Squash Source

3 responses to “Black Ball Open 2019”

1. Iqbal

   March 19, 2019

   17-7 to Teardrop vs Conventional head shapes. I counted half point to each for Tecnifibre Dynergy and Prince Airstick 130. Any insights on why most pros go for teardrop models?

   Reply
   1. Pierre

      March 31, 2019

      I’m not sure. I think it’s just whatever you get used to!

      Reply
   2. Mitch Guthman

      April 10, 2019

      I think it’s partly as Pierre says: it’s what you’re used to playing with and feel comfortable with. But I also suspect that a lot of pros consider the teardrop shape to be more forgiving, typically with a larger sweet-spot that’s located slightly higher up on the racket (depending on modifications to the frame and grip that might shift the location of the sweet-spot).

      I suspect it’s also much easier to change rackets and/or racket companies because the sweet-spot and balance of most of the teardrop shape rackets that I’ve hit with over the years seem to be pretty similar. There’s obviously still differences (the most obvious being head light vs head heavy) but within those categories, generally speaking, I think teardrop shapes tend to have more similarities and fewer idiosyncrasies than conventionally shaped rackets so you can adapt and starting middling the ball sooner and easier.

      An example is the Salming racket that I play with. It has good control and tremendous power but (even considering how fussy I am about rackets) it has a lot of peculiarities and it took some time getting used to. It’s a fantastic racket but but if I were ever going to change, I’d probably go back to the teardrop shape just to make the transition easier.

      Could be wrong, through. And it wouldn’t surprise me. But that’s what I think. I’d be interested in hearing what others think.

      Reply