Mailbag: Why Thin Wasn’t In and More
Category: Tennis
Publish Date: 08-06-2010 12:13 PM -0400
TENNIS.com gear editor Bill Gray and his technical advisers will answer your equipment questions every Friday. Click here to send one of your own.
I was very interested to read on your site that Donnay is bringing back the ultra-thin 15-millimeter beam that Wilson released briefly in the 1990s. Why didn’t the skinny beam catch on the first time?—Gregg
The Wilson 5.5si thin-body came—and quickly disappeared—in 1996, largely a victim of the misperception that this thinnest-ever frame (the size of some badminton racquets) just couldn’t withstand ball impact. In fact, our playtests showed it could hold its own, but players back then were still infatuated with the power-mongering wide-bodies like the Wilson Profile and thick-beam versions of Wilson’s Hammer and Sledgehammer that were bestsellers throughout most of the 1990s.
The 5.5si did have a comparatively low power quotient because of its thin beam, but it was only intended for advanced players with fast swings who generated their own power. The advantage of the thin beam was more maneuverability and racquet-head speed because there was less aerodynamic drag during the swing than with clunkier frames. “The aerodynamic principles of the 5.5si are sound, and the playtests we documented showed most everyone felt their spin potential increased when they used the racquet,” recalls Wilson’s Bill Severa, who designed it. We’re currently putting the Donnay version of the 15-millimeter frame through its paces (the X-Orange is pictured at right) and will give you a full report soon on TENNIS.com.
I’m a 3.5–4.0 player and am turning 16 soon. I use a Wilson K-Six One 95. My coach has advised me this is not the ideal racquet for me as it is very heavy, especially when I try to snap my wrist on the forehand. He thinks I should get a lighter racquet. What do you recommend?—Mahesh
We agree with your coach that a 12.3-ounce heavyweight like the K-Six is a bit too much racquet for a player at your level and age. We suggest you take the Wilson Pro Open BLX out for a spin. It’s more than an ounce lighter, and produces such a comfortable feel without compromising on the feedback and control you’re used to with the K-Six.
I still play with my high school racquet from 1992, a Head Atlantis 660. It's a great racquet, but it's time to get into the 21st century. I'm a 4.0 all-court player who likes to hit topspin. Any suggestions?—Jim
TENNIS.com racquet adviser Bruce Levine suggests you try one of the newer hybrids that combine a lot of the attributes of game-improvement and player sticks. Since you’re already in the Head family, check out the YouTek Extreme MP, along with the Babolat Roddick Pure Drive, the Babolat Aero Pro, and the Dunlop Aerogel 4D 500 Tour. And welcome to the second decade of the new millennium.
I was at a major sporting goods store in Manhattan where I get my racquets strung. An employee in the tennis department told me to try a 16-gauge string for more spin, saying it was thinner. I thought the opposite was true, that the 18-gauge is thinner. Even after I showed him the thicknesses stated on the packaging, he wouldn’t back down, and said that the 16 gauge would actually be thinner than the 18 gauge when both were pre-stretched. Is this true? These are people I normally turn to for informed advice on equipment, but now I'm wary.—Ernie
That advice is more than enough to make you wary—it’s downright scary. It should be good motivation to solicit expertise from a pro shop, tennis specialty store, or this Mailbag. Two good shops in your area are Mason’s Tennis Mart and Grand Central Racquet. At some retail outlets, clerks are transferred frequently from department to department. My guess is yours was probably selling baseball bats the week before.
