PDA

View Full Version : So Why Has Head Nixed it?


jaap deboeck
09-24-2007, 07:23 AM
Whither Flexpoint? New Microgels do use this technology. It is odd for a new technology, other than grommet gizmos, to be scuttled after a year? What was wrong with "flexpoint?"

vinnier6
09-24-2007, 09:04 AM
i dont know...i dont have a problem with it as i am still using 3 of them....

Klatu Verata Necktie
09-24-2007, 09:23 AM
People just didn't believe the claims. Most technologies are BS, "flexpoint" just seemed to go too far.

MrAWD
09-24-2007, 09:53 AM
Well, I happen to see this FXP to MG transition slightly different. FXP technology seem to have two spots on the frame that give (according to Head) improved pocketing of the ball. Now, MG technology is the same as the FXP just with much more spots on the frame that help pocketing the ball. Basically, instead of having just one spot that would give in to allow pocketing, now the whole head of the frame is allowing extra pocketing compare to the conventional racquets.

So, from this point of view Head didn't abandon FXP technology but rather improved it a lot!


Fedja

timeisonmyside
09-24-2007, 10:04 AM
I play with a Flexpoint Prestige, and cannot feel the extra ball pocketing on this racquet. People with the FXP Radical have told me that they can feel it.

At least it's more believable than Fischer's magnetic technology.

0d1n
09-24-2007, 11:24 AM
I play with a Flexpoint Prestige, and cannot feel the extra ball pocketing on this racquet. People with the FXP Radical have told me that they can feel it.

At least it's more believable than Fischer's magnetic technology.

It might SOUND more believable but the Magnetic Series from Fischer was an actual improvement over their previous line (i.e Magnetic tour > previous Tour 100, and MSpeed Pro 1 >>> Black/red Pro no 1), where as head's flexpoint models were crappier than the previous models (except the prestige, which might actually be an improvement over the LM). But the Instinct, Radical ... and a few other lighter models were WORSE than the LM equivalent models.

BMG
09-24-2007, 11:37 AM
I have hit with the FXP Prestige and didn't feel anything different re: ball "pocketing", etc. I think the technology/marketing is kind of lame but I think that the racquet is excellent.

hyogen
09-24-2007, 12:20 PM
i ,too, have been skeptical at this flexpoint technology...

i tried out the FXP radical tour when it first came out. was too heavy and not for me...

I really liked the i.Radical... I just tried the FXP Flexpoint team and I can say I DEFINITELY feel the pocketing of the ball. Furthermore, on my backhand side which is the side i have most trouble with...I was hitting GREAT consistent backhands DEEP into the court. I have been demo'ing A LOT of racquets and this is the only one that has been awesome for my backhands consistently.

circusmouse
09-24-2007, 12:24 PM
I hit with the flexpoint instinct and thought I could feel a small flex on contact, but I just found it distracting. Plus, the whole "pocketing" notion, as displayed in diagrams on their website and promotional material, would only work if you hit the middle of the stringbed. If you hit near the top of the strings, the frame would presumably bend back, which provides no advantage. Flexpoint turned me off of head racquets in my last couple of racquet searches, so I'm glad to see it go.

WhiteSox05CA
09-24-2007, 01:13 PM
The whole concept of flexpoint was a joke.

skiracer55
09-24-2007, 01:20 PM
...I'm currently using Head Metallix 2, which I went to after a season with FXP Radical Team, which I also liked. The Metallix 2 is way rigid in the throat area, which is essential for me for control. Yep, I can feel the pocketing from the FlexPoints on everything, including the serve, and it definitely improves the dwell time of the ball on the racket.

Head frequently looks like they've got a couple of competing technologies. I prefer to think that they've got all kinds of leading edge R&D going on, so they've got new thinking and new benefits coming out in overlapping waves.

I've hit with about everything out there, and I choose Head...but that's my choice. Your mileage may, and probably will, vary...

AndrewD
09-24-2007, 02:19 PM
The Flexpoint system DOES make a difference. It just isn't possible to put something like that into a racquet and it not do something. HOWEVER, it isn't a difference that is, necessarily, going to be noticed by the majority of players. In itself, the concept is simple and should have been quite easy for people to understand (make the racquet narrower at one point and flex reduces at that point - in essence merely variable width, as you get on numerous racquets). Unfortunately, the way it was marketed just didn't take and the actual difference it makes is so imperceptible it was always going to be near impossible to get the average person to understand and believe the claims (most people require change to be detectable on the sensory level and, even then, require it to be noticable by at least two or three senses - sight, sound and/or feel- before they're willing to admit it exists. most will not be able to accept change on an intellectual level only).

hyogen
09-25-2007, 09:01 AM
as for when hitting the ball with the top of the string bed above the "flex point"...

it feels just a little bit different but it is fine. Not too erratic ball behavior. I am convinced that flexpoint is actually pretty good. definitely increases the dwell time of the ball. the technology makes ok sense.

Now what I want to ask is -- for ppl who have the Microgel racquets or who have demo'ed them--do those have a really really nice long dwell time?

fuzz nation
09-25-2007, 09:41 AM
Of course they ditched it!

If these companies don't constantly turn out new technologies that they can hype, it's harder for them to market their gear. While it's arguable as to how effective the flexpoint technology has been for players, it was a phenomenal idea for marketing because you can actually see it.

A good pal of mine has been a teaching pro for decades and his Prince rep gave him the "big schpeel" on the landmark, historic, blah-blah-blah breakthrough of the O-port technology, but a year later the same rep was pitching the speedports as an improvement that rendered the old stuff obsolete. Go figure!

hyogen
09-25-2007, 03:47 PM
OK so I found something out by talking to an owner of a tennis shop over here.

They said the microgels have been a bust... he's played with the radical and radical pro and the extreme pro....they're ok and he does kinda feel the increased ball dwell time...but for him they're too soft...he like the extreme pro the most.

He said that the Flexpoints are selling much better than the microgels. Also that the Flexpoint Radical outsold the Flexpoint Prestige like 8 to 1.

He says that the flexpoint technology is actually pretty good. .. and he answered my question about what if you hit the ball with the top of the string bed.

Well, he says it was more designed with that in mind. Cuz the sweet spot of most racquets are high up on the racquet. Also, most ppl tend to hit with the top of their racquet and thus that's where the most wear is on the strings.

So, hitting the ball above the "flex point" near the top of the frame works fine too!

I am dying to buy a prestige...I have learned that the i.prestige was the stiffest out of them all.... I heard to stay away from the LM prestige....so...I guess it's either a Prestige Tour (with suspension handle)....or FXP prestige (or the Team), or the microgel prestige.

thundaga
09-25-2007, 03:50 PM
i demoed the flexpoints ages ago and i have to say i did notice the racquet "cupping" the ball for longer... tho it really didn't seem to have any major benefits over other racquets.

sargeinaz
09-25-2007, 04:19 PM
OK so I found something out by talking to an owner of a tennis shop over here.

They said the microgels have been a bust... he's played with the radical and radical pro and the extreme pro....they're ok and he does kinda feel the increased ball dwell time...but for him they're too soft...he like the extreme pro the most.

He said that the Flexpoints are selling much better than the microgels. Also that the Flexpoint Radical outsold the Flexpoint Prestige like 8 to 1.


Keep in mind that microgels are new and the flexpoints have been out forever, so give people time to buy the new rackets. Ive played with the microgel radical MP and thought it was a fantastic racket, the only stick I liked better was the RDS002. If the MG Radical MP (the 11oz one) came in an open pattern, it would have made my decision to go with the yonex much more difficult. I also hit with the flexpoint radical and preferred the microgel much more.
________
Z50M (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_Z50M)

WhiteSox05CA
09-25-2007, 04:43 PM
It's all marketing, it's all getting you to believe it works, it's all about NEW technology whether it's real or not.

Head never has had any good technologies. Flexpoint (duh) and MicroGel (Dunlop released AeroGel first, poor attempt)

Chauvalito
09-25-2007, 05:26 PM
Its not physically possible all, if you take Physics 1, you will realize why.

The only possible way FP could work, is if the FP was near the middle of the frame, and the ball hit the racket near the middle of the frame.

Then, possibly, the top half of the racket could Flex SLIGHTLY around the ball.

In its current position its not possible.

Hopefully someone with a better physics background can explain.

me is bored
09-25-2007, 05:36 PM
flexpoint was stupid crap. you had to hit it directly in the center every time in order to get the benefits, and you also had to hit really hard. so it was just a gimic. all it did was make the racket stiffer. trick a few million people, then ditch it.

stormholloway
09-25-2007, 05:52 PM
There's just no benefit to making the beam inconsistent like that.

saram
09-25-2007, 06:51 PM
I have two FXP Prestige mids and they do not pocket the ball nor create a better 'dwell' than my i Prestige mids. I almost prefer the i Prestige mids more...

JW10S
09-25-2007, 07:11 PM
Whither Flexpoint? New Microgels do use this technology. It is odd for a new technology, other than grommet gizmos, to be scuttled after a year? What was wrong with "flexpoint?"Flexpoints were introduced more than 2 years ago, which is when I first got mine--which is the lifespan of any tech these days. There is nothing 'wrong' with Flexpoint tech, MicroGel is simply better.

The_Dark_Knight
09-25-2007, 07:30 PM
People just didn't believe the claims. Most technologies are BS, "flexpoint" just seemed to go too far.

And flexpoints sucked.


Really bad.

Deuce
09-25-2007, 09:18 PM
Whither Flexpoint? New Microgels do use this technology. It is odd for a new technology, other than grommet gizmos, to be scuttled after a year? What was wrong with "flexpoint?"
Come on, Jaap - you can do much better than this.

Of course they ditched it!

If these companies don't constantly turn out new technologies that they can hype, it's harder for them to market their gear. While it's arguable as to how effective the flexpoint technology has been for players, it was a phenomenal idea for marketing because you can actually see it.

A good pal of mine has been a teaching pro for decades and his Prince rep gave him the "big schpeel" on the landmark, historic, blah-blah-blah breakthrough of the O-port technology, but a year later the same rep was pitching the speedports as an improvement that rendered the old stuff obsolete. Go figure!
It's nice to see that at least one person understands what's going on.
I would have thought it was extremely obvious to just about everyone.

A few years ago on this board, TW had a 'segment' where we could ask questions of an 'engineer' from Prince.

My question was:
"What will be the next three technological gimmicks to appear, in order of appearance, and what is the approximate date that they will become obsolete and useless, and replaced with the next?"

Given the state of the racquet industry, mine was a very legitimate question. Of course, I would have asked the same question of any representative of any other racquet company.
Marketing is so much interwoven with 'research & development' that the mention of "R&D" has now become a significant marketing tool.
Some - such as myself - even question whether or not 'research & development' actually exists anymore.
'Planned obsolescence' is alarge part of the 'new marketing'. Selling is no longer about what you have - it's about what you claim to have.

hyogen
09-26-2007, 07:57 AM
Keep in mind that microgels are new and the flexpoints have been out forever, so give people time to buy the new rackets. Ive played with the microgel radical MP and thought it was a fantastic racket, the only stick I liked better was the RDS002. If the MG Radical MP (the 11oz one) came in an open pattern, it would have made my decision to go with the yonex much more difficult. I also hit with the flexpoint radical and preferred the microgel much more.

i'm gonna have to demo the microgel radical mp.

as much as it's easy to blindly believe that a new technology works--it's just as easy to cast doubt on it and be fashionably skeptical. I am just saying some of us, including myself, have tried out many racquets including the flexpoints and without a doubt we can feel the benefits of the flexpoint technology. I'm not saying it's the best out there, but it definitely lets you cup the ball for a noticeable amount longer.

cknobman
09-26-2007, 08:14 AM
If flexpoint wasnt crap then Head would have flexpoint racquets with new microgel in them to further increase the dwell time and "cupping" of the ball. Did we see this? H_ell no, and not because Head cant do it either, its because the flexpoint train has come to a grinding hault. I tried a fxp radical and compared to its lm predecessor(awesome groundstroke racquet) it felt like crap. Problem is a racquet dosnt get a chance to "flex" if the person swinging it dosnt produce a hard full swing (90% of all rec players) so you see absolutley no benefit except a racquet with less feel and feedback. As someone stated earlier Head never has produced any decent technologies in their racquets. Heck when it comes down to it 90% of all new racquet technology is hype and advertisment to increase sales.

GS
09-26-2007, 08:14 AM
I still think Head's best marketing strategy was when they came out with the i.intelligence racquet years ago. It had a computer microchip built in it to make this racquet "smarter". I guess the chips all had bugs in em, since this lineup didn't sell and got laughed off the market pretty quickly.

skiracer55
09-26-2007, 08:20 AM
i'm gonna have to demo the microgel radical mp.

as much as it's easy to blindly believe that a new technology works--it's just as easy to cast doubt on it and be fashionably skeptical. I am just saying some of us, including myself, have tried out many racquets including the flexpoints and without a doubt we can feel the benefits of the flexpoint technology. I'm not saying it's the best out there, but it definitely lets you cup the ball for a noticeable amount longer.

I think there's two things we've discovered in this thread:

- Racket manufacturers are always going to try to come out with the next big thing so you'll buy more of their new rackets.

- Some technological advances are meaningful to some players, some are meaningful to all players, and some are pretty much meaningless to all players. Is "planned obsolesence" a manufacturer strategy? You bet it is. On the other hand, see above, some technologies are meaningful, at least to some players. So if Wilson comes up with something genuine, then Babolat has to counter...and Prince has to counter that, and so forth. So I think as a group, tennis players benefit from the new gee-whiz technologies...providing we're informed consumers. And...not to be a shill for this forum and the TW reviews and customer feedback threads...where could you find a better advocacy for tennis players cum consumers of the New Racket Technology?

Linkkokiri
09-26-2007, 09:24 AM
I have two FXP Prestige mids and they do not pocket the ball nor create a better 'dwell' than my i Prestige mids. I almost prefer the i Prestige mids more...

Did you say "almost"?! ^^

Wheelz
09-26-2007, 11:33 AM
If flexpoint wasnt crap then Head would have flexpoint racquets with new microgel in them to further increase the dwell time and "cupping" of the ball. Did we see this? H_ell no, and not because Head cant do it either, its because the flexpoint train has come to a grinding hault. I tried a fxp radical and compared to its lm predecessor(awesome groundstroke racquet) it felt like crap. Problem is a racquet dosnt get a chance to "flex" if the person swinging it dosnt produce a hard full swing (90% of all rec players) so you see absolutley no benefit except a racquet with less feel and feedback. As someone stated earlier Head never has produced any decent technologies in their racquets. Heck when it comes down to it 90% of all new racquet technology is hype and advertisment to increase sales.

Someone mentioned that the Microgel incorporates the same FXP tech...but it's with Microgel to create more "spots"... I think it's on the first page.

vsbabolat
09-26-2007, 11:55 AM
There has been some confusion about Flexpoint and Microgel being similar. Flexpoint and Microgel have nothing to do with each other.

This is what MicroGel is:
MicroGel Technology

FEATURE:
When combined with carbon composite fibers in the racquet head, MicroGel deforms and compresses upon ball impact, uniformly absorbing and distributing the impact load around the entire frame.

BENEFIT:
According to HEAD, MicroGel creates a rock-solid feel and improved comfort while offering extra stability against twisting.

This is what Flexpoint is:

FLEXPOINT
Flexpoint racquets feature two precisely-engineered control holes in the racquet's head. This creates a new point of flex, which cups the ball and improves control without losing power. The patented HEAD Flexpoint technology breaks the rules of traditional racquet design by not making racquets stiffer, but by engineering them to flex in a new and revolutionary way.

With a conventional racquet, the ball strikes the racquet at 90 degrees, but due to the racquet flexing it leaves the racquet at a different angle. A Flexpoint racquet is designed to cup the ball by flexing at the Flexpoints. The cupping effect reduces the angle at which the ball leaves the strings and promotes more accurate hitting. Flexpoint technology increases the dwell time and ball pocketing due to its cupping effect which increases feel and provides a larger sweetspot.

Flexpoints are made up of two complimentary features and are located at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions on the racquet head. Each Flexpoint features an engineered dimple to create flexibility by reducing the beam width by a maximum of 25%. Each Flexpoint also features a hole in the center of the dimple which reduces sectional stiffness by 50%.

hyogen
09-26-2007, 12:04 PM
There has been some confusion about Flexpoint and Microgel being similar. Flexpoint and Microgel have nothing to do with each other.

This is what MicroGel is:
MicroGel Technology

FEATURE:
When combined with carbon composite fibers in the racquet head, MicroGel deforms and compresses upon ball impact, uniformly absorbing and distributing the impact load around the entire frame.

BENEFIT:
According to HEAD, MicroGel creates a rock-solid feel and improved comfort while offering extra stability against twisting.

This is what Flexpoint is:

FLEXPOINT
Flexpoint racquets feature two precisely-engineered control holes in the racquet's head. This creates a new point of flex, which cups the ball and improves control without losing power. The patented HEAD Flexpoint technology breaks the rules of traditional racquet design by not making racquets stiffer, but by engineering them to flex in a new and revolutionary way.

With a conventional racquet, the ball strikes the racquet at 90 degrees, but due to the racquet flexing it leaves the racquet at a different angle. A Flexpoint racquet is designed to cup the ball by flexing at the Flexpoints. The cupping effect reduces the angle at which the ball leaves the strings and promotes more accurate hitting. Flexpoint technology increases the dwell time and ball pocketing due to its cupping effect which increases feel and provides a larger sweetspot.

Flexpoints are made up of two complimentary features and are located at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions on the racquet head. Each Flexpoint features an engineered dimple to create flexibility by reducing the beam width by a maximum of 25%. Each Flexpoint also features a hole in the center of the dimple which reduces sectional stiffness by 50%.


i think most of us realize this, but I am hoping it will have the same cupping effect as the flexpoint.

If the microgel frame compresses like it shows on the pictures/diagram then that should absorb the impact of the ball a little bit longer--and increase the cupping/dwell time of the ball.

What do you think?

vsbabolat
09-26-2007, 12:12 PM
i think most of us realize this, but I am hoping it will have the same cupping effect as the flexpoint.

If the microgel frame compresses like it shows on the pictures/diagram then that should absorb the impact of the ball a little bit longer--and increase the cupping/dwell time of the ball.

What do you think?

I don't think Microgel increases dwell time or cupping of the ball. Microgel is supposed to make the racquet more comfortable and have extra stability. Like what HEAD had with Twaron Fiber.

hyogen
09-26-2007, 02:22 PM
hm...if that's the case it turns me off to the idea of waiting for the i.prestige.

what do YOU think about the microgel? radical or whatever u use.

vsbabolat
09-26-2007, 03:11 PM
I have hit a lot with the Microgel Radical MP and I liked it. It plays stiffer than the specs indicate with good stability and feel. I thought it was on the light side and could be easily customized. The rumor right now is that the Microgel Prestige mid is supposed to play close to the Prestige Classic 600. I hope that turns out to be true.

Klatu Verata Necktie
09-26-2007, 04:43 PM
The rumor right now is that the Microgel Prestige mid is supposed to play close to the Prestige Classic 600. I hope that turns out to be true.

Where did you hear that rumor? I'm also hoping it's true. I got a chance to hit with drakulie's Prestige Classic 600 last week, and loved it. It's definately a stick that should be made forever, ala the POG.

vsbabolat
09-26-2007, 05:46 PM
Where did you hear that rumor? I'm also hoping it's true. I got a chance to hit with drakulie's Prestige Classic 600 last week, and loved it. It's definately a stick that should be made forever, ala the POG.

I heard this at TW.
I was in NYC over the weekend for the open. I had the afternoon yesterday to kick around before my flight left so I stopped in at RPNY. They had just received a demo of the mid. Perhaps from the Head rep mentioned earlier? Roman does a lot in the pro ranks so it wouldn't be a far stretch for him to get one. Anyways, the guy at RPNY said it was supposed to play quite similar to the older prestige models.

I did not take pics, so don't bug me about it.

Greg

Here are a couple photos from the thread http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=154339
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w50/vsbabolat/microgelprestige1.jpg
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w50/vsbabolat/microgelprestige2.jpg

sargeinaz
09-26-2007, 07:55 PM
^^^ the microgel prestige looks great and for some reason I have a feeling that lots and lots of people are going to like it.
________
DC MEDICAL MARIJUANA (http://dc.dispensaries.org/)

Deuce
09-26-2007, 09:37 PM
i'm gonna have to demo the microgel radical mp.

as much as it's easy to blindly believe that a new technology works--it's just as easy to cast doubt on it and be fashionably skeptical. I am just saying some of us, including myself, have tried out many racquets including the flexpoints and without a doubt we can feel the benefits of the flexpoint technology. I'm not saying it's the best out there, but it definitely lets you cup the ball for a noticeable amount longer.
Oh, brother...
You'd have to be a physicist and would have to dissect the racquet to know if what you like about the racquet is because of the 'flexpoints'.
That you like the racquet could be owing to any number of elements, including some variables.

I think there's two things we've discovered in this thread:

- Racket manufacturers are always going to try to come out with the next big thing so you'll buy more of their new rackets.

- Some technological advances are meaningful to some players, some are meaningful to all players, and some are pretty much meaningless to all players. Is "planned obsolesence" a manufacturer strategy? You bet it is. On the other hand, see above, some technologies are meaningful, at least to some players. So if Wilson comes up with something genuine, then Babolat has to counter...and Prince has to counter that, and so forth. So I think as a group, tennis players benefit from the new gee-whiz technologies...providing we're informed consumers. And...not to be a shill for this forum and the TW reviews and customer feedback threads...where could you find a better advocacy for tennis players cum consumers of the New Racket Technology?
The fact that a given 'new technology' isn't universally adored would certainly seem to indicate that the 'new technology' is a gimmick. If it actually worked as company X claims, then every player (including pros, even) would not only feel it and recognize it, but would also benefit from it - which is clearly not the case.

Flexpoint, for instance. Head claims that it 'cups' the ball. But, as we see in this thread, those who have tried Flexpoints are far from unanimous in their agreement with Head's claim. Ergo - gimmick.

Seems pretty simple (and obvious) to me.

Racquet improvement reached its peak over a decade ago. Since then, the racquet companies have decided that the best route to greatest financial gain lies in marketing BS and gimmicks. Thus we have what we have today.

I have hit a lot with the Microgel Radical MP and I liked it. It plays stiffer than the specs indicate with good stability and feel. I thought it was on the light side and could be easily customized. The rumor right now is that the Microgel Prestige mid is supposed to play close to the Prestige Classic 600. I hope that turns out to be true.
Yeah - and the rumor was that the LM Prestige was supposed to play close to the Prestige Classic, and the Flexpoint Prestige was supposed to play close to the Prestige Classic...
When will people learn that it's all just marketing BS?

You people are discussing various 'new technologies' as if you honestly believe that the racquet companies are truly trying to provide us with better and better racquets; as if they truly care about us.
Fact is, they see us as fools who will believe anything they tell us. And in reading through this thread, it looks like they're right.
You people are the same people who believe that this time, politician X will be honest and upright.

Wake up.

hyogen
09-27-2007, 12:07 AM
sigh... i'm sure i'll be ranting on other threads about this...but

today I made an almost impulse buy on a FXP prestige team MP. I have been demoing a LOT of racquets and i remember hitting very very nicely with it...especially the backhand which is my weaker shot. I was hitting deeper consistently with it than any other racquet I had demo'ed.

So i decided to support the local shop and buy it--they gave it to me for "at cost" + the stringing labor + strings for $130 (strings were $30).

I guess I hit okay today with it...but I was disappointed. I wasn't hitting as well as I was when i demo'ed it a week or so ago.....but overall I had a craptastic day today--my legs especially were very tender from all the running I had done this week on the very hard hardcourt where I have been playing. I'm also battling tennis elbow.

I just hope that I haven't completely wasted another $100 on a new racquet.

As for cupping the ball/dwell time--I definitely coudln't feel it today....ugh.

hyogen
09-27-2007, 12:09 AM
I heard this at TW.


Here are a couple photos from the thread http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=154339
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w50/vsbabolat/microgelprestige1.jpg
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w50/vsbabolat/microgelprestige2.jpg

looks nice :) So...i heard the i.prestige was the stiffest out of all them...
what does it mean to play like the prestige 600 classic? Is it that buttery soft? I would love that I think.... and apparently the Tour version is even softer.

slice bh compliment
09-27-2007, 12:19 AM
Deuce, great points.

It would be refreshing if a racquet manufacturer came out and said: here, no gimmicks. A great, solid frame from ten years ago. Yes!

They would sell a few thousand to dudes like us.
They'd give about two thousand frames to advisory staff and professional players who'd love it.
And they'd sell about 500 units to the general public. That's all. And the frame would be critically acclaimed, but like a rare, great piece of television writing, it would be a commercial failure.

They'd get the reputation in a small segment of the industry for having integrity. The rest of the industry, including the business world (it's all about the friggin' stockholders) would accuse them of not trying anymore. They'd even trot out the phrase "career suicide".

Too bad.

Back to stringing up my Max 200Gs. [kidding];)

vsbabolat
09-27-2007, 06:14 AM
looks nice :) So...i heard the i.prestige was the stiffest out of all them...
what does it mean to play like the prestige 600 classic? Is it that buttery soft? I would love that I think.... and apparently the Tour version is even softer.

The stiffest Prestige I have hit with is the Flexpoint Prestige mid. To me the i.Prestige did not feel as stiff as the Flexpoint Prestige. The Prestige Classic 600 has great stability and feel with just the right stiffness.

cghipp
09-27-2007, 07:33 AM
I agree - I thought the FP Prestige felt much stiffer than the i.Prestige.

hyogen
10-01-2007, 01:42 PM
i hope i win the prestige tour on auction today