Author Archives: RacquetQuest
What is “Soft”?
For many years, we have been testing string for elongation and subsequent power potential.
There is a new batch of strings that include the term “soft” in the promotional language, seemingly in an effort to mitigate the injuries associated with very stiff strings.
At some point, we can go into detail about how the soft version of a string compares to the non-soft version; however, for now, I want to reintroduce you to a post we did in 2016… almost ten (10) years ago!
Click on this link to go to that post
Thank you for reading this again. It is important “Play Harder not Hurter™”
Head Extreme Pro 2026
If you are thinking of a new 98 square inch high-performance racquet, don’t make a decision until you try this one!
This one is the new Head Extreme Pro for 2026, with a beautiful cosmetic upgrade and material enhancements that improve performance.
Something that you may not notice but is very good is the elongated cross-string holes in the twelve (12) central cross strings’ location. This design increases the effective hitting area by a couple of inches without increasing the head width. This is not unique to the Extreme Series, but it does not show up in the Speed or Gravity series.
Head Extreme Pro 2026
| Manufacturer | Head |
|---|---|
| Racquet Model | Head Extreme Pro 2026 |
| Reference Tension | 55 |
| String | MonoGut ZX Pro |
| Machine Used | True Tension Pro |
| String Bed Stiffness - RDC/Units | 50 |
| String Bed Stiffness -FlexFour/Pounds | 63 |
| Strig Bed Stiffness - SBS/Pounds | 43.5 |
| String Bed Stiffness - ERT/Kg/cm | 34 |
| Racquet Flex, RDC/Units | 67 |
| Racquet Flex, FlexFour/Lbs | 43.5 |
| Racquet - In Plane Stiffness/Lbs/Inch | 493.6 |
| Weight, Grams | 330 |
| Weight, Ounces | 11.64 |
| Balance, mm | 323 |
| Balance, Inch | 12.72 |
| Length, Cm | 68.6 |
| Length, Inch | 27.008 |
| Head Width | 9.56 |
| Head Length | 12.87 |
| Head Area, cm2 | 623.8 |
| Head Area, Sq. Inch | 96.7 |
| Beam Height @ Grip, mm | 20.5 |
| Beam Height @ Mid, mm | 23.3 |
| Beam Height @ Tip | 22.4 |
| Beam Width @ Grip, mm | 15.7 |
| Beam Width @ Throat, mm | 134.0 |
| Beam Width @ Mid, mm | 11.5 |
| Beam Width @ Tip, mm | 13.9 w/Bumper Guard |
| Number of Main Strings | 16 |
| Number of Cross Strings | 19 |
| Ratio | .625 |
| Main String Grid Inch/mm | 7.21/183.1 |
| Cross String Grid Inch/mm | 9.63/244.6 |
| Density (% of head filled w/ string) | .728 |
| Average Cross String Space | .507 |
| Average Main String Space | .457 |
| Dynamic Tension, Kp, ERT | 34 |
| Dynamic Tension, Lbs/in | 190.2 |
| First Moment, Nm | .819 |
| Polar Moment | 331.0 |
| Torsional Stability | 14 |
| Swing Weight, Kg/cm2 | 317 |
| Swing Weight, Ounces | 11.18 |
| Swing Weight Calculated | 344.3 |
| Power, RDC | 55 |
| Control, RDC | 48 |
| Manueverability, RDC | 75 |
| Power, Calculated | 2074.2 |
| Head Points | 6.30 |
| Head Weight, % | 47.1% |
| Center of Percussion | 20.9 |
| Dwell Time, ms | 6.62 |
| Efective Stiffness - lbs | 26.4 - Flex Four Data |
| K, Lb/In | 160.26 |
| Dynamic Stiffness/Lbs | 369.5 |
| Dynamic Force/Lbs | 141.8 |
| GDR Ratio: static/dynamic | 1.94 |
| Recoil Weight | 155.24 |
| Twist Weight | 226.4 |
| End Weight | 134.9 |
| Tip Weight | 193.9 |
| 9 O'Clock | 97.5 |
| 3 O'Clock | 95.8 |
| Butt End | 136.9 |
| COF, Main | .348 |
| COF, Cross | .352 |
Rules? What rules?
Although we deal primarily with the racquet “rules,” it may be a good idea to know a little more about the “other” rules.
Here is a link to the International Tennis Federation (ITF): https://www.itftennis.com/media/7221/2026-rules-of-tennis-english.pdf
Here you can look at specific rules or download the entire “rule book”.
If you read our previous post, “Snap Back”, you may recognize the reason it was posted:
Have fun!
Snap Back?
For several years, tennis players have been told that some string material will “snap back” during impact with the tennis ball, creating an additional rotational force on the ball. This may be true for some period in some cases, but what if the string does not “snap back”?
Now what?
No Snap Back
If this happens to you, we suggest you do not move the string!
The string is in this position because your stroke sent it there! It just didn’t snap back.
This lack of snap-back creates a very nice string spacing that allows the ball to have greater intrusion into the string bed, more dwell time, and possibly more rotation.
This client strings his racquets frequently due to tension loss that may lead to what we see here. If you want to, or need to, continue playing with this racquet as you see it, try it without moving the string back into position.
Racquet Quest, LLC
