09-10-2019, 10:56 PM
There's a big difference between theory and practice!
At a practical level, even for the pros, the sweet spot on the racquet face on a bigger racquet is larger as you have agreed (I think).
Therefore, the chance of losing power (or as a % of loss of power) by hitting outside the sweet spot must be lessened - or conversely, with a smaller bat and sweet spot, the chances of a dud shot is higher i.e. the racquet is less forgiving.
And your physics discounts entirely, it would appear, the effects of leverage - the arm length, the swing arc and indeed, the length of the bat....that is why a tennis player never impacts the ball with his/her racquet at your so called 'best bounce spot'.
A racquet is not "freely suspended by a long length of string or balanced vertically on the end of its handle."
LP. you're not a climate change modeller are you?
At a practical level, even for the pros, the sweet spot on the racquet face on a bigger racquet is larger as you have agreed (I think).
Therefore, the chance of losing power (or as a % of loss of power) by hitting outside the sweet spot must be lessened - or conversely, with a smaller bat and sweet spot, the chances of a dud shot is higher i.e. the racquet is less forgiving.
And your physics discounts entirely, it would appear, the effects of leverage - the arm length, the swing arc and indeed, the length of the bat....that is why a tennis player never impacts the ball with his/her racquet at your so called 'best bounce spot'.
A racquet is not "freely suspended by a long length of string or balanced vertically on the end of its handle."
LP. you're not a climate change modeller are you?
Finals, then 4 in a row!