This user has no status.
Hello everyone,
When I started my journey as a coach, this was my general understanding of the characteristics of a racket that help children to develop:
It must be a thin handle, children should be able to almost touch their own palm with their fingertips whilst holding the handle.
The same coach taught me that the length is important too: if it’s too long, it could cause problems during the backswing of the backhand topspin stroke.
These points made sense to me, and I’ve tried my best to follow them.
I must admit, however, that I found it a bit difficult to understand why it is so hard to find blades with shorter grips.
Many children’s blades seem to have a smaller hitting surface than ‘normal’ rackets.
This makes them (as well as the rubbers) lighter, and lighter equipment should be easier to accelerate.
Furthermore, this should cause an increase in speed (due to the higher frequency).
However, less mass also means less momentum.
I’m not entirely sure how these effects influence one another, but it seems that blades with smaller hitting surfaces do not result in a reduction in overall speed, as I would have intuitively assumed.
That being said, using smaller blades for a child's first racket makes me look for slow rubbers.
Regarding the blades' hardness I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other.
Here too, my intuition tells me that softer veneers seem to be the right choice for developing a better feel for the ball.
On the other hand, choosing the best rubbers has become something of a puzzle to me.
At first glance, ‘soft’ (and slow/low catapult effect) seems to be the answer once again.
However, I have read several posts which strongly advise against using rubbers that are too soft (rubbers with a hardness of >45° are even recommended).
That made me think.
Choosing medium-hard rubbers should not only reduce control, but also makes the racket more head-heavy – particularly in rackets with a smaller and thinner handle.
Especially on the forehand side, I tend to prefer rubbers with little catapult effect.
This encourages the children to make full use of their weight transfer.
In my opinion, there is less margin for error with the backhand, but given the shorter swing that is common nowadays, medium-hard rubbers seem to be a legit choice.
What do you think?
When I started my journey as a coach, this was my general understanding of the characteristics of a racket that help children to develop:
- not too heavy
- blade not too fast and stiff
- rubbers should be soft and not too fast
It must be a thin handle, children should be able to almost touch their own palm with their fingertips whilst holding the handle.
The same coach taught me that the length is important too: if it’s too long, it could cause problems during the backswing of the backhand topspin stroke.
These points made sense to me, and I’ve tried my best to follow them.
I must admit, however, that I found it a bit difficult to understand why it is so hard to find blades with shorter grips.
Many children’s blades seem to have a smaller hitting surface than ‘normal’ rackets.
This makes them (as well as the rubbers) lighter, and lighter equipment should be easier to accelerate.
Furthermore, this should cause an increase in speed (due to the higher frequency).
However, less mass also means less momentum.
I’m not entirely sure how these effects influence one another, but it seems that blades with smaller hitting surfaces do not result in a reduction in overall speed, as I would have intuitively assumed.
That being said, using smaller blades for a child's first racket makes me look for slow rubbers.
Regarding the blades' hardness I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other.
Here too, my intuition tells me that softer veneers seem to be the right choice for developing a better feel for the ball.
On the other hand, choosing the best rubbers has become something of a puzzle to me.
At first glance, ‘soft’ (and slow/low catapult effect) seems to be the answer once again.
However, I have read several posts which strongly advise against using rubbers that are too soft (rubbers with a hardness of >45° are even recommended).
That made me think.
Choosing medium-hard rubbers should not only reduce control, but also makes the racket more head-heavy – particularly in rackets with a smaller and thinner handle.
Especially on the forehand side, I tend to prefer rubbers with little catapult effect.
This encourages the children to make full use of their weight transfer.
In my opinion, there is less margin for error with the backhand, but given the shorter swing that is common nowadays, medium-hard rubbers seem to be a legit choice.
What do you think?
Last edited:
