliable performance and have to restring every week than constantly search for something that is more durable but is ultimately a compromise.
I agree completely. But in my case I really truly love these strings and the durability is just a happy effect of the best snapback ever seen.
I suppose players who like to hit a flat ball might not love that but I have a friend who hits very well and flat and he likes it! So, that is yet to be proven.
Woops I mixed up videos with my comment but did it even go through? Anyway, I'm glad I found the strings I use now. Increased the performance I wanted and happened to give me more spin. If you're still breaking like once a week maybe give it a try. And if you like topspin I actually bet you'll be totally spoiled by the strings I mentioned.
But maybe you've already heard.
I wouldn't sacrifice performance for string lifespan. In my case, I get big gains in both with my strings of choice though and that's a wonderful thing.
I did a side by side comparo of Restring Zero, Wasabi Pro Hybrid and one of my old standbys: Head Lynx Tour.
Zero wins the title for spinniest by a long way. Wasabi Pro was close and had a little nicer ride, as they say. Silky, almost. I think I’d break it pretty quickly if I kept using it.
But I still like the response and the control I get from Lynx Tour. I break it in about 10 days and it plays well up to that point. Zero has a weird twang that bothered me. I don’t use a dampener.
I used your discount code, btw. And I’m not saying no to Zero. We’ll see how long it lasts in the Textreme Tour 95.
Zero does like being strung a little lower! I know what you mean. My favorite combo of any of these is any of them with Wasabi X in the crosses. I agree that regular Wasabi is a little softer than Zero. I actually would be surprised if you broke any of these as soon as you might think. Wasabi and Zero are both about equally durable, mostly because that super snapback avoids the string damaging itself. It's not like the string is made to be super tough, more so less self-destructive. A point I try to get bettter at making each time I mention it and that might be the best way to say it.
Let me know! I'm glad you found the spin to be of such a high bar and appreciate you trying these all and using the codes! Healthy curiousity is great :)
Thanks for your content. In the last few months I moved back to a 16x19 (Gen 3 PS) from an 18x20 TF40. Love the TF40 but wanted something that stands up against higher quality players with easier depth and spin while helping deliver more power on serve (few extra free points).
Very nice! And you're welcome, thanks for your comment.
It does make perfect sense an 18x20 string pattern should have additional weight added to increase plow through and when you consider the additional control you get from an 18x20 I really have to wonder why I'm still using a 16x19!
It does! Haha what are your reasons? I was bent on 18x20 for a while mostly for the density and resistance to breaking and not thinking it was a big sacrifice in spin.
San Jose? One mile from the airport is Bellarmine - I graduated from there.
Yes, if you mean the one in Cali. Picking up a tennis home from that airport. Was my first time there. I'm not in SJ ever but I was looking at public courts and seems pretty accommodating. Might take a day in the city if it's safe to park there haha.
@@ZeroLoveTennis the HS used to have its own courts but when I revisited the school 10 years ago they had torn down the courts and replaced it with a wrestling center, odd since they never even had a wrestling team when I attended in the mis 70's - I imagine a big money alum wanted one. The discussion of spin v. drive through is critical for every player and that is the backstory to your video. Personally, I may have ad an over-reliance on spin and depth. I switched from an Eastern FHG grip to a semi-Western FH grip and it produces a safe, steady shot but it lacks sizzle. I have been watching Sampras match highlights and his electric flattish forehand is oe pf the most exciting, explosive shots in the game's history. I'm going to try reverting, at least at times, to an Eastern grip flatter forehand. And as for 18 x 20 I used a Head Prestige Mid (93 head size) from my stash list time I played I did notice less spin, less net clearance but the hitting was smooth, depth and pace were good. I think the Prestige family of rackets is often rated as one of the best rackets, alongside PS .6.0, POG, Max 200G etc
Nice! I see. For flatter shots, technique is really key but racquet is a large part of the equation. Generally, the stability or weight around the 3/9 area makes hitting flatter shots much more accessible with a trade-off on the spin. But for a while, it seems, I can increase that stability to open up flat shots without eating into my spin potential. Past that, it does diminish quickly.
You could get an open pattern style racket. I think the PA98 is wonderfully versatile in it's ability to hit massive spin but also flatten out effectively when needed, even with the semi-western grip which I also use.
@@ZeroLoveTennis Stability at 3 and 9 - the Wilson PWS system.... I will add a little lead at 3 and 9 for the Prestige then,
thank you. I have too many rackets to consider buying a new one, but thanks for the suggestion.
The reason I want flatter, slightly higher paced shots, maybe this is true for everyone, is to prevent some balls from coming back altogether or to induce a weaker ball. I have to end the point as quickly as possible. I turn 62 in less than 2 weeks, a long point gasses me. I think older players need to play first strike tennis, need to be aggressive, force a shot to the corner and take the net. With a long point my anxiety increases - I'm anxious that at any moment the point may slip away.
I see! I think a floppy racquet really only favors the spinny players (and that's floppy relative to the other traits, not just floppy in general) so if that's not quite your style, it could make a nice difference. It'll increase swingweight a bit but more noticeable should be twistweight. I'd try maybe half a gram on each side at first. Adjust accordingly but give yourself a little time to adjust as well. Even if the difference seems too subtle at first, a gram at 3/9 total can make a 5-10% difference in twistweight or so.
Curious your thoughts about trying the shift pro 18x20 strung with a lower tension (44-48) vs the shift 16x20 say at like 52 - would you experience decent pocketing on the pro to say compare its topspin to the 16x20? (Launch angle/net clearance aside) I ask only because between the percept 97d and the shift pro I really thought the shift pro had a lot more top spin but the I currently have 8g of lead tape at 12 o'clock on the 16x20 shift and I really think it's playing closer to the Pure Aero 98 with better feel. Sorry just on the deep dive for a new racquet 😂
I was actually surprised how loose 44 felt on that shift pro. I think 48 is about as low as I'd go. Crazy to say for that pattern but if you compare, it's crosses are VERY open relative to the stringbed and that's probably why. You could get closer to the spin levels but it will probably always lose to it's 16x20
@@ZeroLoveTennis after testing both 99s ngl with the shift pro I don't miss that high net clearance that I get on a 16x19/20. It feels so smooth and hits so clean! That percept though...sheesh! With the poly tour pro strings my serves never sounded so close to a shotgun haha its addicting 🤣
I'd pick the Percept! I like that height for when I want but I understand the frustration of it having to be that way like every shot.
The Wilson Ultra Pro 1820 actually comes with a surprisingly low swing weight around 280 unstrung(+-7).
That's pretty good! Probably for room to customize.
You can get the unmeasured swing weight of a racket at tennis warehouse. All you have to do is call and pay the fee for them to measure it of $30, plus the racket. It’s a way to make more money, that’s all.
😅
Time is money, this is a value added service and the fee charged by TW (and TWE) is more than reasonable. That they even provide such a service should be commended.
Most UK tennis retail shops will generally feign ignorance of spec variance and will hide any scale, balance board, swingweight machine or RDC in the back office. It suits their convenience far better if customers think the racquet spec they are getting is what is printed on the stick itself. My own club shop acted surprised when I brought a portable scale with me when buying a Radical Pro, saying, “The weight is right there on the racquet, 315g”.
Unless the shop provides racquet customisation services, they have zero interest in wanting to discuss such matters.
Hi, unrelated to this video. But have you been able to try out any of the strings by grapplesnake? Specifically the m8 or tour sniper. Wanted to get your thoughts and opinions. Wondering how they stack up in comparison to restring zero. In terms of how soft, power, control and feel
Didn't care about them much. Wasn't impressed. Very underwhelming performance for anyone that cares about spin. Didn't offer anything standout to me. I wonder why that string often comes up because they are so vastly different that I don't understand how they can come up together in conversation haha.
It's definitely not a bad string. It just doesn't offer me anything of interest that another basic name brand poly wouldn't.
They market themselves as being really stable. Maybe flatter players with nothing to lose on topspin might find something in there they really like but I have no idea. They might not, either.
I don't quite understand what I'm supposed to get about those strings but my game and technique suffers whereas with zero and wasabi etc it really shines. And the strings last so much longer. I just can't find a reason I'd like it.
But I will say the guy running is knowledgeable and good at tennis and very enthusiastic. I'm sure the string is really good in some ways but it's lost on me. It's more of less just another nice polyester to me that doesn't come close to what the strings I love can do.
But I'm not hating. It just didn't do anything for me
Just curious: why are you wearing a work glove on your right hand?
Keeps fingerprints off my car screen. Oh it's also more of a gaming glove, I guess? It's pretty thin. Work gloves sound heavy duty haha
@@ZeroLoveTennis - I think you are secretly playing Ryan Gosling from Drive movie....
Is it a good movie? I'll watch it if so. He a one glove guy?
It's a good movie. RG is pretty good at picking his projects. And this vid is a good project, too. It made me think, and I think you're right.
Nadal racquet is not whippy at all, am i not correct?
You mean the Rafa Origin? I would say it is whippy but that it's not easy to whip. I actually played well with mine and my kind of tennis but I don't think it's worth the difficulty to weild although it felt much easier than I would have thought given the weight and swingweight.
What do you think of the spin of the Ezone 98? it's wippy but it has quite a dense string pattern.
It seemed really good somehow but I think that's in part due to the low twistweight but then I have to get into a rabbit hole talk about why lower twistweight can give better spin and not everyone is going to follow that but that's my theory.
@@ZeroLoveTennis ah yes, I saw that video of the twistweight, makes a lot of sense, but so far I've struggled a bit to produce heavy shots with the Ezone 98 despite it's the most comfortable racquet I've play with.
Try the graphene 360+ prestige. 18x20 insane spine if u let the racket do the work. Lighter tension in a controlled racket offers more spin than snap back.
That was a great racquet! I had one for a while.
All good points. Well done.
Thanks!
Interesting as always. But uhhhhhhh what's up with the driving glove???
Finger prints! Tesla...
@@ZeroLoveTennis you really do have OCD don't you!? 😜
Haha it's not too hard to keep prints off the screen. Do people just not mind?? Whatever I have should be normal 🤣
Never thought about the weight but I’ve always preferred the feel of 18x20 on the ball
How would you describe the feel to be favorable for you? I think 18x20 better for hitting right through the ball instead of a bit over it.
@@ZeroLoveTennis I find it to be a cleaner feel, more solid impact, more control, I’ve used the Speed pro for years now, went to the extreme pro for 2 years but ended up back to speed pro and along the way tried a few other 16x19 and to me they just feel ‘loose’ not meaning loose tension but just loose control if you know what I mean 😅. I broke strings almost every set with the extreme pro too which was hell annoying…I’ve just ordered a ball machine and I’m going to try a few different racquets as I was previously obligated to Head via coaches contract, although I have tried others and still prefer the speed pro I’m wanting to try in more length the Babolat pure strike 18x20, Rafas racquet and an rf97
I see. I really like the 16x20 PA98. I think I know what you mean. They are a bit launchy and maybe they sink into the stringbed too deep and fly out?
You might also appreiate the Percept options from Yonex. Namely the 97D or possibly the 100 or 97 regular. Maybe even the PA98 from Babolat but that would be on the extreme end but maybe not too far and probably preferable to others of that style of racket.
Pure Strike 18x20 is on the extreme end. That one, is super different from the speed pro in my experience. I can get very good spin on a speed pro but somehow very little to none on the Pure Strike. You'll feel the flex more, I think.
Try it, lmk. Strange racquet. Sits on one end of the spectrum that most are far from these days so I appreciate it but it's not my style. Too far in that direction but if that's what you want there is only one racquet like it.
@@ZeroLoveTennis ok interesting, appreciate the insight, yes Yonex is one I’m interested in delving into so I’ll try at least one of those recommendations…regarding the pure strike 18x20, would you more compare it to a Radical seeing as you said more flex? I used radicals into my late teens but now I’m no a fan of them so much..yeh launchy could be a way to describe it to, I really need to hit more with different 16x19 I think to make a really fair debate as I’ve only spent time with the extreme pro, the others were just a quick hit so quick first impressions
They are kinda launch prone. The 16x20 pure aero 98 is cool. It gives you some of that juice but tapers it a bit. Just the right amount of everything for me.
Yonex is sweet, they set a bar for consistency in their manufacturing and I'd say an elevated sense of quality from them.
If you can like a yonex, go for it. Always worth a try.
I wouldn't compare it's flex to the radical. Hard to think of a comparison actually but if you try one lmk. Feels old school for the first bit of it's flex and suddenly stiffens up. Very bouncy but kind of dead flex as well. Not a bad thing just a preference. You'll see what I mean maybe
You've seen the light 😉 love 18x20s!!
Haha took me long enough. Not really anything breaking it down like that though so I felt alone on this journey to understanding the merit but I think I got it this time.
Very good point on this one, not useless 😂 Got a good one for you though. How many 16x19 300g unstrung rackets have a 330+ sw when strung. Check out the new Head Speed MP 2024. I think TW must have had a really heavy batch
Those TW batches are weird. For example I've never found a head Gravity MP to be as low as their sw claims.
@@ZeroLoveTennis the grav tour was 313 too. Its deffo not that low. Easy a 320-325sw
That is wild. Yeah what did they string the MP with? Because it's not super obvious what you should string this with...some racquets it's more obvious but this is one of those where you could justify any kind of string. And that can make a difference of like 7 or so units in SW. Annoying.
@@ZeroLoveTennis head lynx tour 1.25. Pretty standard
I agree with you. Getting more standard info would be nice on the racquets. TW USA should do what TW Europe does with showing unstrung and strung weight. I learned so much more about how the specs change by viewing more complete info.
I also feel the moving towards lighter frames overall has ushered in the emphasis of using more spin. The more open patterns with less weight should help players create a more spin friendly swing path.
Great video on an interesting topic.
Twe is actually a copy of what tw usa measures. They use their numbers. Unstrung weight is not what he is talking about. He is talking about swing weight
@@LarzB TW USA does not list unstrung weight in the racquet specs. TW Europe does. Standardizing the specs to include unstrung swing weight on an average would be nice. It would be a more complete picture. TW could also state more visibly that the specs are an average.
Interesting, I wonder why they decide to include unstrung specs as well, minus swingweight (which I wish they did but it would only be worth as much as they are clear on exactly what string they used.)
@@b.lakeberg7456 to be honest, static weight and especially the variations of it really is unimportant. 5 or even 10 grams of static weight difference while the swing weight and balance stay the same, you will not notice. Believe me, I've tried. And yes that is possible
@@b.lakeberg7456 i looked at tw usa and it is indeed crazy they don't even mention the manufacturer's data of unstrung spec. That is stupid.
Bang on video 👏👏👏👏…
Finally a new video!
It's been a minute! Vegas was a 2 week thing and kinda ate into video time.
18x20 rackets don't always have a higher swing weight designed compared to their counterparts. Blade v8 18x20 and 16x19 are very close and the difference there is only due to the weight of additional string material of the 18x20.
The percept or vcp 97D is 10 grams heavier (unstrung) and a noticeable higher swing weight. In that instance you're right. It's by design for a different type of player who prefers an 18x20.
My solinco white out 18x20 was very low in swing weight for the kind of racket it is. And i have cx200 tour 95 18x20 dunlops with a swing weight under 310. And i have 16x19 rackets with swing weight close or over 330.
So although some higher swing weights with denser string patterns are by design. It is not generally standard the case.
It's generally true. I think I said generally, right? Like way more examples that way then it not that way. Shift Pro, speed pro, prestige whatever the 18x20 is. Pure Strike...
@@ZeroLoveTennis there are more examples where the 18x20 has also other aspects of the racket different to the 16x19. Not only limited to swing weight, but yes also swing weight. A more dense stringbed generally is geared to players who want a more predictable and controllable launch angle. A higher launch angle out of the string bed generally results in a less predictable vertical trajectory and as a result the ball will float more which is more difficult when slicing the ball or hitting flatter through the court. A higher launch angle requires the use of spin to control that launch and for that you need higher racket head speed in vertical direction. For this you need a lower spin weight (which is swing weight + twist weight). As strongly reducing twist weight is impossible, the only way to reduce spin weight noticeably is by reducing the swing weight.
Twist weight is most of the time a number between 13 and 14,5. Say swing weight is 330, then spin weight is already closed to 345 which results in regular people having slower head speed in vertical direction.
This kind of proves your point, but I'm trying to elaborate a little bit on the why behind it.
Most of the time not only the swing weight differs, but also other specs of the racket, like beam width, flex and polarisation of the racket.
Ohh spin weight? Another metric to consider hahahaha oh boyyy here we go. You got me with the crooked crosses before 😂 and I haven't been the same. I never will be, in fact.
@@ZeroLoveTennis haha. Yeah. You have 3 inertia axis to consider. In swing direction (horizontally through the ball), twist direction (around the axis of the racket) and spin weight (vertically perpendicular to the incoming ball). All those weight inertias are a measure of resistance to change in those directions. And with direction i mean the turning of the racket around an axis into a certain direction. The higher the number the more difficult it is to change the speed (acceleration and deceleration) in that direction. And those 3 inertias are linked:
Spin weight = swing weight +twist weight
Crazy cool. I plan to test topspin potential to make this point. Any tips on how to best approach that video and elimiate variables? I was thinking of matching balance/swingweight or something with 2 rackets but having the twistweight on one be higher. That way people can't say the difference is due to the difference in swingweight.
I changed from a 16x19 to an 18x20. The increase in control was noticeable but the power seemed to be the same. My assumption is that 1820 string patters have, inherently, less power so a boost in swing weight brings the power back up with plow through. Also, 1820 string beds will be a bit stiffer, and probably harsher, than less dense patters and the added weight will help to take up some of the additional shock. I think there is good reason that the swing weight is higher.
I always liked the idea of less power. I wonder if that's true or only kind of, as in it's harder to get free power. I feel like there's a spectrum of input and output power that's shorter on an 18x20 which is how it gets the control.
Which is why I liked lowering the tension, to bring that power back up but keep the range of power a little smaller, still.
(Salutes in one glove)
A language only few speak
More strings on your racquet puts more control on the ball
I get my depth control from spin largely so it might not be as simple as that but I know what you mean and do agree, which was always part of the attraction to this pattern for me.
Do a speed pro vs mp
I think 18x19 pattern will prevail soon on 98 rackets and 18x20 on 100s
16x19 will remains for comford
The good think is that you Can play with swing weight by picking the right string Gut the heaviest multifilament the lightest
Oh dang is Gut heavier than poly generally? I had no idea, never messed with gut. I can see those patterns making a bit of a comeup. I like the 18x20 100 idea.
@@ZeroLoveTennis maybe you should have because is so important on balance and swing weight. Yes natural gut is the heviest
Also 1.15 gage is ligther than 1.30
TW can measure they just charge extra.
Yeah but I mean they could for their average as a spec they post while they're at it since they measure so many other things. It takes me about 5 seconds to measure swingweight once the racquet is prepped for measuring.
You make a lot of assumptions about tw that you actually don't know. Personally if i would be tennis warehouse i would not string 6 rackets with the same string. I would measure 1 racket without strings, i would string that racket with one standaard 1.25 thickness string (and always the same string) and then measure the strung spec. The difference between unstrung and strung is the difference due to the strings. Then i would measure whatever amount of rackets of that type in stock unstrung, calculate the average unstrung and then add the difference of the strings measured in that 1st racket. This is the cheapest and easiest way to do it (labor and material). On top of that you don't want to damage multiple rackets grommets with stringing them as those rackets still need to be sold (with or without strings).
Why do they only show strung specs? As that is what people actually play with, not the unstrung specs.
What i am more worried about is that i don't believe they are always completely honest about the average strung spec as i have 1 instances where i think they tweaked it down and the other where they tweaked it up.
The first being the gravity pro (360+ version) I have had like 5 in my hand (measured) and they were all 340+ swing weight strung. I actually had contact with head headquarters in Austria where (without giving detailed information why) they sent me a under spec gravity pro in the mail to me and after measurement that under spec stick (according to them) was 334 swing weight.
Tennis warehouse has an average swing weight for the gravity pro of 333 or 335 i believe. Why do they tweak it down? If they post it as a 340+ swing weight racket, what will it do with the sales? Right...
The same for almost all Dunlop cx like rackets. They have structurally a higher swing weight on tw than my experience and what I've seen online. The cx line structurally is too low in swing weight for that type of racket, but on tw they post it with a little bit higher spec.
I don't want to call them liars, but i have my suspicions.
Interesting on the gravity pro 360+ because I figured mine was over spec as it's so unwieldy to move around. Don't have access to SW measuring tool but I know how it feels compared to 5+ other heavy/heavy-ish racquets and their stated SWs and it's a damn club by comparison. I have to be feeling really strong and on point to use any given day and even then I start to fall apart in the second hour or so. But then compared to my old Radical Pro Microgel with the same specs (and possibly same mold), the Radical is so much easier to move around.
And then I compare it to my Radical MP 360+'s which I think were advertised as like 326 SW iirc and then I added 5g of lead total at 3,9 and 12 and I imagine those have to be mid 330s now and they feel so much head lighter still than the gravity pro...
Interesting. Well, my assumptions weren't really assumptions. In the video I said I literally asked the "racquet technicians" how they get these numbers.
I think the reason they might string 6 racquets anyway is because they will play test it.
No idea if they tweak but if they did it honestly but deceptively, they could use a thin multi to lower that number but why not just lie at that point haha.
You surely see the problem in doing unstrung spec measurements when they are already provided by the manufacturer. I mean, I get it. Maybe you just measured 2-3 rackets instead of 7-ish for that particular model, and got a heavy batch and so you can see that the strung specs really change the "official" weight, SW and balance because the real ones were already a little high to start with, but imagine just how it would look if you listed both manufacturer's unstrung weight and measured unstrung weight, or don't list the manufacturer's at all and be the only website to differ in unstrung weight from all the others, even the "official" website of the brand. Tennis nerds like us may love it, but the grand public would find it confusing at the least, probably unprofessional at the most. It would just not fit a store as big as TW.
Yeah good point and that is the kind of thing I was thinking about in my video where I said "it might just raise more questions" and then TW would need to expose the reality of quality control and how much is affects swingweight averages. And then everyone would buy yonex only 🤣
@@ZeroLoveTennis yes exactly that 😂 but a store the size of TW not only has to focus on the "broader public" so to speak, I'm guessing they would be getting calls from Babolat and Wilson if they did that...
Good point, it might raise questions to the degree it affects the perceived integrity of the brands they control a large section of sales for.
Better they just don't say anything, maybe. And us lunatics can dig in if we so wish.
And if we make a big enough deal of it then that's on us and not tennis warehouse lol.
Use 16 x 20 or 18 x 19 instead lol
Happy with that PA98 right now and have been for a while. Still the one to beat!