Does the Shape of a Padel Racket Really Determine Its Balance?

Round means low balance.

Teardrop means medium balance.

Diamond means high balance.

Right?

That is how padel rackets are usually explained. It is convenient, easy to understand and supported by a reasonable physical expectation.

But the scientific answer is more interesting:

Shape influences balance. It does not determine it.

At FLO Lab, we want to understand what is actually happening—and separate useful expectations from measurements we have yet to make.

First, What Is Balance?

Every padel racket has a centre of mass, or COM.

This is the point at which the racket’s mass can be considered balanced. Its position tells us whether more of the racket’s mass is concentrated towards the handle or farther into the head.

A practical way to identify it is to position the finished racket horizontally over a narrow support and move it until the balance point is found.

The distance from the bottom of the handle to this point can then be recorded.

For example:

Balance point: 263 mm from the butt

A higher measurement places the centre of mass farther away from the bottom of the handle and closer to the racket head.

In a study of 137 padel rackets, Blanes and colleagues reported balance distances ranging from 246 mm to 283 mm, with an average of 265.52 mm. The rackets also ranged from 316 to 387 grams. This helps explain why rackets with similar overall weights can still feel noticeably different. Blanes et al., Sensors, 2022

Why Should Shape Matter?

Consider three typical padel racket geometries:

Round → Teardrop → Diamond

As the geometry moves from round towards diamond, the widest region of the racket head generally moves higher.

That changes where some of the structure forming the racket is located.

A conventional round shape tends to carry more of its head geometry around the central and lower regions. A pronounced diamond shape tends to extend more of its geometry towards the top of the racket.

The centre of mass depends on both the amount of mass present and its position.

In simplified form:

Here, mi represents each portion of mass and xi represents its distance from the chosen reference point—typically the butt of the racket.

Move mass farther away from the handle and the centre of mass tends to move upwards.

This gives us a logical hypothesis:

• Round → lower average COM
• Teardrop → intermediate average COM
• Diamond → higher average COM

But there is a catch.

A Racket Is More Than Its Silhouette

A finished padel racket contains numerous components.

These include:

• The frame
• EVA core
• Carbon or fibreglass faces
• Structural reinforcements
• Bridge
• Hole pattern
• Handle
• Grip
• Butt cap
• Wrist strap

Every gram contributes to the final centre of mass.

Imagine adding 10 grams near the bottom of the handle. The racket becomes heavier, but its centre of mass can move downwards.

Place the same 10 grams near the top of the racket and the centre of mass moves upwards.

It is the same amount of additional weight with a completely different effect on balance.

That means a diamond racket is not automatically high balance simply because it is diamond-shaped.

Likewise, a round racket is not guaranteed to have low balance.

Shape creates a tendency. Construction determines the final result.

The Question FLO Lab Wants to Test

FLO has access to a library of racket moulds covering round, teardrop and diamond geometries.

Rather than simply accepting their conventional classifications, FLO Lab wants to investigate a more fundamental question:

How strongly does racket geometry correlate with the measured centre of mass of a finished padel racket?

This can be tested.

Rackets from different mould families could be produced using controlled construction variables, including comparable:

• Foam
• Face construction
• Frame layup
• Drilling pattern
• Grip
• Butt cap
• Wrist strap
• Finishing components

The centre of mass of every finished racket could then be measured repeatedly using the same procedure.

We might expect the group averages to follow this pattern:

Round → lower average COM

Teardrop → intermediate average COM

Diamond → higher average COM

But these are currently hypotheses.

They are not FLO Lab results.

The measurements must tell us whether the expectation is correct, how strong the relationship is and how much variation exists within each shape family.

Going Beyond Three Marketing Labels

There is another problem.

What exactly makes a racket a teardrop?

The boundary between round and teardrop—or between teardrop and diamond—is not always obvious.

Two moulds carrying the same marketing description can have visibly different geometries. Treating every racket in the same category as geometrically identical loses useful information.

FLO Lab could therefore measure the actual silhouette of each racket head.

One possible metric is its geometric centroid: the geometric centre of the two-dimensional head shape.

We could then investigate the relationship between:

Geometric centroid of the head

and

Measured centre of mass of the finished racket

If a meaningful correlation exists, this could become more informative than relying only on the three traditional labels.

However, the geometric centroid is not a substitute for measuring balance. It treats the silhouette as geometry and does not fully account for:

• Hole placement
• Varying frame-wall thickness
• Internal reinforcements
• Differences in material density
• Handle construction
• Uneven mass distribution

It should therefore be treated as one possible predictor—not the final answer.

Balance Is Not the Same as Manoeuvrability

There is one more important complication.

Consider two rackets:

Racket A

• Weight: 360 g
• Balance point: 265 mm

Racket B

• Weight: 360 g
• Balance point: 265 mm

They have identical mass.

They have identical balance points.

Will they necessarily feel identical when swung?

No.

One racket could concentrate more of its mass close to the centre, while another places more mass towards its extremities.

Their centres of mass could remain identical, but their resistance to rotational acceleration—their moment of inertia—could be different.

This is why a simple specification such as:

Weight: 360 g
Balance: Medium

does not tell the whole story.

To understand how a racket moves, we ultimately need to examine:

Weight

↓

Balance / Centre of Mass

↓

Mass Distribution

↓

Moment of Inertia

↓

Manoeuvrability

The cited study makes this same broader distinction: racket manoeuvrability depends on its mass, the location of its centre of mass and how that mass is distributed. The researchers measured multiple moments of inertia and proposed a manoeuvrability classification based on those inertial properties. Blanes et al., Sensors, 2022

From Marketing Labels to Measurements

There is nothing inherently wrong with describing a racket as round, teardrop or diamond.

These are useful shape descriptions.

Likewise, low, medium and high balance can give players a quick indication of what to expect.

The problem begins when descriptive categories are treated as measurements.

They are not.

A mould can suggest where the balance may lie.

Only the finished racket can reveal where its centre of mass actually lies.

Instead of saying:

Round = low balance

We would rather say:

Round = a tendency towards lower balance

Then measure it.

Instead of saying:

Diamond = high balance

We would say:

Diamond = a tendency towards higher balance

Then measure it.

Because the ruler does not know whether a racket has been marketed as round, teardrop or diamond.

It only tells us where that racket actually balances.

And that is exactly what we want FLO Lab to find out.

FLO Lab

Measure it. Understand it. Then describe how it plays.