What are pro racquets like?

[BETA POST to get the content out there, will build out if there's interest]

Now that we have somewhat of an overview of mainstream racquets, it's probably interesting to compare that to what the pros are playing with.

Most top level pros use frames built upon proven basis, so called "pro stock" frames. Those are then build up to the pro's liking. As a final step, they receive the paint job of a current mainstream racquet that needs endorsement.

That established conduct is quite misleading (unethical?), and *maybe* apart from the RF97, you cannot really buy a racquet similar to what your favorite pro is using. (There's also the underlying question if that racquet would be best for your game...)

So what are pro racquets like, roughly? In summary, they tend to be a lot heavier and a bit more headlight, resulting in a hefty swingweight premium over mainstream racquets. The frames are also significantly softer, i.e. bend much more on impact.

Here are the averages of key properties, based on information I have gathered across the web and from conversations over the years - probably directionally correct:

Male pro racquets / ATP

Weight: ~370 grams, +/-15 (vs. 309 grams across all mainstream)

Balance: ~315 mm, +/- 10 (vs. 334 mm)

Swingweight: ~360 kg cm²  (vs. 317 kg cm²)

Flex: ~60 RDC, +/- 10 (vs. 66) (guestimate, few data points)

Beam width: ~20 mm, +/- 2 (vs. 23.7)

Female pro racquets / WTA

Weight: ~327 grams, +/- ~30 (see averages above)
Balance: ~344 mm, +/- ~25
Swingweight: ~342 kg cm², +/- ~50
Flex: ~60 (guestimate, few data points - might be a bit higher than the men's)

So if you want to get a mainstream frame close to a pro frame without plastering it with tungsten or lead tape, there are not a lot of racquets to choose from. The closest mainstream frames are probably the RF97 (although that one is pretty stiff), or the 330g Yonex VCORE Duel G 97.

You may be able to somewhat emulate the pro racquet feel by building up something like the Prince Tour 95, a heavier Head Prestige (e.g. the Pro), or some of the other thin Yonex beams (e.g. the VCORE Duel G 97 (310g). Prince's old Rebel 95 might have actually been quite close, as it was quite hefty, headlight, and noticeably bent back on impact.

Handles are sometimes customized too, accommodating the pro's hand. Leather grips are still popular. Some pros then add the overgrip in unique fashion - Richard Gasquet for example only wraps it halfway up the handle. The overgrip that seems most noticeably on tour is still the original, light blue Tourna Grip.

Pros also tend to opt for tighter string beds to better control the ball at high speed. The most popular string jobs are hybrids of natural gut and a poly (often a Babolat VS in the mains, and some Luxilon string in the crosses), or a full bed of a firm poly such as the Luxilon Alu Power or the brand's 4G. The Solinco Hyper G is worth a mention too, as Sam Querrey for example chooses to play with the string without getting paid for it.

The softer and heavier frames make these relatively stiff poly strings easier on the arm than a firm and light mainstream racquet would. Due to strings having become stiffer, I would triangulate that the average tension has probably dropped a couple of kg's from 25 to 23 kgs (roughly 51 lbs).

Finally, if you'd like to have a frame built to your preferred (pro's) specs, take a look at Head's and Vantage's offerings.

2016 string comparison

Taking the last string related post a step further, here's a comparison between some strings I consider interesting in 2016. Again, I made the highest value for each string property a 1, and the lowest a 0. Now we can somewhat easily see how they compare to each other:

(Click image to enlarge)



Takeaways:

The Babolat RPM Blast is pretty stiff, gives back a decent amount of energy, but doesn't do its name justice in terms of spin potential. Might be due for an update after almost 4 years on the market?

WeissCANNON's new Ultra Cable very much opens up the spin potential spectrum, making previous "spin monsters" like the Tour Bite or Cyclone look pretty average on paper. Based on my impressions it seems a bit spinnier, but not as much as the numbers suggests. It does eat up a bunch of power on impact. In general, I'm also starting to wonder at what point there are diminishing returns in terms of adding more RPMs to the ball...

The Tecnifibre Black Code 4S looks like a great all-round string on paper. I liked the original Black Code back in 2009. There's a short-term review here - felt pretty stiff, and gave me decent but not crazy spin. Tour Bite and Cyclone still seem grippier to me.

The Gamma Motos have received great reviews, which the numbers here seem to validate. In my tests, I haven't been able to dial in the tension yet. They seemed to lack power - when strung somewhat tightly they were all about control, and when strung somewhat loosely it was tough to get shots past the service line. Will give each Moto another shot though.

Solinco's Tour Bite appears to be noticeable softer in 1.20 than in 1.25, and should deliver a tad more spin too. I've played the 1.25 for a while but ended up finding it too firm in my RF 97 - so the 1.20 might be an alternative after all. UPDATE: comparison here.

The Völkl Cyclone looks like a great all-around string and still plays like one. My subjective findings regarding the Cyclone Tour are confirmed in the numbers: it felt very comfortable, but swallowing most of my built-up momentum on impact. The spin rating seems off - it definitely did not appear more spin-friendly to me than the standard Cyclone or the Tour Bite.

I've played Kirschbaum's red Pro Line II for a while, and found that color to be as soft as licorice (vs. the black one). So assuming Tennis Warehouse measured the black one here, ending up with a relatively high stiffness measure. Both definitely lack a bit of ball bite for me, for example causing my second serve to sail just a bit long.

Loved a loosely strung Silverstring to counter the stiffness of the Wilson BLX Tour 90 for a while, but was also looking for a bit more more ball grab there. In this group, it marks the low end of the spin spectrum, it however is relatively soft and bouncy. Now I'm quite excited about experimenting with the Black 5 Edge, which should also provide a good bit more power.

The classic Luxilon Alu Power is still somewhat low powered, paired with a low spin rating. It might still be an option if you hit out hard and flat like DelPo, and see your string as a tool to keep your shots in the court.

The now popular (and expensive) 4G marks the high end of stiffness and energy return, but also with low no spin potential due to little ball grip. I didn't include the 4G Rough here since the spin potential rating isn't much higher either. So that string is really about crushing the ball, which Serena seems to like - as Wilson likes to point out :)

So that's a bit of an overview for you. Personally, I'll stick with the orange Cyclone for match play, while experimenting with the Black 5 Edge, the Moto Soft, and the Black Code 4S in practice.

Thanks again to TW for publishing their string performance database. I again chose a reference tension of 51 lbs. You can find definitions of the properties here.

WeissCANNON Ultra Cable review

Gauge: 1.23mm

Tension: 21/20 kgs (~46 / 44 lbs) for clay court at moderate temperature, strung with Wise Tension Head, slowest speed, constant pull

Racquet: Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph

Estimated number of ball contacts to date: 1,000



Stringing: Tough! String is so edgy it would slip through the clamps (despite tightening), and at times even through the tension head. Also cut into the fingers a bit. The sharpness reminded me a bit of the Dunlop Black Widow, which however wouldn't slip, and seemed stiffer.

Playing: Spin is pretty good, but not as extreme as the rating would suggest. It did feel like the string eats up a good amount of power on impact. That made it somewhat comfortable, but didn't allow me to hit a heavy ball. I switched back to racquets strung with the Tour Bite and the Cyclone for comparison, and found both strings to deliver more power, provide more solid feedback, and produce a similar amount of spin.

Personal takeaway: Switching to the Ultra Cable would sacrifice too much power without overcompensating that with additional spin. Wouldn't enjoy stringing it frequently either. Will stick with the orange Cyclone for now. 

General thoughts: I can't shake the impression that the Ultra Cable might have been developed to top the "spin potential" list. Tennis Warehouse calculates spin potential using string-to-string friction and ball grab, both of which seem to be very high - subjectively as well. I'm not sure whether many players would stick to the string for the long run. Appreciate the effort though - the Ultra Cable is probably going to push other manufacturers to come up with competitors, and maybe WeissCANNON's next iteration will be a long-term winner...

Too see how this string performs in context, check out my comparison of interesting strings in 2016.

Practicing for the long run

[BETA post, wanted to get the content out, happy to rework and/or go into detail later if there's interest.]

As we get older, we tend to get wiser, but unfortunately also slower, less endurant, and might not be able to practice as much. So besides from staying in shape and working to overcome the downward trends, what else can we do to maintain our level of play, and maybe even evolve as a player? How to keep the game as enjoyable, or make it even more so?

To get there. I'd assume the 2 most important factors are optimizing energy input vs. output, and creating a solid base level of performance that you can count on even with little practice. Here are 5 top of mind pointers that might help you with both:

Technique: Is there any stroke you can simplify? The more complicated, the more energy is needed, and the more prone to inconsistencies, errors, and injuries. Back in 2003, I invested a winter season to change my forehand grip from close to Berasategui-style to a more neutral one like Roger's. Very glad I did. Now in 2016, I'm working on removing a step and a good chunk of back-bend from my serve and cleaning up the swing path. If you like to hit standing sideways, you might also consider practicing open-stance strokes to save a couple of steps per shot.

Timing is crucial to ensure that most of the energy you build up goes into the ball. Also, over time you might be less able to step into the ball, so practicing both stepping in and waiting for the ball might be helpful. You can practice this by repetition and also paying close attention to where along the swing bath the ball really takes off. Also, a bunch of throwing and catching should not be underestimated - alternating hands, balls, height, speed etc, and focussing on a really clean catches.

Game style: Over the decades, drop shots, slices, volleys etc will become more important than heavy topspin hitting from the baseline. Even if you have a defensive game style now, you might not enjoy being pushed around in the later stages of your tennis life. So it might be a good idea to practice how to dictate play and effectively neutralizing when you're under pressure.

Positioning: Related to a more offensive game style, you might want to move closer to the baseline so you need to move less, can dictate play, and take time away from your opponent. This is where simple technique and good timing will come in very handy as well. For example, practice playing points while standing inside the baseline and not stepping back over it.

Anticipation, the art and science of knowing where your opponent is going to hit the next ball, can save you many steps and a good deal of time. You can derive cues by figuring out patterns of play, or paying attention to stance, point of impact, or where they look etc. Boris for example used to indicate by tongue where he would serve :P You can also practice this by watching tennis, in-person or on the screen, and predicting where the next ball is going to go.

Remember, people tend to practice the most what they're already good at, so if we want to evolve, we need to work on the other things that make sense for our games and feel a bit uncomfortable in the beginning. You can find some thoughts on effective practice here.

Tecnifibre Black Code 4S review

Gauge: 1.25mm / 17

Tension: 21/20 kgs (~46 / 44 lbs) for clay court at moderate temperature, via Wise Tension Head, slowest speed, constant pull

Racquet: Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph

Estimated number of ball contacts to date: 750



Stringing: String feels quite soft, not as edgy as the Dunlop Black Widow, somewhat similar to the WEISSCannon Black5Edge, not as soft as the red Kirschbaum Pro Line II.

Playing: Stiffer than expected after the stringing experience. String did settle in after a couple of weeks on the racquet, making it a bit softer. Good ball grip, but not too crazy. Subjectively less spin production than the Tour Bite or Cyclone, but more than the RPM Blast. 

Personal takeaway: In the current setup still too stiff for me. Will stick with the orange Cyclone for now, and might give the 4S another try @ 20/19 kgs sometime. 

General recommendation: Might do well in a powerful frame, such as the Babolat Pure Drive or the Yonex Ai or DR series, strung in the low 20 kgs / high 40 lbs. A dampener should take some of that stiffness away. Do note that you pay a ~50% premium over the Cyclone, which may be offset to some extend by better tension maintenance. 

Related: Comparison including benchmarking of interesting strings (from 2016, but still seems relevant in 2018 as I haven't seen a real step change yet!)

The Nike Zoom Vapor problems

I loved some of the early Nike Zoom tennis shoes, however the following generations didn't work for me. After years of abstinence, the Vapor 9 finally came around, and it fit like a glove.

The 9.5 is quite similar to the 9, and has been my "editor's choice" since it's been on the market. The only problem is that they tend to tear open along the toe box:

    

This keeps happening to me, and some of my tennis buddies as well. No warranty on the shoe, so that's at least 2 pairs / ~$200 per year for tennis footwear. And most of that time, you're running around with an open toebox - not pretty, open to clay and/or dirt, and most importantly less support for the feet. How does this still happen after decades of development, experience, and fine tuning?

Also, in light color, the mesh covering the toe box tends to develop brownish stains quite quickly:

    

This happens to the indoor version as well:

    

That's a shame too, since some of the brighter designs turned out quite nicely:

    

So please Nike, fix the toe box issues and make the Vapor 10 the best tennis shoe to date!

Match prep and recap template

Feel free to copy and adjust to your liking, just give Forehand.TV a shout-out:

 [Pop out template]

Putting strings in perspective

As a follow-up to the post about my top 3 strings in 2015, I thought it might be useful to add some data and put these strings in perspective. How do they compare relative to each other, as well as to extremes in their category?

Below is a first attempt, looking at the 3 main properties - stiffness, energy return, and spin potential:

(Click image to enlarge)



For each property, I made the highest value a 1, and the lowest a 0. That way we can see where in the current spectrum each string falls. In terms of judging and choosing a string, this approach seems more tangible than looking at absolute values.

Examples:

• The WeissCANNON Ultra Cable ranks highest in terms of spin potential, whereas the Silverstring finds itself at the other end of the spectrum
• The Luxilon 4G is super stiff and returns the most energy, however ranks very low in terms of spin potential (supposedly because it lacks ball grip)
• The Cyclone, my current string of choice, looks like the most rounded string within this group

Hope this first look was useful for you guys too. Will put future strings in perspective as well and keep working on methodology and visuals - feedback always welcome.

Data was available thanks to Tennis Warehouse's string performance database (reference tension set to 51 lbs), where you can also find definitions of these properties (e.g. here) - thanks guys!

Quickly tweak weight, balance, swing weight

To put finishing touches on a racquet's playing characteristics, most folks apply lead tape. However, lead is not considered healthy to touch. In addition, if you need to reposition or trim the tape, the glue becomes an issue too - the tape can be tough to peel off, and then quickly loses its stickiness. You might also end up with residue / marks on the frame.

Tungsten tape is not supposed to come with those health concerns, but it's quite expensive, and you still have the glue problem. I found that if I'm lucky, I can reposition that tape once before it flies off with the next swing.

If you're 100% sure how much tape you'd like to apply and where, you're good. But if you want to experiment or finetune, why not use dampeners? They usually weigh 2-3 grams, and are easy to move around. Of course you can mix and match what you have, as long as you distribute the weight symmetrically.

I found that I liked the Tourna Pete Sampras dampeners for this purpose. They are small and soft enough to squeeze into tight spots.

If you want to tweak your racquet's playing *characteristics*, you want to experiment with weight around the 3 and 9 o'clock, 2 and 10 o'clock, and/or 12 o'clock positions:

Once you're dialed in, make sure to measure weight, balance, and swing weight for future reference. Maybe add a rating and notes too. Then you can cut and stick the tape of your choice to the frame. Voila!

Any of the above will obviously make the racquet more head-heavy / less head-light. A quick way to add more weight to the handle is to replace a synthetic grip with a leather grip, which can weigh up to 10 grams more. On the heavy RF 97 Autograph, that already changes the balance point by about 10 mm, which is huge!

Need more context or want more ideas? You can find related posts to racquets and customization here.

Why you might not have bought Roger's racquet

Alright, good news first. The Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph generally turned out to be an amazing racquet. Official weight and balance combo is spot on, head size seems right, spacing between the cross strings around the sweet spot is even (as opposed to many other PWS frames), it's got plenty of power but also provides good touch, and I like the graphic design too. And it's probably a collector's item.

Between different interviews, Roger has indicated that he has been playing his previous racquet, the Tour 90, close to stock spec. Maybe sometimes a slightly stiffer or softer frame, depending on playing conditions, but that was supposed to be it. After 127 prototypes and about a year of testing, Wilson and Roger came up with the RF97. He committed to the switch and has been playing great since. More power, better serving, less backhand framers - and maybe one can even give the racquet partial credit for the SABR :)

The RF97 was "meticulously play tested and developed by the greatest tennis player of all time", Wilson claims.  It gets better: according to the NY Times, both Wilson and Roger confirmed that the RF97 is what he's actually playing with. Amongst the top 100 players or so, who mostly use custom frames, that would be quite a rarity. And a treat for us consumers. Between the Tour 90 and RF97, weight, balance, and swing weight are actually pretty close - Roger probably wouldn't want to adjust his swings to a new racquet.

I first experienced the RF at the 2014 US Open. I didn't get a chance to hit with it, but holding and swinging it felt right. Very exciting! However, the racquet was almost impossible get a hold of after the official launch. Roger was playing well, and for the first few months it was *the* racquet on the market.

A few months later at a Wilson demo event at Stanford, I finally got a chance to hit with it. It felt rock solid, but I just couldn't get the racquet head around. Very disappointing! The racquet just seemed too heavy.

Most prominent resources found the same. Tennis.com for example tested a frame with 348 kg cm² swing weight. That's significantly higher than the ~330 I've seen resulting from the official specs (including string). Not surprisingly, the Tennis.com author wrote "Wow, it’s heavy.", "...the RF97 Autograph feels every bit it’s 12.5 oz measurement", and it was "a chore to swing". For comparison, Midwest lists 336 and Tennis Warehouse 335. This guy was lucky though and ended up with 331.

After that Stanford hit, I dismissed the racquet. Fast forward a year, I took part in a PBI Camp at Stanglwirt, Austria. That gave me a chance to give the frame another go. Between coaches and participants (but not provided by PBI sponsor Wilson!), there were 3 racquets to try. And they all seemed very different...

During the camp, I got about 30 hours of demo time in. I found that I really enjoyed the lighter swinging frames. So I made a trip to the closest Tennis-Point store in Munich and sacrificed a Champion's Choice string job to get the naked specs of the racquet I liked. Turned out that it was slightly below the official spec of 340 grams and 305 balance, which result in a 299 kg cm² swing weight.

In the case of the RF97 (and similar "player" racquets), a true to spec frame does feel substantial and heavy when held, but due to its headlight balance it's supposed to whip around quite easily. With a true to spec RF97, I even find myself making contact or abandoning a swing path too early. For example, I couldn't see players like DelPo or Ana enjoying this frame - the racquet head would probably come around too soon for their long-arm swings.

Based on what I've seen, it's quite likely that folks have been demoing heavy-feeling versions of the RF97. Between the 20 or so frames I measured, the weight range was 6 grams, and balance differed by up to 11 mm. Put those 2 together, and you end up with a swing weight spectrum of over 20 points (measured in kg cm²). That basically means you could get a racquet that swings as light as the non-Autograph Pro Staff 97 or the 95S, or almost as heavy as an old-school Dunlop 200G.

All in all the situation is a bit unfortunate:

• I probably spent more than 50 hours and more than a grand to figure all that out, just to end up with 3 racquets that match the specs that are printed on the frame.
• In the process, I also (kindly) tortured 2 local tennis stores and put the folks at Tennis-Point.de to work. That also puts retailers in a funny spot, as they have to balance sales, customer experience, and cost on their end.
• Many of us won't enjoy the fruits of the labor that Wilson and Roger put in to develop a spot-on racquet.
• Wilson, who has such a winner on their hands, could be selling many more racquets and gain more excited fans and brand ambassadors. 
• Roger, who has gone through the whole process and given his name and autograph for the racquet, probably wouldn't enjoy hitting with most of the racquets that end up on the shelves.

So what to do? Ideally the problem would be fixed at the source, by tightening up the manufacturing tolerances. If that's too costly and/or tricky for some brands, they could provide a spec range (as Technifibre does). And maybe print the actual specs on the frame, at least for higher-end models. Might also be worth thinking about charging more for more precision, and/or less for less precision. That way players who don't care can save some money, and players who do can spend a little more to save themselves a lot of hassle.

In the meantime, serious players should pay attention to the actual weight, balance, and swing weight of the racquets we're demoing, so that we make the right judgment and purchasing decision. I recommend asking for measures and/or measuring yourself. That'll educate you more about what you like, and create further demand in the marketplace for supplying racquets how they were meant to be. Your racquet should not be a blocker, but an enabler for your performance and development - right?

If you're ready to walk the walk, I have a few posts on measuring and getting matching racquets on this blog that may help you.

Keep enjoying game and gear, and try a true to spec RF97 sometime :)

Update: on a related note, here's my long-term review of the racquet.

Do I need the latest tennis racquet?

New tennis racquets are flooding the market each year. On the one hand that's quite exciting, but on the other their appearance triggers a cycle that reminds me a bit of Groundhog Day. The vast majority of racquets haven't shown to be breakthroughs over what's already been out there. So once the excitement wears off, we're mostly back to looking at the good old specs that we think best support our natural style and create effective strokes.

For example, the Wilson Pro Staff Classic's specs have lasted a quarter century, being reincarnated in the SixOne series along the way. A true-to-spec RF97 Autograph is not that different either. Material, grommets, grip dampening etc keep undergoing changes too - but they don't necessarily lead to better playing racquets, and most changes don't seem to stand the test of time. My favorite material for example still is Wilson's HyperCarbon, which came out around the turn of the millennium.

Tennis pros tend to stick to proven gear as well. Many pros play racquets based on a handful of stock frames, which are then tweaked to their liking. Ana for example confirmed that she hasn't changed her setup much over her career. At first sight, Roger's change from the Tour 90 to the RF97 seems quite drastic, however it's worth noting that both racquets are quite similar in terms of weight, balance, and swing weight. So often times, when a new racquet comes out, the pros stick to the old frame that gets a new paint job - unfortunately.

So what does that mean for us? Well, once we figure out what specs we like we can narrow down what's on the market from a few hundred to 20 or so frames. Or if you have an all-time favorite you go from there and demo similarly spec'ed frames, and maybe change 1 variable at a time. Either way, you don't necessarily need the latest and greatest.

From time to time though, I'd still try something different - maybe even extreme -  to question your assumptions, avoid missing out on the occasional step change, develop your game, or just get more excited about playing. For example, that crazy big, long, and swingweight-heavy Gamma Bubba found a surprising number of fans when it came out.

To help understand racquets are out there and what has and hasn't changed, I created a bit of an overview. And if you'd like to dig deeper, you can find plenty more about racquet specs here.

How to choose a tennis racquet

[BETA POST to get the content out there, will build out if there's interest]

1. Narrow down the options

Pick up as many racquets as you can (e.g. in a store), move them around, go through your swings, and then select a substet that appeal to you. And/or ask all your tennis friends who you can get a hold of if you may borrow one of their frames.

Pay attention to grip size too - they can feel different between manufacturers, models or even model years. In terms of size, factor in the overgrip if you use one.

If you're planning to identify a set of demos online, either start from the racquet of specs you know you like, or eliminate what you surely won't like - huge head size, super heavy, super light, dense string pattern etc. Tennis Warehouse for example offers a Racquet Finder (which I wish was a bit easier to use), and also shows similar racquets on each product page (RF97 example).

2. Try your favorites

Pick your favorite frames to demo, and maybe pick up 2 extremes that you think you won't like, just to get a sense for the spectrum and question your initial impression.

Any self-respecting tennis store will offer a demo program. You can also order demos online, e.g. at Tennis Warehouse, Tennis Express, or if you're in Germany for example, there's Tennis-Point.

3a. Found a clear winner?

Go for it. And enjoy it for the time being - if you discover that you don't like something, you can always adjust later. At least you got on court in the meantime :) If you just like to tweak your racquet a bit, you can find an idea here. If you're looking for a more drastic change down the line, select your future set of demos based on your current pick and adjust the spec(s) you're no longer fond of.

3b. Not in love yet?

Note weight, balance, swing weight, head size, string pattern, and any other spec that stood out to you. Even better, measure what you can. From there, figure out what you liked and what you didn't.
Then pick the next set of demos by keeping what you liked, and changing what you didn't. If you want to keep track and rate your demos, there's a template here's that you can adjust and use.

Hope this gives you some ideas so far. If you're an advanced player, here are some other things to pay attention to:

* When buying multiple racquets, get them matched to what you like and to each other. Over the years, I wrote a few posts about my matching woes - here's an example.

* If you're sensitive towards the grip, remember that there are different butt caps (somewhat easy to change) and grip shapes (not easy to change).

* If you know exactly what you want, you can order a custom racquet, e.g. at Head or Vantage. Fun playing around with this the Head customizer in any case :)

Some fun practice points

If you could use a quick break, here's a collection of fun practice points:

Superstringer T50 w/ Wise Tension Head review

... or: "Best stringing machine for the money?"

When I decided to spend more time back in Europe, I sold my second stringing machine, the Gamma Progression ST II (my review here). Back in the motherland, I set out to find the stringing machine with the best price/performance ratio. Or in other words, at what price point could I find a complete package, without deal-breaking sacrifices?

My wish list:

* Electronic pull mechanism, featuring both constant pull and lockout
* Ideally linear pull that's easy on the string
* Self-centering 6 point mounting system (less work, less stress on the frame)
* Solid clamps, ideally self-releasing / semi-automatic

In addition, no deal breakers please, e.g. pink with yellow hearts on it, no terrible reviews etc.

After some research, it became clear that a combination of a solid base with the latest version of the Wise Tension Head would make the most sense. Both parts should have come pretty far in their respective development, and each is reasonably priced.

Eventually, I settled on the (all black) Superstringer T50, which met all my criteria for around €1,200:



First, the bad

Poor packaging: As Apple and other companies know, packaging is the first and thus important impression of what you've just bought. Here's the first impression you get from the T50:



So there is some protection on the bottom, left, and right. However, there's still play towards the sides, and most concerningly, the machine can move up and down quite a bit. When we (2 people) carefully lifted the machine out of the box, one of the feet already fell off. After that, I wasn't sure if the play in the sidearms I noticed later comes standard... Definitely concerned what a machine with moving parts would go through in this packaging from the factory to my doorstep.

Another surprise was that the included manual was for the F40, instead of the T50 - not even a note attached.

The rubber mat that's glued to the tool tray was too long. The "glue job" was poorly executed, plus the glue smelled pretty bad. Then if you lift the mat, it gets even uglier. I ended up removing the matt altogether and cleaned the metal as best as I could - looks much better now. Why not omit the mat altogether?





Not all screws were tightened properly and evenly - some too loose, some too tight. As a customer I probably shouldn't have to think about this, and if I do, how do I know how much I should tighten each screw?

No starting clamp included, so that's another ~$50 on top. Other tools are included, not exactly premium but function OK.

The plastic mounts locking in the frame each had a sharp seam in the middle - not nice to expose your beloved frames to that. I carefully sanded them off with fine sandpaper.



Also, you cannot lock the turntable, e.g. to pull strings at an angle (sorry, Prince Speedport racquets).

So overall a bunch of serious quality issues, which could easily be addressed!

Now, the good

The look and feel is more solid than the official images would suggest, mostly due to sufficiently big swing arms and screws. Looks quite elegant in all-black, too.

So far no issues whatsoever with the semi-automatic clamps - easy to move, clamp, and release. Maybe even more importantly, they give in very little to the pulling and releasing of the string, would estimate less than 1 mm. Sometimes they do shift sideways upon locking - when that happens, a quick reset does the job.

If you're not familiar with semi-automatic clamps: their lock to the turntable releases when you let the clamp drop onto its base. That saves as many steps as there are strings to pull.

The side-arms move in at the same time and thus automatically center the racquet - simple, saves time, and evenly locks in the frame.

We're already at v12 of the Wise Tension head, and it shows. It seems like a solid work horse that delivers consistently - for the most part it's been set it and forget it. After stringing about 50 racquets the sled started to get stuck, but a careful application of oil onto its bearings solved that issue. Would recommend the Tension Head to anyone who wants to go electric.

Other notables

Subjectively, the string could slide a bit deeper into the gripper - that might partially be user error, but would be nice if that wouldn't require conscious effort, or 2 hands. Either way, it's slowing me down a bit.

There's no "tie the knot" button. Wise suggests to use the pre-stretch button. But you need to press that again to go back to normal, which I forgot from time to time. Old habits...

You don't need the optional foot pedal since your thumb is right next to the button when you put the string in the gripper.

As mentioned above, the gripper bearings will need some oil from time to time. For lack of better options at hand, I used some clear bike chain lube, which seemed to work well and last quite long. Just be careful - start with a tiny bit, and avoid the inside and top of the sled that grabs the string. Otherwise no more grabbing the string!

The swing arms have some play, and that play might not even be 100% even on both sides. Also, the frame is held by the 2 x 2 sidearms and the 2 center mounts, and doesn't actually rest on the rubber pads on each end. I had to experiment a bit to get the racquet to sit tightly. It still has some play vertically, probably due to the rather wide angles of the mounts, and the gripper / diablo pulling the string slightly downwards (so that you can rotate the racquet handle over it). Since I usually string with pretty low tension I'm not too concerned with that in practice.

Superstringer kindly provides some extra equipment and adapters with the machine. However, the accessories are not labeled, which can cause some confusion. For example, due to the sharp seams on the plastic mounts I wondered if the sidemount adapters for badminton racquets were supposed to be used for tennis racquets as well...

Verdict

Superstringer surely cut some corners putting this package together, which left me with a negative impression of the brand. Most issues seem easily fixable, so hope they'll start cranking through those in the very near future.

In the meantime, once you've done that work for them, you get the most important high end features, and no deal breakers. At least that's the case for me. For my string jobs, I felt that I've not been sacrificing speed, quality, or consistency, even compared to $10,000 Babolat or Wilson machines.

Overall, this might be one of the top 3 machines for the money. As with most things, hope it'll get even better over time!

*Update 2016-12-06: Supposedly you can now lock the turntable, and the rubber matt glue job has been improved. Things are moving in the right direction!

My top 3 strings in 2015

Well, first I thought this post should be titled "my top 3 strings *of* 2015". But turns out that my favorite strings have come out before 2015, and what really matters is what works best at any given time. Hence my top 3 string *in* 2015.

Over the last few years, a seemingly endless stream of polys have been hitting the market. On the one hand that's quite exciting: many new strings to - literally - play with, and there's always hope to find a game changer amongst them.

On the other hand, which ones to try? If you look at Tennis-Warehouse for example, you'll find over 300 single sets of poly. Other shops offer house, budget, and/or lesser-known-brands as well.

So how to navigate that market? Personally, I keep an eye out for announcements and reviews. I also check out the "string of the year" surveys, which usually bring 1-2 strings to my attention. From time to time, I search for "best string of 2015", "best poly", "best tennis string" etc. And finally, talking to other tennis folks at tournaments tends to yield some interesting insights too.

I then try the strings that seem promising and/or interesting. Over the last few years, that led to testing north of 200 string setups, so thought I'd share my 3 favorite to date.

What have I been looking for?

Most importantly, I wouldn't want to sacrifice on performance. So spin, power, and feel are equally important to me.

I don't care too much about durability in the sense of the string breaking. For years now, I've been cutting out polys long before they would have broken.

Obviously a drastic change in playing characteristics, e.g. due to tension loss, would not be great. If a string can give me 5 great, consistent hits, I'm happy.

Also, I definitely want poly. I've been playing polys for more than 25 years now, starting with the good old PolyStar Classic, and sticking to it for more than a decade. I've never really found a multi setup that delivered all that power and feel that many are raving about. Plus lack of spin would be an issue.

I don't care too much for hybrids either. I prefer a consistent feel on the string bed, and then there's also the mindset that one string should be able to do it all :)

In terms of gauge, I like strings around 1.25 mm, maybe +/- 2 mm. I haven't been getting a solid enough feel with thinner gauges, and not enough finesse out of strings once they get close to 1.30 mm.

So with that background, here are my current top 3:

Kirschbaum Pro Line II (red, 1.25 mm)

I found this one by accident. As apposed to many other tennis friends, I had never been fond of Kirschbaum strings. They all used to feel pretty dead to me. But then I found some good reviews on the Pro Line II and decided to gave it a try.

Out of the box, the string is soft as licorice. So that was fun and made it easy to string. On court, that translated to comfort, power, and feel. If strung too tightly though, the string can quickly become generic. I would probably shoot for a string bed tension around 22 kg / 48 lbs.

For the first while I was very excited about the Pro Line II, and even strung up a bunch of older racquets with it. After some time I found one key issue though - it just wouldn't grab the ball. No big surprise - it's soft and round with a low friction surface. I mostly noticed that on second serves, which would tend to sail about a foot long. Also, the string seems very sensitive to temperature. In heat, balls would just fly.

Overall though, if you'd like an awesome playing string, don't care much about a string's spin potential, and play in constant conditions, this might be a good choice for you. Also, due to its high comfort level it's probably one of the best strings for teaching. Note that I found the black version to play noticeably stiffer.

If you haven't, try it to benchmark power, feel, and comfort against strings like the Tour Bite...

Single set: http://amzn.to/1lCdoth
Reel: http://amzn.to/1ljO4Yw

Solinco Tour Bite (1.25 mm)

In many reviews over the last few years, the Tour Bite came out as the front runner in regards to spin potential. I felt the same - most bite I've ever put on the ball. That's not only great for ground strokes, but also very effective for drop shots, opening up angles, and creative shots like sidespin backhands.

Again though, when strong too tightly, the Tour Bite loses some of its qualities. You still get decent spin, but lose most power and ball pocketing. It also becomes very hard on the arm. I found it to be one of the stiffest playing strings out there. Solinco noticed that too and put out "Tour Bite Soft", which I tried too but didn't like as much.

So I'd go for the original Tour Bite, and string it quite softly (and slowly), maybe iterating from the low 20s (kg) / mid 40s (lbs). I found that a dampener helps too. I usually prefer playing without one, but with the Tour Bite I put a thick one in. That changes the feel from metallic to somewhat plush (!). In addition, a cushy grip and of course a forgiving frame can further help to take the uncomfortable edge off.

The best term to describe the Tour Bite might be "effective". It produces a heavy ball with massive spin. That not only creates problems for your opponent, but also keeps your shots in the court.

If you play a lot and/or mishit a bunch and/or string too tightly, your arm will probably start to complain. In that case you might want to string up a more comfortable alternative while you recover :) Or try a hybrid - Ana for example pairs the Tour Bite 1.3 with a Wilson Natural Gut.

In any case, great string to try and benchmark against.

Single set: http://amzn.to/1N1xLpQ
Reel: http://amzn.to/1Xtjdoz (16L = 1.25 mm)

UPDATE: I tried the Tour Bite in different gauges, which are all significantly softer - read about it here.

Völkl Cyclone (orange, 1.25 mm)

This summer, I did string up the Tour Bite too tightly and ended up with a sore arm. That led me back to looking for something between the Tour Bite and the Pro Line II.

I remembered the Völkl Cyclone, which many have found to be a great half-priced alternative to the Babolat RPM Blast. I had tried the black Cyclone on a demo racquet, and it felt a tad too stiff for me. I hence tried the orange one, and ended up really liking it.

The orange Cyclone has a bit of a plasticky feel, but delivers almost as much spin as the Tour Bite, almost as much power as the Pro Line II, and sufficient feel and comfort. You clearly hear the string snapping back after hitting a spin shot, which somewhat incentivizes putting even more spin on the next ball :)

There's also a yellow version - if you want to dive in, you can find my comparison of the 3 colors here.

The slightly more expensive Cyclone Tour is not bad either - it plays noticeably softer, but I found that it eats up too much power on impact. The ball just seemed to lose more and more momentum as it approached the opposite baseline.

So the orange Cyclone is my current string of choice. It's a solid (though not perfect) combo of the red Pro Line II and the Tour Bite. Indoors, I found that it plays best around a string bed tension of 22 kg. Outdoors I'm currently shooting for 20.5 kg, depending on conditions, balls etc.

Single set: http://amzn.to/1ljPi6d
Reel: http://amzn.to/1lCd5i3

If you decide to play test any or all of these, I'm sure you'll gain some valuable insights!

Triangulating weight, balance, and swing weight

Once I had decided to switch to the Wilson Pro Staff RF 97 Autograph, I ventured out to find 3 true to spec frames. As mentioned before, Wilson and some other brands' racquets come out of the factory quite differently. Technifibre for example recently increased their official tolerance from 5 to 7 (grams for weight and millimeters for balance), so basically a spread of 14 for each measure! At least they print that on their frames...

I had tested the RF 97 in different weight, balance, and swing weight combos for more than 30 hours, and found that even a slight increase in balance and swing weight over the official spec made the racquet feel as heavy as often reported. However, I loved the feel of a true to spec (or slightly below) frames. So I had no choice but to become a picky customer when it came to the measures.

Even if you only want 1 racquet, you may have found the weight, balance, and swing weight combo that works for you. There are a few situations in which you might have to triangulate a bit, for example:

• you want to pick the right racquet(s) off the shelf at your local tennis shop, but they're not very keen removing the plastic wrap around the handle, cutting out the card board, stringing the racquet up etc
• you fell in love with a demo or someone else's racquet, but they're not very keen on you cutting out their favorite string job, removing their grips etc.

Both of the above actually happened to me, so here's what I found as I was looking for a RF 97 with a true to spec 340 grams and 305 mm balance point in-store:

The cardboard in the racquet head...

• weighs ~14 grams
• moved balance up by ~8 mm (from 305 to 313)
• increased swing weight by ~41 kg cm² (higher than the string value below - maybe due to air resistance?)

A (Champion's Choice) string job...

• increased weight by 16 grams
• moved balance up by ~9 mm
• increased swing weight by ~31 kg cm²

The Wilson Pro Overgrip...

• weighs ~4 grams
• moved balance point by ~3 mm
• increased swing weight by 1 kg cm².

The plastic wrap around the handle weighs ~2 grams, so you'll have to subtract that from your measure. The effect on swing weight is negligible though.

A 5 gram dampener increased swing weight by 2 kg cm².

A fully loaded frame with string, overgrip, and dampener weighed 340 + 16 + 4 + 5 = 365 grams. All that moved the balance point up by ~8 mm, so a true to spec model with a naked 305 mm balance point would have a fully loaded balance of ~313 mm. I still have to measure swing weight on that one - should be in the mid 330s...

Note that with ~340 grams, the RF 97 is one of the heaviest frames out there. So on lighter frames, cardboard, string, grip etc should have a higher relative impact on balance and swing weight.

You can find some tips on measuring weight and balance in this post. For swing weight, you'll need something like the Alpha Accu Swing 2, the Babolat Racquet Diagnostic Center, the Gamma 3 in 1 Racquet Test Center, or the Prince Precision Tuning Center. Luckily some tennis shops are starting to recognize the importance (and business opportunity?), and are investing in these machines. As a workaround, you can check out Racquet Tune, which features a swing weight calculator.

For reference values, I recommend visiting Tennis-Warehouse.com, where the staff actually measures multiple frames and then posts the averages on the racquet description pages (RF 97 example). Note that not only weight, but also balance and swing weight are taken from strung racquets.

There are some more sophisticated tools and formulas out there to calculate all this, but hope this info and approach gets you thinking in the right direction. And most importantly, gets you 99% the racquet you want within 5 mins :)

Collection of backhand videos on YT

Collection of forehand videos on YT

Effective tennis practice

I'm sure that by now, a bunch of studies have been conducted on how frequent and how long to practice, when to take breaks etc. But for a quick start and/or inspiration, I thought I'd share my approach to practice, which you can use to start or tweak your current practice with.

First, the rough schedule. I could play all the time, but decided to stay a bit hungry for tennis, and also give my body a day or two to recover. In a perfect week, I'd probably have 3 practices, 1.5h each. When there's a match, I'd like 2 x 1.5h practices, plus 1 light hit before the match, for rhythm and feel. For most of us, 1 session per week would probably be the minimum, and 4x the max.

For those who could play every day and have enough time and energy to do so, it might be worth considering to mix in some other sport. That'll not only develop new skills, but might even take the tennis to the next level. And maybe prevent injuries from too much repetitive movement.

Once you've set your practice days, the question is how long to practice. From my personal experience, I'd say you need at least 1h 15mins (although getting on court is probably better than not playing at all). If your goal is to maximize effectiveness, I'd say the less time you have, the more purposeful and intense your practice.

If you can only get 1h, I suggest adding some off-court time before and/or after, for example to warm up and cool down. Before, you can always go for a jog or do some rope skipping. After, you could sneak in some strength training since your energy is already flowing. If there's access to a backboard, you can use that for warmup, or for practicing certain shots after your court time (e.g. overheads). Maybe you can even move the volley-volley practice with your partner off court...

At some point, too much time per session might also hurt your practices. Having some sort of limit can be a good forcing function to use that time wisely (and stay hungry for more). I usually wouldn't go for more than 2h per session. An exception may be going for a full practice match, or wanting to complete a set.

Quick note on balls: If you want to swing freely and try stuff, bring a bunch of decent balls so that you can keep hitting as opposed to picking up balls. I'd say 6 is the absolute minimum, 150 the max. This winter, I've been practicing with 80 balls or so, and really enjoyed that. Remember to always get them out of your way though to prevent injury!

Once on court, my routine would be 5 mins for mini-tennis, 10 mins for baseline (including cross court), 5 mins at the net, 5 mins for serves and returns. That's already 25 mins! I would suggest to add some dynamic to this part too, for example moving each other from side to side or front to back while keeping the ball in play. You can then use the service warm-up to get your pulse back to normal, in order to jump straight into a drill after.

Spend 5-10 mins on your first drill, and then change something to keep things interesting. Either tweak the drill, build on the drill, or do something different. I know some folks like to hit forehands and backhands for hours, but I like to mix things up a bit.

Couple of interesting insights for me:

* If you practice practicing, that's what you'll become better at :) Meaning, that being able to hit the same forehand 20 times in a row might actually not help you that much in matchplay... So it again depends on what your goal is, and for example where in the season you are.

* Assuming you want to evolve as a player, you need to practice at the edge of your abilities. So once you got the basic strokes covered, try some shot variations that usually don't get a lot of attention,  and/or build a challenge for yourself that you're slightly struggling with at first.

* Almost everyone under-practices the 2 most important shots, serve and return. I've tried to better remember this when back on court and do something about it, e.g. start to mix in overhead feeds early in practice (=> maybe ~50 additional "serves" and "returns" per session), and kick off more drills and points with serve and return.

In any case, create targets and/or goals for your drills. Tennis comes down to placing the ball, so that's probably what we should practice! Unless you want to focus exclusively on technique, aim for something on the other side of the net. That could be a cone, a ball pyramid, a bag, a shoe, your partner's feet, or part of the court. You can count together towards a common goal, or play points against each other - whatever brings out the better in your pairing.

As a coach, I tend to analyze each shot I hit, so re-prioritizing targets over the mechanics of a shot that I have dialed for over 3+ decades has become very helpful...

During the drill part of practice, take 2-5 minute breaks every 15 to 20 minutes. That'll help you catch your breath, refuel, and relax. But also make sure you don't cool off and risk an injury, a cold etc.

Depending on the respective drill's intensity, you can choose to take mini-breaks similar to downtime between points in a match, so 20-30 seconds.

After about 1h of warm-up and drills, practice might be at risk of becoming a bit dull. At that point, it's probably time for some points or matchplay - or some alternative fun stuff.

With all that structure and purpose, it's probably worth noting that most of us enjoy tennis because it's a game to *play*. So make time for fun too: try trick shots, bring fun gear, change some rules, play music - whatever lightens things up. Just make sure your partner is down with that too :)

Now how about some tennis, anyone? Enjoy!

Remembering serve & volley

In the early and mid 90s, there were a lot of big servers on the ATP tour - Sampras, Becker, Ivanisevic, Krajicek and others, who took advantage of their overhead power by closing out points early at the net. And there were also strategic, graceful, and athletic movers like Edberg and Rafter who knew how to work the court and their opponents.

While I didn't enjoy watching 5 sets of 1-2 stroke "rallies" at Wimbledon, it was fun seeing well executed serve & volley tennis, and different style of play match-ups like Becker and Agassi.

Today, the only serve & volley you see is in doubles, and you have the exceptional singles player taking advantage of a faster surface. Ironically, one of the only players with gracious serve & volley game left is a Spaniard, Feliciano Lopez, and Spaniards are usually known for their baseline power. So what happened?

There were a few developments over the past decade that made serve & volley less successful. As a result of the big servers in the 90s, the game was slowed down in most places - for example by using slower balls or creating more friction on the surface. This happened even in places like Wimbledon, where grass court tennis today almost looks like conventional hard court tennis. A lot of people say that return skills improved as well, and that Luxilons and other poly strings made returns more effective. And then there are just less serve & volley idols like Edberg and Rafter around, so it's also less likely to see followers.

Does all this mean that it's not worth trying to become a good serve- & volleyer? I don't think so:

• First of all, if you play any doubles, you might know that you still win doubles at the net.
• Second, adding more diverse skills to your game gets you closer to becoming a truly complete player, which many strive for. Why hit the same few strokes and be stuck in the same game for 40 years or so?
• And last but not least, it might help you win matches too. Maybe coming in whenever you can is the right strategy against your opponent. Or you could throw them off every once in a while with a serve & volley play, like Federer and Haas have started doing lately. That's a good play to disrupt return rhythm.

I compiled a few of my sample videos for inspiration below. Notice for example how the slippery surface and the opponent in some of the clips pretty much demand serve & volley play! Watch best in fullscreen and high quality setting, and let me know if you have any questions or comments: