How to choose a tennis racquet? Start with four numbers
Updated: Sep 8
"Which tennis racquet should I choose?" Asked that way, the question has no answer. Nobody can name a model without knowing what you already hold in your hand, or what you want to change about it. What does have an answer is the four values that decide what you feel at impact. They can be measured, they can be compared with each other, and none of them carries a brand name.
Why the question, as it is usually asked, has no answer
A racquet has no virtues. It has values — mass, balance, swingweight, stiffness. The word "control" describes nothing measurable: it describes a sensation, and the sensation is the result of those numbers. Two frames sold under the same label can be ten grams and twenty swingweight points apart. In the hand, they have almost nothing in common. That is the normal spread of an industrial series: the stated values are targets, and nobody takes the frame back off the line to bring it to an exact value. Our six moulds do go through that step: measured one by one, tuned to order to a tenth of a gram. The tolerance is not endured, it is removed.
This is also why a player's review does not travel. It tells you what one frame did in one hand, with one string, at one tension, on one stroke. Change any of the four and the report no longer holds. That is not bad faith: it is that the frame alone is only part of what was tested.
So the useful question is two questions. What values am I starting from? And in which direction do I want to move?
The four values that decide
Mass, in grams, measured strung. What the racquet actually weighs when you play with it. It is the easiest value to record and the most misread: on its own it says almost nothing, because it does not say where the weight sits.
Balance, in centimetres from the butt of the handle. The position of the centre of gravity. Two 300 g racquets, one balanced at 31 cm and the other at 33 cm, do not handle the same way: the second carries noticeably more mass ahead of the hand.
Swingweight, in kg·cm². The frame's inertia about the axis you rotate it around. It is the only one of the four that really describes what you feel as you accelerate: the racquet's resistance to changing speed. Mass and balance both contribute to it, and neither replaces it. It is also the value almost nobody gives you.
Stiffness, written RA. How much the frame flexes when the ball arrives. It governs return of energy, contact duration and part of what travels back up the arm. Below 62, a frame is soft: it absorbs energy instead of returning it. Above 72, it sends the vibration back. Our six adult moulds are all at 69 RA — firm, without being stiff.
The first two are printed on the packaging. Swingweight almost never is. Stiffness, rarely — and when it is, it is often the unstrung figure, which is not the one you will play.
What each one changes, taken on its own
Ten grams of extra mass placed in the handle changes little about trajectory, but steadies the racquet at contact: it gets pushed back less on a ball taken late. The same ten grams placed in the hoop changes everything, because it is not the quantity that decides, it is the place. Ten grams at 12 cm from the butt barely move swingweight; the same ten grams at 66 cm raise it by more than thirty points. A gram has no value in itself. It only has value somewhere.
One centimetre of balance towards the head means more mass ahead of the hand. You gain penetration and stability, you lose set-up speed. At the net, you feel it immediately.
Ten swingweight points is the change that is felt fastest and named worst. The racquet goes through the ball better and gets deflected less. It also asks you to anticipate more. This is the setting that separates a racquet that swings itself from a racquet you have to survive.
Five points of stiffness are invisible in a slow rally and visible everywhere on a committed strike. Stiffer, contact is short and sharp, the ball leaves fast, the feel turns dry. Softer, contact lengthens, the ball is carried longer, and some of the energy stays in the frame.
The trap is moving two values at once. You change racquets, so you change mass, balance, swingweight and stiffness at the same time — then try to attribute the difference you felt to one of them. That cannot be done.
Start from the racquet you already own
It is the only reliable method, and it is free.
Weigh it strung, with the overgrip and dampener in place. That is the mass you actually play.
Find its balance point by resting it across a table edge until it holds on its own, then measure from the butt.
Write down what you hold against it, in one sentence, in terms of behaviour: it gets pushed back on heavy balls, it arrives late at the net, it buzzes late in a match, the ball drops short when I brush up.
Those three lines are worth more than any twenty minutes in a shop, because they describe a real starting point. From there, one value moves at a time. That is exactly what a mass, balance and swingweight tuning on your own frame is for: starting from the racquet you already know, rather than starting again from an unknown.
If you want to understand how those three values combine, and why they do not simply add up, the complete tuning guide takes them one at a time, with the measurements.
The string decides as much as the frame — and costs a fraction of the price
A frame gets changed once every two or three years. A string gets changed several times a season. Yet between a soft multifilament and a stiff monofilament, the gap in feel at impact is of the same order as the gap between two frames from different families.
A string name tells you nothing. A number places it. Our range runs from N°1, the softest, to N°7, the most controlling, with an N°4.5 between the two middle steps. They are comparable with each other because they were measured on the same bench, with the same protocol. N°4 is the most versatile, and that is a question of shape: it is octagonal where N°5 is round. Its edges are what make the difference: for the same swing, N°4 bites the ball more, and it is that bite which makes it generous for the greatest number. N°5, smoother, is the other choice, not the lesser one: the choice of feel, control and predictability — and it lasts longer.
So before changing racquets, two things are worth trying: a different string, and a different tension. In many cases, what you hold against the frame comes from there.
Head size, string pattern and length
Three geometry parameters complete the four values. They cannot be tuned: they are chosen when you choose the frame.
Head size. A larger head deforms its string bed more at impact, so it returns more energy. It is also wider, and therefore harder to twist about its long axis: that is twistweight, the frame's resistance to torsion on a ball taken off to the side. The trade-off is that a larger head allows impacts further from that axis, where the leverage is greatest. A smaller head makes trajectory more predictable and demands a cleaner strike. Heads from 95 to 100 square inches cover almost every need today; the 85 disappeared for good reasons.
String pattern. A 16×19 lets the strings move more: more snapback — the strings slide sideways at impact then return to place, and it is that return that spins the ball — more rotation, faster wear. An 18×20 constrains them: a flatter trajectory, more predictability, less free spin. It is not "spin versus control", it is a question of what you already produce. A player who brushes up heavily does not need more of it added.
Length. 27 inches is the adult standard. Beyond that you gain tip speed on serve and lose manoeuvrability everywhere else. It is a real setting, rarely the first one to touch.
Three method errors that cost you
Testing four racquets on the same day. After twenty minutes, your arm and your timing have adapted to the first one. The others are judged against a sensation that is already distorted. One racquet per session, at minimum.
Judging on the first twenty minutes. A more demanding racquet feels worse straight away and better after three sessions. An easier racquet does the opposite. If you decide in the moment, you will systematically choose the lightest and most permissive one.
Comparing racquets strung differently. This is the most common error, and it invalidates everything. Two frames, two strings, two tensions: you are testing four variables and attributing the result to one.
One line of reasoning, end to end
Take a concrete case, to show what a properly framed decision looks like.
A player records his racquet: 305 g strung, balance at 32.5 cm. What he holds against it: it gets pushed back on heavy balls from the baseline, and it buzzes late in a match. He assumes he needs a heavier frame.
The record says something else. At 305 g and 32.5 cm, mass is already fine; what is missing is inertia where the impact happens. The first move is not to buy 320 g, it is to shift a few grams towards the sides of the hoop and put some back in the handle so as not to lose manoeuvrability. The late-match buzz probably belongs to the string: material, age, tension.
An order of magnitude, to show that these moves are calculated rather than guessed. Take a frame of 310 g, balanced at 32.0 cm, measured at 320 swingweight. Four grams placed at 66 cm from the butt bring it to 32.43 cm of balance and 332.5 swingweight. The same four grams placed at 12 cm bring it to 31.75 cm and to 320.0 swingweight — that is, no change at all. Same mass added, two different racquets. The formula fits on one line: ΔSW = m × (d − 10)², with m in kilograms and d the distance from the butt in centimetres.
Two changes, a few euros, and a before-and-after measurement. If the gap persists after that, then and only then does the frame question arise — and it arises with numbers.
What we do not know
We do not know which racquet suits you. Nobody knows that from a distance — that is as true for us as for anyone. What we do know how to do is measure what you play today, place it, and move one value at a time, giving you the numbers in writing.
If you want to place yours, the configurator asks the questions in the right order and returns a position, not a model name.
Comments