Nadal Adds Weight to his Racquet...

First topic message reminder :

Here is Nadal's interview in Doha from yesterday:


On his shoulder injury: "...I had to stop for my shoulder. I really couldn't play with my forehand and serve. So I stopped for two weeks. So I was doing working in the gym...The shoulder is better, I think. The shoulder needs more power, because when you have an injury there, the rest, the muscles around lose the power. But the problem, the injury, is much better. I am able to play today with no pain, so that's important."

On adding weight to his racquet: "...I trying to play with a little bit heavier racquet and on the top of the racquet to get a little bit more power...I try to play with a little bit heavier than what this racquet is today, but we take the position that we have to change the racquet or we try to have to change the racquet. Not the racquet, only the weight, no?"

Not a bad idea though this may explain why he's had this shoulder injury earilier. A heavier racquet means harder serve, heavier shots BUT loss of precision, quicker exhaustion, more risk of injury.

Considering his style of play I am not sure this is the right decision but clearly this means he intends to play shorter rallies, therefore play more agressively.

Will it work?

lydian wrote:"Heavier bat"...lol TP

Give me Rachmaninov piano concerto #2 anytime.

You play the Piano, Lydian? It is an amazing piece of music.

Another one is Grieg in A Minor - absolute heaven.

If artists were tennis players then Dali would surely have to be Santoro?
And Monet would have to be Djokovic, as Nole is a great impressionist

No, not piano LF - guitar (hence my forum name...Lydian is the scale that my fave player Steve Vai mostly composes his song in...e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAzMLc7YOik - the guy for me is a modern day genius) but I appreciate great playing, phrasing and composition of any musician.

lydian wrote:No, not piano LF - guitar (hence my forum name...Lydian is the scale that my fave player Steve Vai mostly composes his song in...e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAzMLc7YOik - the guy for me is a modern day genius) but I appreciate great playing, phrasing and composition of any musician.

Thanks for the video link. Very nice.

lydian wrote:"Heavier bat"...lol TP

Give me Rachmaninov piano concerto #2 anytime.

Hey Lydian

I thought I sounded really nonchalantly sporty there but perhaps I just sounded like Del Boy?

I know he is not a lot of musicians' favourite composer, but I love Tchaikovsky nearly as much as Mozart, probably because I am a huge ballet fanatic but also adore and weep when I listen to Piano Concerto No 1. Elgar's Cello Concerto usually reduces me to a blubbing heap as well!

Cheers LF...thats my current project, to emulate that recording, I'm about 50% through it.

lol TP , I guess they are "bats" though! Certainly todays players "bat it" backwards and forwards!

I really like Tchaikovsky...love his piano concerto #1 op23 - as played by Arthur Rubinstein (maybe the piano GOAT to coin a tennis phrase). Here's a link to it... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG83EmwJpo8
Also love Chopin, Faure and Debussy.

But I think some of the modern composers are also fantastic but they dont get as well known.
For example Philip Glass is amazing, listen to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL8lQU_1a-w or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcyTyLqkvoU or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcmsoYLjVXk

I also like Jim Brickman,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTC79Pjz-Rw
Or...even Exogenesis Part 3 by Muse is amazing (for a rock band but then Matt Bellamy is amazingly talented): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7hX4Omxyrk

Lots of great piano based music out there for sure.
Oh well...beats talking about Nadal for the zillionth time.

Tennis Concerto in eff sharp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACuqiobrjH8
It begins around 55 sec in after all the different elements are first introduced.

lydian wrote:
For example Philip Glass is amazing, listen to this:

I have this series DVD. http://www.koyaanisqatsi.org/films/k_music.php - Pretty good music by Mr. Glass.

Mussorgsky - Pictures at an Exhibition and ELP's interpretation. Some pretty good music there, too

Perhaps we need a sea of calm in the middle of Tennis debates and discuss Music.

Nadal adds weight to his raquet? The big news is he's got a new little wheely suitcase.

laverfan wrote:

lydian wrote:No, not piano LF - guitar (hence my forum name...Lydian is the scale that my fave player Steve Vai mostly composes his song in...e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAzMLc7YOik - the guy for me is a modern day genius) but I appreciate great playing, phrasing and composition of any musician.

Thanks for the video link. Very nice.

The links you posted are all fascinating Lydian - I love the Glass - very cinematic, and some of the videos that your Vai links led me onto are really brilliant - there are some incredible 'duels' out there for the guitar enthusiasts amongst us. Are you a professional musician - is it your day job, or simply your greatest love?

Suppose I should add something 'on topic' - did anyone see the matches yesterday? The scoreline would suggest that Rafa wielded the 'heavier bat' with great skill and effectiveness. The only comment I read in the press was that his serve looked strong and consistent.

Hi LF and TP - its abit off topic but a good discussion nonetheless

Yes Philip Glass does write alot of cinema scores...eg. The Hours. But his other works are very gifted. He's abit like, but better than, Michael Nyman of The Piano fame (e.g. The Hearts Asks Pleasure First).

Indeed TP...some of Vai's works are amazing. Technically he's very gifted, but its his songwriting skills that stand him out from other virtuoso guitarists. He's played in quite alot of rock bands too and his style is "heavy" but underneath that is an amazingly inventive musician. He plays with a 7 string guitar by the way, and learnt to play music with Frank Zappa who made him play songs in lots of different and weird time signatures which pushed his musical theory and ability to the limit. If you want more guitar links (if you like that kind of stuff) I'm happy to PM some more.
Yes its my greatest passion (besides tennis of course), but its not my day job which is very different. I guess for me its a battle of spending time with strings....guitar or tennis!

Yes Rafa says he's getting happier with the new "bat"...lol. The serve looks harder, and looked harder vs Fed in Abu Dabi also. The tests will come once he plays the other top 3 - I dont think he's where near 100% form but you never know with Rafa, his form can vary wildly from one day to the next these days.

Last year when I was changing racquet weight I remember the shop I went to (and what a shop it was) we used a whole range of racquets from Babolat to Wilson to Prince to Dunlop and to be honest weight wise when holding a 280g racquet and then a 330g racquet the difference wasn't so noticable until you really hit through the ball or when you tried a drop shot. My swing with some of the lightest racquets was distorted due to having to generate more power and it killed me hips!!!

laverfan wrote:

lydian wrote:"Heavier bat"...lol TP

Give me Rachmaninov piano concerto #2 anytime.

You play the Piano, Lydian? It is an amazing piece of music.

Another one is Grieg in A Minor - absolute heaven.

You mean this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7GeKLE0x3s

I envy you your talent Lydian - if I could choose to be anything, it would be to be musical. It is such a wonderful medium to express yourself in.

I think Rafa sounds as if he is playing himself into the the tournament - something he is pretty good at! Fingers crossed that Roger is not going to have a pl*nker day, but it's become much more nerve racking being a TMF fan over the last few years

bogbrush wrote:

laverfan wrote:

lydian wrote:"Heavier bat"...lol TP

Give me Rachmaninov piano concerto #2 anytime.

You play the Piano, Lydian? It is an amazing piece of music.

Another one is Grieg in A Minor - absolute heaven.

You mean this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7GeKLE0x3s

This is fantastic, BB. Thanks.

Indeed TP

time please wrote:Hi Positively - Happy New Year to you

I think the first rounds of AO will tell us loads about where Djokovic is physically and where Rafa is too.

I must admit I was struggling to see how a heavier bat would help with shoulder issues, but I understand (I think) a little bit more after reading this thread about what Team Nadal might be hoping to achieve.

Hopefully 2012 will provide plenty of interesting times!

Hi tp. Happy New Year! Apologies for the delay, had a trip to Edinburgh to contend with.

It seems Federer now has a bad back, which is a real shame. Question marks over how fit #1-3 will be now... step forward Andy Murray?

The match thread I was reading re Nadal-Youzhny suggested Rafa was being more aggressive. He said himself that he needed to work on his service return. That, and his serve, were things he really suffered with against Djokovic last year.

Hi Positively - yeah, it's a shame about Fed, but I think he is probably reaching the stage now where the back does begin to be more of an issue - it's inevitable wear and tear, I guess.

If there are any doubts about the top three, I certainly hope Murray will be able to dig deep and capitalise - could be an interesting AO

I always think that Rafa is aggressive - and I think my money may be on him for this AO because I thought Djokovic ended the season looking well and truly beaten up - I'm not sure Murray really believes atm that he can take Rafa, he seems to have lost confidence in their encounters post AO 2010, and I don't know if anyone else has the belief yet to step up and take it to Nadal - I'm off to check the odds , while still crossing fingers that TMF may roll back time!

Positively 4th Street wrote:The match thread I was reading re Nadal-Youzhny suggested Rafa was being more aggressive. He said himself that he needed to work on his service return. That, and his serve, were things he really suffered with against Djokovic last year.

Youzhny had a couple of BPs when Nadal was serving for the match, but he fought back with some good serving and a couple of good volleys, IIRC. The first few matches at AO would be very clear of the intent.

legendkillar wrote:Last year when I was changing racquet weight I remember the shop I went to (and what a shop it was) we used a whole range of racquets from Babolat to Wilson to Prince to Dunlop and to be honest weight wise when holding a 280g racquet and then a 330g racquet the difference wasn't so noticable until you really hit through the ball or when you tried a drop shot. My swing with some of the lightest racquets was distorted due to having to generate more power and it killed me hips!!!

Okay so maybe those carrying "girlie" racquets actually have to be stronger than those carrying more masculine racquets (like Federer and Sampras), because they have to generate more power to drive through the ball. The ball will also stay on the lighter racquet for longer giving the player greater feel of the ball and hence (in theory) more control. So maybe Rafael will find he has an excess of "unused strength" when changing up to a moderately heavier racquet.

ps that "unused strength" can go into speeding up the ball - which I think is the main purpose behind the change.

Nore Staat wrote:Okay so maybe those carrying "girlie" racquets actually have to be stronger than those carrying more masculine racquets (like Federer and Sampras), because they have to generate more power to drive through the ball. The ball will also stay on the lighter racquet for longer giving the player greater feel of the ball and hence (in theory) more control. So maybe Rafael will find he has an excess of "unused strength" when changing up to a moderately heavier racquet.

ps that "unused strength" can go into speeding up the ball - which I think is the main purpose behind the change.

That's not quite correct. F = mass x acceleration or p = m x v (different equations but similar principles) so the loss in mass is compensated by easier acceleration therefore similar force behind the ball. No need therefore to hit harder to generate the same momentum cause speed is easier to generate with a lighter mass. Having said that Nadal's big arm is also part of the mass behind the ball giving him both speed and mass and therefore huge power. The lighter racquet facilitates the acceleration and therefore the increased spin. The spin is key to add safety in shots (net and line clearence). The heavier racquets rely essentially on a flatter but more subtle and controlled hitting, needed as the risk is higher.

You have there scientifically how power can compensate for more subtle talent.

Nore Staat wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Last year when I was changing racquet weight I remember the shop I went to (and what a shop it was) we used a whole range of racquets from Babolat to Wilson to Prince to Dunlop and to be honest weight wise when holding a 280g racquet and then a 330g racquet the difference wasn't so noticable until you really hit through the ball or when you tried a drop shot. My swing with some of the lightest racquets was distorted due to having to generate more power and it killed me hips!!!

Okay so maybe those carrying "girlie" racquets actually have to be stronger than those carrying more masculine racquets (like Federer and Sampras), because they have to generate more power to drive through the ball. The ball will also stay on the lighter racquet for longer giving the player greater feel of the ball and hence (in theory) more control. So maybe Rafael will find he has an excess of "unused strength" when changing up to a moderately heavier racquet.

ps that "unused strength" can go into speeding up the ball - which I think is the main purpose behind the change.

That is correct NS about lighter racquets, but stringing tension is still the big factor in control of the ball. Borg for example had a stringing tension of 80lbs and when Raonic was playing he had his tension at 40lbs!!!

A heavier racquet yes will take some of the strain off Nadal, but not that much.

Does that mean he may actually calm down on the grunting side of things?
I may actually be able to watch a match without the mute on then.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Does that mean he may actually calm down on the grunting side of things?
I may actually be able to watch a match without the mute on then.

He may grunt when he makes his way on and off court with the excess weight

I think you raise a good point LK, its not just the weight of the racquet but the set-up of the racquet as a whole. Moving string tension up or down by 10lbs will probably have more of an impact that adding or deleting 20g to the frame. I suspect its rather more complex than Newton's 2nd Law.

At the end of the day, Nadal is principally doing this to get more "pop" on his serve - he/Uncle Toni have said as much. It will also likely give him abit more depth of he loses just a fraction of the spin - if the string tension stays the same. The other factor is that Nadal has only relatively recently moved to the new RPM Blast strings which have more feel and less power, so again the heavier racquet may compensate for some loss of power there. I dont have stats on whether he's changed his string tension vs the Hurricane Pro...anyone know?

lydian wrote:I think you raise a good point LK, its not just the weight of the racquet but the set-up of the racquet as a whole. Moving string tension up or down by 10lbs will probably have more of an impact that adding or deleting 20g to the frame. I suspect its rather more complex than Newton's 2nd Law.

At the end of the day, Nadal is principally doing this to get more "pop" on his serve - he/Uncle Toni have said as much. It will also likely give him abit more depth of he loses just a fraction of the spin - if the string tension stays the same. The other factor is that Nadal has only relatively recently moved to the new RPM Blast strings which have more feel and less power, so again the heavier racquet may compensate for some loss of power there. I dont have stats on whether he's changed his string tension vs the Hurricane Pro...anyone know?

He will still use the RPM Blast strings lydian. I think a move back to Hurricane would actually harm his HC game. Sounds drastic when I say it, but the Hurricane Pro tends to be for the flatter hitter. With the RPM he is able to have greater control and actually has to use less power than he would with the Hurricane as he would require more effort to generate control. I think if Nadal finds anything near the serving of 2010, we could see another great year for Rafa.

Oh I agree LK and thats why he moved to the RPM blast to get more feel, not power over the H-Pro he'd used for most of his career. If he can get more power onto the serve and depth to his shots (doesnt really need more power on those) then he'll be formidable to beat by anyone.

I think even Tsonga moved to the RPM blast at the start of 2010 and he has started to have a much more solid game and is not spraying many FH's long like he used to.

That's right LK, I was watching the promo video Babolat released for RPM Blast the other day...cant remember if Roddick uses it also but Tsonga was on there waxing lyrical about RPM.

I think its given Nadal in some respects a more consistent game but there's no doubt its been at the expense of power and length. I guess they had 3 choices:
+ change the string tension but that can play havoc with someone's game
+ change the string back to Hurricane...backwards step
+ keep the string tension but add weight to the racquet for more power

(or change both more subtley - but then you dont know whats have the most effect so you can tweak further if needed)

lydian wrote: I suspect its rather more complex than Newton's 2nd Law.

Typical of Lydian again to dismiss an essential physical law we are all submitted to, including Nadal's racquet, to muddy the water further.

String tension is another parameter, like ball pressure, weight, fluff and so on. We are talking here about racquet weight! nothing else.

Looser string tension woudl affect the precision of his shots which woudl make it a real hasard. That is why Nadal is adding weight and not losening further his string tension. I am sure he has tried that too before opting for more racquet mass.

Tenez wrote:

lydian wrote: I suspect its rather more complex than Newton's 2nd Law.

Typical of Lydian again to dismiss an essential physical law we are all submitted to, including Nadal's racquet, to muddy the water further.

String tension is another parameter, like ball pressure, weight, fluff and so on. We are talking here about racquet weight! nothing else.

Looser string tension woudl affect the precision of his shots which woudl make it a real hasard. That is why Nadal is adding weight and not losening further his string tension. I am sure he has tried that too before opting for more racquet mass.

Though I am intrigued to see if he will stick with the change should results not go his way. I remember Djokovic changing to Head from Wilson and his results were largely affected by this, but he persued it. Given his OCD nature I am surprised he was looking at his racquet to help him with his game.

legendkillar wrote:

Though I am intrigued to see if he will stick with the change should results not go his way. I remember Djokovic changing to Head from Wilson and his results were largely affected by this, but he persued it. Given his OCD nature I am surprised he was looking at his racquet to help him with his game.

The good thing for Nadal is that, as explained, he plays with big margins so he'll never be as disturbed by a change of racquet weight as a Davydenko or a Djoko coudl be.

What he needs however is a bigger arm, which clearly this year again is as big as ever, but that means he needs more recovering power between points and/or shortening the points.

I don;t think he will be shortening the points as much though he will try.

Now now Tenez, calm down...remember your New years resolution..."I must argue with Lydian less because it gets us nowhere"

Adding weight to the tip of his racquet via lead tape is a relatively subtle move - the way you talk you'd think he was adding a big lump of platinum on the end and now needs to go into the gym to build 18inch biceps to wield the thing. This subtle weight change will give more force behind the ball, thats obvious, we dont need physics equations to show that, and as its placed on the tip of the racquet its designed to benefit the serve more specifically (but will likely lengthen his other shots slightly too). The risk is less spin used so more risk...but you wont find any Nadal fans saying he shouldnt be more aggressive and take more risks! I welcome the move!

Which leads me to say I see it the other way LK. I think he should have made this move years ago when his game was developing from clay to master all surfaces to give him more depth. I'm surprised they have left it so relatively late in his career to make this change. I guess until they felt they had to after it was clear he was hitting short last year and losing pop on the serve. I suspect the latest string change revealed to too stark a degree the underlying weakness in the racquet - i.e. its weight.

lydian wrote:Now now Tenez, calm down...remember your New years resolution..."I must argue with Lydian less because it gets us nowhere"

Adding weight to the tip of his racquet via lead tape is a relatively subtle move - the way you talk you'd think he was adding a big lump of platinum on the end and now needs to go into the gym to build 18inch biceps to wield the thing. This subtle weight change will give more force behind the ball, thats obvious, we dont need physics equations to show that, and as its placed on the tip of the racquet its designed to benefit the serve more specifically (but will likely lengthen his other shots slightly too). The risk is less spin used so more risk...but you wont find any Nadal fans saying he shouldnt be more aggressive and take more risks! I welcome the move!

When you hit a 50g ball with such violence, any "subtle" change is going to have a significant impact. All discussions we have about tennis are discussed in those subtle margins anyway. Talking about physcal and talent differences is also about subtle differences.
Those subtle differences have big impacts though.

I was answering to NS on the physical impact of using a lighter racquet and clarify what was in my view a technical error when he was saying that using a lighter racquet woudl require more power or force to generate "momentum".

ok, fair enough Tenez

So you would agree the difference in talent between Nadal and Federer is subtle then?

lydian wrote:ok, fair enough Tenez

So you would agree the difference in talent between Nadal and Federer is subtle then?

A better example woudl be the subtle difference in talent between let's say Federer and Nalbandian...yet the huge difference in slam count. A clear case that shows that talent has little to do in a player's success nowadays. The main factor everybody talks about nowadays is ......... no point for guessing.

Shoudl they speed the conds up again, talent might play a bigger role.

Yes but you know that the reason for the Fed vs Nalby difference is alot more than just a subtle difference of talent. Essentially Nalby hasnt got it "up top". He has talent, but its talent without control, or execution, at the highest level crunch moments. The 16 vs 0 record shows this clearly. Same with Rios, same with others on that 0 slam list. We cannot judge the mark of a player by pure talent alone...surely its achievement that counts at the end of the day. 'Talent' tends to concern promise and potential...achievement concerns what has actually been done.
Isnt that a greater talent at the end of the day in pro sport?

Yes but what's "up top" has again a lot to do about talent, physique and confidence. Federer had teh talent prior 2003 but lacked physique and confidence. A better physique game him that extra confidence that turned out to be deadly.

Nadal likewise was strong mentally as long as he was stronger physically. As soon as he got physically challenged, his confidence and mental strength went pear shaped...exactly as I predicted it.

legendkillar wrote:Last year when I was changing racquet weight …. to be honest weight wise when holding a 280g racquet and then a 330g racquet the difference wasn't so noticable until you really hit through the ball … My swing with some of the lightest racquets was distorted due to having to generate more power and it killed me hips!!!

Nore Staat wrote: Okay so maybe those carrying "girlie" racquets actually have to be stronger than those carrying more masculine racquets (like Federer and Sampras), because they have to generate more power to drive through the ball. …

Tenez wrote:That's not quite correct. F = mass x acceleration or p = m x v (different equations but similar principles) so the loss in mass is compensated by easier acceleration therefore similar force behind the ball. No need therefore to hit harder to generate the same momentum cause speed is easier to generate with a lighter mass. ….

Tenez wrote:... I was answering to NS on the physical impact of using a lighter racquet and clarify what was in my view a technical error when he was saying that using a lighter racquet woudl require more power or force to generate "momentum".

What are you saying there Tenez - that Legendkillars direct experience and observation of using different weight tennis racquets is wrong? That Legendkillars direct experience and observations are a technical error?

yes I am surprised by LK observation. If you apply the same Force behind the ball, you will get the same result. F = mass x acceleration.

In theory, your arm will swing faster and compensate for the loss of mass.

It looks like Nadal disagrees too as he felt the pain in his shoulder because he played with a heavier racquet...not because he played with a lighter racquet.

Tenez wrote:yes I am surprised by LK observation. If you apply the same Force behind the ball, you will get the same result. F = mass x acceleration.

In theory, your arm will swing faster and compensate for the loss of mass.

It looks like Nadal disagrees too as he felt the pain in his shoulder because he played with a heavier racquet...not because he played with a lighter racquet.

I would ask anyone to mimic the same swinging motion of a Nadal when he 'whips' a FH and not at some stage feel the strain in the shoulders.

My swinging motion is completely different to his and mine is much more from the hips.

The whole Force = Mass x Acceleration misses an important ingredient. Pressure. There is much difference between say 285G of pressure to 330G of pressure. Nadal is not your typical 'Power' hitter so he will always use a lighter racquet. Tsonga and Roddick for example use the Babolat racquets and I believe Roddick uses a 335G and Tsonga uses a 330G racquet. I hit the ball flatter and a heavier racquet has helped take some of the strain off me hips.

Hi LK, you mentioned that when you held the two different racquets (280g and 330g) you didn't feel much difference. I assume that also meant little difference between the two racquets as you swung them around in the air (without hitting anything). But you experienced a significant difference between the two racquets when you were hitting the ball - was this for both dropped (stationary balls) and for balls hit towards you?

legendkillar wrote:The whole Force = Mass x Acceleration misses an important ingredient. Pressure. There is much difference between say 285G of pressure to 330G of pressure. Nadal is not your typical 'Power' hitter so he will always use a lighter racquet. Tsonga and Roddick for example use the Babolat racquets and I believe Roddick uses a 335G and Tsonga uses a 330G racquet. I hit the ball flatter and a heavier racquet has helped take some of the strain off me hips.

I am not sure what you mean by pressure.

All I am saying is that a lighter racquet shoudl be easier to accelerate than a heavier racquet and that at equal force (all other parameters remaining the same) you shoudl get similar force behind the ball.

Nadal shots are extremely heavy despite using a light racquet.

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:The whole Force = Mass x Acceleration misses an important ingredient. Pressure. There is much difference between say 285G of pressure to 330G of pressure. Nadal is not your typical 'Power' hitter so he will always use a lighter racquet. Tsonga and Roddick for example use the Babolat racquets and I believe Roddick uses a 335G and Tsonga uses a 330G racquet. I hit the ball flatter and a heavier racquet has helped take some of the strain off me hips.

I am not sure what you mean by pressure.

All I am saying is that a lighter racquet shoudl be easier to accelerate than a heavier racquet and that at equal force (all other parameters remaining the same) you shoudl get similar force behind the ball.

Nadal shots are extremely heavy despite using a light racquet.

How to word this without sounding confusing.

Say I have 2 racquets

Both strung with RPM at 64lbs (My fav)

One racquet weighs 290G and the other 330G

Say you threw a boiled potato and I swung with the same speed at the potato at the same speed there would be potato everywhere no doubt, but you would find that the heavier racquet would have taken more off it because the pressure of the additional weight behind the force will have an impact on how fast the ball comes off the racquet. Thus making the effort less if your wanting retain the same accuracy.

Nore Staat wrote:Hi LK, you mentioned that when you held the two different racquets (280g and 330g) you didn't feel much difference. I assume that also meant little difference between the two racquets as you swung them around in the air (without hitting anything). But you experienced a significant difference between the two racquets when you were hitting the ball - was this for both dropped (stationary balls) and for balls hit towards you?

Indeed NS. Go into any shop and pick up the racquets and I am more or less sure that you wouldn't be able to guess the weight. When swinging in the air there was a little difference, but it was only when I hit the ball that in most instances I was over cooking a most shots, long on FH's and BH's or too hard on drop shots. To get the same length it took a couple of days to get the consistency though when me head goes the balls fly everywhere

legendkillar wrote:
Say you threw a boiled potato and I swung with the same speed at the potato at the same speed there would be potato everywhere no doubt, but you would find that the heavier racquet would have taken more off it because the pressure of the additional weight behind the force will have an impact on how fast the ball comes off the racquet. Thus making the effort less if your wanting retain the same accuracy.

Understood. That's actually what I thought you meant. What happens is that when the racquet is in full speed (swing) the inertia of the heavier racquet can take on the energy of the ball more easily than the lighter racquet which means you feel it less down your arm. In theory, the lighter racquet would have more speed itself and therefore carry teh same force than a heavier racquet swingging more slowly. BUt because we swing at roughly the same speed regardless of the difference in the weight of teh racquet we feel (pain even) more the impact of the ball with teh lighter racquet. However if you go through the ball faster with a lighter racquet you might be surprised (I have done with a babolat) how fast and easy the ball goes with little impact on your arm/wrist.

Nadal's big arm helps a lot too.

Anyway...It's getting complicated, let's go back to OP.

I don't know why but a lighter racquet just felt like I was hitting a daisy and that the impact on the racquet felt lighter and it literally gave me too much control I felt and at times I felt like I was physically a slob because of how much of me hips I had to put in. With a heavier version of the Babolat Aero Pro Drive I find that I am able hit flatter and 'straighter' with minimal effort and not scamper around the court when before I just put topspin on the ball and finding it coming back slower or quicker.