Head heavy v Even v Head light Balance

Discussion in 'Racket Recommendation / Comparison' started by Stokey1, Nov 13, 2009.

  1. Stokey1

    Stokey1 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Staffordshire, UK
    Hi everyone!

    I have searched the archives but couldn't find if this has been discussed before, if it has I apologise in advance!!:eek:

    I play competitive mens doubles and was wondering what type of racket balance is best! My style of play is hit hard from back of court and fairly good aroubd the net.

    My question is for mens doubles what racket is best, head heavy, even, head light, stiff, medium, flexible??

    Thanks
     
  2. druss

    druss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,685
    Likes Received:
    37
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I personally prefer an even weight, stiff flex racket for mens doubles. Not to generalize but I think head light rackets are great for women in mixed doubles as the prefered positions are woman at the front and man at the back.
     
  3. Sevex

    Sevex Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    11
    Occupation:
    Academia, CFD/ wind engineering
    Location:
    West Berkshire, England.
    Just to throw a spanner in the works....

    I like head light, flexible (compared to my singles racket) for level doubles. Which is light, as in doesn't weigh much. Which is the Carlton Airblade superlite

    For Mixed and singles I use an ever so slightly heavier racket, still head light but much stiffer. The Panda Power Trinity.

    I tend to play fairly controlled games, with rallies lasting for quite a while. Also I think all the nanospeed series, a "headlight" series are all head heavy... So I avoid Yonex!

    Having said that I do swap the rackets around depending on how I feel. I need to be feeling fine to use stiffer rackets. So I can get behind the shuttle and use the right technique to get power. More flexy tend to be less punishing on the wrong technique. In my opinion any way.

    Oh and I'm male, just to show that everything is personal. Although most men do use head heavier rackets.

    If you like hitting hard then get head heavier. Unless you want to cover your weaknesses. This is again personal preference. Do you want one really great aspect of your game and a weakness, or a more balanced game.

    See if you can borrow some from people you know to get an idea of what they feel like to you.

    Or you could just pick up a racket and play! Certainly more fun than looking for a racket, unless you enjoy shopping!
     
  4. druss

    druss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,685
    Likes Received:
    37
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Nothing wrong with using the racket that works best for your style of play.
     
  5. Mark A

    Mark A Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    7,170
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    St Helens, UK
    Mens doubles players generally stay away from flexible rackets, so anything medium-stiff and upwards can be considered. Stiffness is more about technique than about the type of shot being played, anyway.

    As far as balance goes there is a huge variety in the pro ranks - on the one hand we had Tony Gunawan and Lee Wan Wah using AT700's (a golf club) and on the other Lee Yong Dae using AT800D (a golf club held by the head). This decision will almost certainly be a compromise: I can hit smashes through the floor with a SOTX W7, but it feels like having hold of an angry horse's back leg trying to defend with it.

    My own selection procedure is to err on the side of defence - I choose the head-heaviest balance that will not compromise my defence (which, in my case, ends up being even to very slightly head-light, a la NS9000); if you just choose the sledgehammer that lets you attack best you might end up cocking your defence up:D. To take Sevex's mentality further, I choose a racket that minimizes weaknesses rather than amplifying strengths.
     
    #5 Mark A, Nov 14, 2009
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2009

Share This Page