PDA

View Full Version : What's the most rediculous raq "tech" out there?


plowmanjoe
07-14-2009, 03:11 PM
sometimes new racquet technology just makes me laugh. what are some of the most ridiculous gimmicks that have been marketed out there?

Off the top of my head, i'm going to start off with the wilson rollers.

canadave
07-14-2009, 04:56 PM
My vote would be a tie for aerogel and d3o. The idea that aerogel is actually IN one of those racquets, or that d3o somehow stiffens the racquet when a ball hits the strings (or that d3o is even actually used--has anyone ever photographed d3o in a racquet?), is absolutely ludicrous and worthy of actual laughter. The number of posters I've seen on this board who believe in that marketing tripe is amazing.

pmerk34
07-14-2009, 05:28 PM
My vote would be a tie for aerogel and d3o. The idea that aerogel is actually IN one of those racquets, or that d3o somehow stiffens the racquet when a ball hits the strings (or that d3o is even actually used--has anyone ever photographed d3o in a racquet?), is absolutely ludicrous and worthy of actual laughter. The number of posters I've seen on this board who believe in that marketing tripe is amazing.

Right, so only your ProStaff is legit technology.

T1000
07-14-2009, 05:35 PM
tecnifibre vo2. the racquet actually breathes, wow

canadave
07-14-2009, 05:53 PM
Right, so only your ProStaff is legit technology.

Not sure how you inferred that. The OP asked what is the most laughable technology out there, and I answered. To be honest I'm not all that sure that PWS in ProStaffs (and Wilsons in general) really makes any difference. It wouldn't surprise me if someone could prove it didn't make the slightest difference.

However, since you raise the question, yes, I believe most of the "technologies" out there are nothing but marketing gimmicks. Some notable exceptions, in my mind, would be things like Pro Kennex's Kinetic technology (which does seem to have a dampening effect that helps people with arm problems), and graphite itself (which definitely is a technology that has a discernable effect over wood racquets).

pvaudio
07-14-2009, 05:56 PM
d30, without question. Knowing what aerogel is and knowing that it can't be used in racquet frames is one thing. Knowing what d30 is and knowing that it possibly COULD be used in racquet frames but would have no effect whatsoever, much less you wouldn't be able to stabilize it is even more ridiculous. Head is the master of ridiculous technology: none of them work. They make fine racquets, but it has nothing to do with liquid metal, intellichips or d3O.

pvaudio
07-14-2009, 06:00 PM
My vote would be a tie for aerogel and d3o. The idea that aerogel is actually IN one of those racquets, or that d3o somehow stiffens the racquet when a ball hits the strings (or that d3o is even actually used--has anyone ever photographed d3o in a racquet?), is absolutely ludicrous and worthy of actual laughter. The number of posters I've seen on this board who believe in that marketing tripe is amazing.
I own 6 aerogel frames, 3 200s and 3 100s. Not once have I ever thought they actually contain aerogel. It makes ZERO sense.

canadave
07-14-2009, 06:01 PM
I own 6 aerogel frames, 3 200s and 3 100s. Not once have I ever thought they actually contain aerogel. It makes ZERO sense.

That's good to hear. I had an AG100 for a while and never once thought it contained aerogel either. Surprisingly, however, quite a few people seem to think it does.

Of course, that's not to say that aerogel racquets (or d3o racquets, for that matter) are bad racquets. The aerogels in particular are fantastic (even though the AG100 wasn't right for me). It's just that the marketing gimmicks are ridiculous.

pvaudio
07-14-2009, 06:08 PM
That's good to hear. I had an AG100 for a while and never once thought it contained aerogel either. Surprisingly, however, quite a few people seem to think it does.

Of course, that's not to say that aerogel racquets (or d3o racquets, for that matter) are bad racquets. The aerogels in particular are fantastic (even though the AG100 wasn't right for me). It's just that the marketing gimmicks are ridiculous.
It doesn't make sense for the physical reasons, meaning its properties, but more importantly it doesn't make sense because of the cost. Aerogel is gram for gram the most expensive substance in the world. A 2x1.5x1.5 chunk will run you over 180 dollars, and when you consider aerogel by volume weighs less than 3x more than air, you can see how it might be rather pricey to put into a racquet frame. Moreso than that, it turns into granules when given a traumatic force AKA a shanked ball. It's useless in a racquet frame.

And yes, the AG100 is the best racquet I've ever hit with. I have nothing to say about it. Believing there's aerogel in it is asinine, however.

Cross Court
07-14-2009, 06:10 PM
Either Flexpoint or O ports...seriously, who the hell puts holes in their racquets?

Infl8edEg0
07-14-2009, 06:11 PM
flexpooooint

plowmanjoe
07-14-2009, 06:16 PM
Either Flexpoint or O ports...seriously, who the hell puts holes in their racquets?

i think the idea is that the holes make the frame more aero dynamic increasing your racquet head speed. whether it works or not, i don't know. it's like the babolat aero racquets.

Cross Court
07-14-2009, 06:19 PM
i think the idea is that the holes make the frame more aero dynamic increasing your racquet head speed. whether it works or not, i don't know. it's like the babolat aero racquets.

Yeah, but the aero racquets change the speed and keep the feel...putting holes in it may increase the head speed, but it just feels horrible.

pvaudio
07-14-2009, 06:22 PM
The babolat Aerodrive ******** is also a top contender. A racquet frame has such little cross area that it is not creating any drag through the air that a more aerodynamic throat would solve. Even if it did, it wouldn't matter because it's still up to your stroke to make the magic happen.

plowmanjoe
07-14-2009, 06:25 PM
Yeah, but the aero racquets change the speed and keep the feel...putting holes in it may increase the head speed, but it just feels horrible.

i'm pretty sure changing the shape of the frame will change the feel. also, the shape doesn't look more aerodynamic to mee. it seems like it would actually create more drag. but i'm not an engineer or a marketer, so what do i know.

Zielmann
07-14-2009, 06:28 PM
First, I gotta defend the aerogel. I have actually had experience with the material itself, and it's quite amazing. Whether it's in the frame or not is debatable. But based off my knowledge of the substance, it could be integrated into some form of epoxy or polymer, and intermixed with the graphite (though likely at a very low ratio, which probably isn't enough to do anything).

I'll go ahead an nominate the Flexpoint as one of the most ridiculous techs. While I'm attacking Head, I'll go ahead and throw out the Intelligence fibers as well.

Oh, remember Wilson's Rollers? And I'll also put the whole concept of the Power Angle frames in the mix, too.

pvaudio
07-14-2009, 06:47 PM
First, I gotta defend the aerogel. I have actually had experience with the material itself, and it's quite amazing. Whether it's in the frame or not is debatable. But based off my knowledge of the substance, it could be integrated into some form of epoxy or polymer, and intermixed with the graphite (though likely at a very low ratio, which probably isn't enough to do anything).

I'll go ahead an nominate the Flexpoint as one of the most ridiculous techs. While I'm attacking Head, I'll go ahead and throw out the Intelligence fibers as well.

Oh, remember Wilson's Rollers? And I'll also put the whole concept of the Power Angle frames in the mix, too.
No one is knocking aerogel. I own a chunk of it actually, and you really can't understand just how light it is until you hold it. But the notion that Dunlop actually used aerogel for anything other than a marketing gimmick is pretty dense thinking.

As I've been saying, Head will win this thread for the top 5 spots. Every racquet tech they've had since I can remember has been a complete gimmick. Not one has actually been legitimate. "chips" in the frame? Are you serious? It's this ******** science crap that I keep getting upset about again. Same thing applies to dog brushes that "immerse the hair in ions, freeing clumps and making the skin healthy". If by ions you mean charged particles, then maybe you're on to something ala static electricity, but the word ion can't just be thrown around the same way. Those stupid "high definition" sunglasses are much the same. Your eyes see in greater resolution than 1080p; all that HD does is try to recreate the image of you being there in person. "enhancing" your vision with technology that gives you less visual acuity is also dense.

Okay, sorry, I'm on a tangent again. Back to Head bashing :twisted:

canadave
07-14-2009, 06:47 PM
First, I gotta defend the aerogel. I have actually had experience with the material itself, and it's quite amazing. Whether it's in the frame or not is debatable. But based off my knowledge of the substance, it could be integrated into some form of epoxy or polymer, and intermixed with the graphite (though likely at a very low ratio, which probably isn't enough to do anything).

Oh, remember Wilson's Rollers? And I'll also put the whole concept of the Power Angle frames in the mix, too.

Aerogel is truly an incredible substance. I'm prepared to believe that perhaps some small miniscule amount is bonded into a polymer somehow, but as you said, there can't possibly be enough in there to make the slightest difference in how the racquet plays. Zero difference.

Power Angles!!! Yes, I'm totally on board with you on that.

Hmmm....now that I think about it, I guess Yonex's isometric head could be counted as a "technology" that does have an impact on how the racquet plays.

certifiedjatt
07-14-2009, 07:13 PM
ummm...kevlar, ncode, k factor, aerogel, cortex...anything. the fundamental shift (i.e., wood to graphite, and some minor refinements later on) has taken place. the rest is all packaging.

racket technologies are like self-help books: the reason there are so many of them, is that none of them is actually proven to do what it promises to do.

canadave
07-14-2009, 07:16 PM
ummm...kevlar, ncode, k factor, aerogel, cortex...anything. the fundamental shift (i.e., wood to graphite, and some minor refinements later on) has taken place. the rest is all packaging.

racket technologies are like self-help books: the reason there are so many of them, is that none of them is actually proven to do what it promises to do.

No argument here for just about everything you said, but I'll take possible issue with your inclusion of kevlar. I believe the kevlar in racquet frames does have an effect on overall stiffness. I have no proof of this, but that's my impression. Feel free to disprove me on that one though :)

klementine79
07-14-2009, 07:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzNr90XZ05A

This even beats that double string-bed, sandwich racquet. What was that racquet called? A 24x20x2...? The most ridiculous racquet was either the sandwich stringbed racquet or this malevolent creation in the link above...

plowmanjoe
07-14-2009, 07:42 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzNr90XZ05A

This even beats that double string-bed, sandwich racquet. What was that racquet called? A 24x20x2...? The most ridiculous racquet was either the sandwich stringbed racquet or this malevolent creation in the link above...

I'm just speechless after watching that. there's no way anyone is going to use those racquets.

ryushen21
07-14-2009, 07:54 PM
The natural tennis racquet is pretty bad. And the blackburn double strung racquet.

I'd have to throw out the flexpoint and o ports as well. Just plain terrible.

klementine79
07-14-2009, 07:56 PM
I'm just speechless after watching that. there's no way anyone is going to use those racquets.


Or that service motion....

Seriously, does anyone remember that racquet from the late 70's, early eighties...? It had two stringbeds lying on top of each other,sandwiched.. with a crazy, dense string pattern.

What the *!@$ was the name of that racquet... i believe I saw the advertisement on youtube at one point.

klementine79
07-14-2009, 07:57 PM
The natural tennis racquet is pretty bad. And the blackburn double strung racquet.

I'd have to throw out the flexpoint and o ports as well. Just plain terrible.

Yes. the blackburn double strung racquet. Thank you.

klementine79
07-14-2009, 07:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMtH1IDGkgA

Here it is... the most ridiculous.

Zielmann
07-14-2009, 08:04 PM
Isn't it in the rules that the strings have to be in a single plane now? So like, the double-strung thing wouldn't even be legal anymore?

Also, I have to say that companies shouldn't market extended-length as a 'technology'.

canadave
07-14-2009, 08:06 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMtH1IDGkgA

Here it is... the most ridiculous.

ROFL....ftw! Brilliant. For extra laughs, watch it with the sound muted the first time....

klementine79
07-14-2009, 08:10 PM
ROFL....ftw! Brilliant. For extra laughs, watch it with the sound muted the first time....

When you watch it without the sound, you can tell that guy is shanking the ball on purpose when not holding the 'Blackburn'-- Then all of a sudden he gets the 'Blackburn' and whallah!!!!

I love that shank on the first return--- it lands in the next county's tennis courts...:)

canadave
07-14-2009, 08:15 PM
When you watch it without the sound, you can tell that guy is shanking the ball on purpose when not holding the 'Blackburn'-- Then all of a sudden he gets the 'Blackburn' and whallah!!!!

I love that shank on the first return--- it lands in the next county's tennis courts...:)

hahahaha....yes!!!

My favourite part was after the animated demonstration of how the Blackburne's strings prevent shanking, and then they have the slo-mo "first, a normal racquet; then, the Blackburne" demonstration of hitting a ball off the frame. It's so obvious that the guy is hitting the ball in the centre of the stringbed with the Blackburne....but, oooooh, look at how much better the BB is on off-centre frame hits!

klementine79
07-14-2009, 08:18 PM
hahahaha....yes!!!

My favourite part was after the animated demonstration of how the Blackburne's strings prevent shanking, and then they have the slo-mo "first, a normal racquet; then, the Blackburne" demonstration of hitting a ball off the frame. It's so obvious that the guy is hitting the ball in the centre of the stringbed with the Blackburne....but, oooooh, look at how much better the BB is on off-centre frame hits!

Who actually was sold on this thing... I don't know...

I really want to play a couple of sets with that racquet...

One side strung all polys the other side a nice multi and interchange during play... baseline-kick serves=polys....flat serves-volleys=multis.

martinrousev
07-14-2009, 11:23 PM
flexpooooint

I'm sorry but flexpoint is a genuine technology. It's not just marketing. I'm not saying it is good or that it works but it's not just marketing. Racquets do bend where the holes are.

See this picture I made during a futures tournament in my home town. The player is Fleming from UK.
http://picasaweb.google.com/izidacup/2008#5237394486581354930

Toad
07-14-2009, 11:58 PM
I'm waiting for the day someone comes out with a Nitinol racket (or similar). I can only imagine the advertising for it...frustrated with your game, bash the hell out of this racket and it will come back to its original shape. No more need to worry about accidental frustrated racket smashing.

bertrevert
07-15-2009, 04:16 AM
Jeez Louise when you look at this page it makes you wonder
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/technologies.html

It does show that almost all the manufacturers indulge in this.

However, were there to be nothing like this I think it's be fairly flat playing field and pretty uninteresting.

If you like your racing bikes you could conclude that actually our sport is fairly tech-free compared to say what goes on in racing bikes (it being Tour de France time!).

jwbarrientos
07-15-2009, 04:51 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMtH1IDGkgA

Here it is... the most ridiculous.

Is that legal?

Dgpsx7
07-15-2009, 05:31 AM
Jeez Louise when you look at this page it makes you wonder
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/technologies.html

It does show that almost all the manufacturers indulge in this.

However, were there to be nothing like this I think it's be fairly flat playing field and pretty uninteresting.

If you like your racing bikes you could conclude that actually our sport is fairly tech-free compared to say what goes on in racing bikes (it being Tour de France time!).


After looking through that link I think the Head techs for their tweener rackets are the most upsetting. Most of them look pretty stupid as well.

Bengt
07-15-2009, 07:34 AM
In order for the manufacturers to keep growing (and provide return for shareholders) there has to be obsolescence. This can occur through shoddy product or brainwashing. Obviously the former is a losing proposition thus the companies have to convince the consumer that what they bought 2 years ago - although it works fine - is obsolete. Otherwise, people would replace their racquets when they wore out and that is too long for the growth required by shareholders.

AznRamenDude
07-15-2009, 10:16 AM
i dont think i joined tennis early enough, but what are wilson rollers? i never seen any discription about them before?

plowmanjoe
07-15-2009, 10:30 AM
i dont think i joined tennis early enough, but what are wilson rollers? i never seen any discription about them before?

I'm so glad you asked. i can't find a picture, but essentially there are wheels in the frame that the strings rest on. kind of similar to babolat woofer tech but with spinners.

Toad
07-15-2009, 10:39 AM
I'm so glad you asked. i can't find a picture, but essentially there are wheels in the frame that the strings rest on. kind of similar to babolat woofer tech but with spinners.

I can see that being useful for stringing, but not much else.

Kick Serve 14
07-15-2009, 11:01 AM
Either Flexpoint or O ports...seriously, who the hell puts holes in their racquets?

You can't diss flexpoints, the fact is the idea of putting little holes to allow the racket to flex returning a more controlled shot is possible, however, the only way to prove it would be to test it in some independant lab tests.

plowmanjoe
07-15-2009, 01:20 PM
You can't diss flexpoints, the fact is the idea of putting little holes to allow the racket to flex returning a more controlled shot is possible, however, the only way to prove it would be to test it in some independant lab tests.

whether or not it does something is besides the point. the real question is: does it improve the racquet? if flexpoint really did improve the frame, why isn't it implemented in their current line-up?

Bengt
07-15-2009, 03:01 PM
whether or not it does something is besides the point. the real question is: does it improve the racquet? if flexpoint really did improve the frame, why isn't it implemented in their current line-up?

If the tech isn't carried over then it may be a sign that it's not all it's cracked up to be. It doesn't seem like Head carries over many, if any, of their "technological breakthroughs". Very curious.

DownTheLine
07-15-2009, 03:04 PM
Either Flexpoint or O ports...seriously, who the hell puts holes in their racquets?

I am not a big fan ethier, but it's to increase the sweet spot and to make it more aerodynamic...

pvaudio
07-15-2009, 03:04 PM
If the tech isn't carried over then it may be a sign that it's not all it's cracked up to be. It doesn't seem like Head carries over many, if any, of their "technological breakthroughs". Very curious.
That's because they're all idiotic gimmicks. Dunlop, however, has been using the M-fil technology in 3 straight lines how (well, really two, but the 4D is kinda similar). Babolat is still using their woofer **** and Yonex will always have their unique head shape.

hyogen
07-15-2009, 03:09 PM
That's because they're all idiotic gimmicks. Dunlop, however, has been using the M-fil technology in 3 straight lines how (well, really two, but the 4D is kinda similar). Babolat is still using their woofer **** and Yonex will always have their unique head shape.

sorry to break it to you, but someone broke one of their mfils and found that it was a tiny one inch little strip of stuff that does nothing :o

pvaudio
07-15-2009, 03:22 PM
sorry to break it to you, but someone broke one of their mfils and found that it was a tiny one inch little strip of stuff that does nothing :o
:lol: Don't get me wrong, I am NOT saying the tech is legitimate. Not in the slightest. What I am saying is that they did carry it over. THat's all.

hyogen
07-15-2009, 03:27 PM
they carried over liquid metal technology for a while.

also their twin tube technology...

and their intelligence stuff...

the funniest sounding ones I think are the Carbon XTREME, etc... XTREME this xtreme that...

Bengt
07-15-2009, 03:36 PM
they carried over liquid metal technology for a while.

also their twin tube technology...

and their intelligence stuff...

the funniest sounding ones I think are the Carbon XTREME, etc... XTREME this xtreme that...

Triple Threat was a little ridiculous too.

pvaudio
07-15-2009, 03:43 PM
No after more careful consideration, intelligence fibers cannot be beaten.

Intellifiber is a new fiber created from piezoelectric material. Extraordinarily different from conventional materials, this fiber (according to Head) transforms the mechanical energy from ball impact into an electrical response that stiffens the racquet for ultimate power. Intellifibers are integrated on both sides of the throat area. An electrical impulse actively changes the shape of the fibers - in less than a millisecond - at ball impact.

hyogen
07-15-2009, 03:45 PM
No after more careful consideration, intelligence fibers cannot be beaten.

it was a good line though. the i.prestige and i.radicals were great looking AND felt great in my opinion. -_-

pvaudio
07-15-2009, 04:39 PM
it was a good line though. the i.prestige and i.radicals were great looking AND felt great in my opinion. -_-
Oh no, again, don't get me wrong. I'm not talking **** about the end product. I'm just saying the "technology" is a complete farce.

bertrevert
07-15-2009, 05:10 PM
After looking through that link I think the Head techs for their tweener rackets are the most upsetting. Most of them look pretty stupid as well.

Hahhahahha I'm totally upset... :( but I'm gonna get even...! :evil:

ser_renely
07-15-2009, 05:13 PM
wow, some great stuff there!!!

The intelligent fiber takes the cake for me, that is just amazing to read....you figure some sci-fi author has to be coming up with half of this stuff.

I remember the old K2 skis that has peizioelectric dampeners on them...boy did people flock to those. I sold skis and boy ohh boy, give it a bend and a jiggle and the pad lights up, makes the customer go mad. I think a lot of people secretly want to really believe these techs.

Is aerogel sorta the same as microgel?

cork_screw
07-15-2009, 05:16 PM
You spelled ridiculous wrong. When you type it, it even gives you a red squiggly line that shows it's a typing error. All you need to do is right click or control click and it'll give you a suggestion for the correct spelling. Anyways, how do you spell ridiculous wrong? It's so commonly used.

tennisnoob2
07-15-2009, 05:57 PM
wow, some great stuff there!!!


Is aerogel sorta the same as microgel?

yeah why hasnt any1 brought up microgel? does it just seem plausible?


^^and does it really matter? it doesnt come up with a redline for me

ser_renely
07-15-2009, 06:02 PM
He doesn't understand not everyone has a spell check plug-in for their browser.

Commando Tennis Shorts
07-15-2009, 07:36 PM
We've got a good list going here, my favorites of which are flexpoint and the blackburne.

Let's not forget about Fischer marketing the "magnets" within frames, supposedly helping the racquets rebound from shots better, I believe. lol

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCFISCHER-FMTSL.html

Zielmann
07-15-2009, 07:50 PM
I feel like I'm betraying myself with this, as I still use one of these models, but...

What was the point behind Prince's MORE+ line anyhow? Like, was there even an overarching tech in those things?

plowmanjoe
07-15-2009, 08:19 PM
Triple Threat was a little ridiculous too.

triple threat actually works and improves the frame. it's the same idea behind lead tape. it's just cooler looking than lead tape.

however they stopped actually using that tech and just put a graphic there that made it look like it was still triple threat when it was just plain graphite underneath.

some6uy008
07-15-2009, 08:50 PM
Wow, never knew Aerogel was real. I thought it was like Karbon Black and d30 or liquidmetal, etc

For the inquiring minds:
http://i380.photobucket.com/albums/oo248/some6uy007/th_Aerogel_nasa.jpg (http://i380.photobucket.com/albums/oo248/some6uy007/Aerogel_nasa.jpg)

DjordjeRosic
07-15-2009, 08:55 PM
Pure marketing, and the ones that I feel are mostly implementable and actually functional would have to be the "technologies" that have the shortest descriptions of what they do and how they work, take a look at the stabalizer bar for the POG's its like a sentence nothing more...LOL

-Djordje

bryanj2u
07-27-2009, 08:01 AM
... and found that it was a tiny one inch little strip of stuff that does nothing :o...

lol thats what she said!

MethodTennis
07-27-2009, 08:05 AM
cortex cos it doesnt work for peanuts

goosala
07-27-2009, 09:57 AM
Flexpoint was the dumbest thing ever. It seems like almost everyone agrees that it made the Prestige line play worse than the Liquidmetal. In fact, no new technology has been able to make the Prestige line play better. The original is still the best. :)

Cloud Atlas
07-27-2009, 03:58 PM
Some of those youtube vids are hilarious! That double handed racquet takes the cake though. The racquet looks like a pair of gardening shears! I think it's significant though that prince released the 100% graphite recently. And that it's getting such good reviews. This shows that graphite was a massive step, but that really the tech since then hasn't made a huge difference, if a 100% graph is getting such good reviews today. Those racquets with the little indentations were pretty good too. The ones that Guy Forget used to use?

Cloud Atlas
07-27-2009, 04:02 PM
And do you reckon this guy's for real, or is he joking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT714mG17bA&NR=1

Commando Tennis Shorts
07-27-2009, 04:48 PM
Some of those youtube vids are hilarious! That double handed racquet takes the cake though. The racquet looks like a pair of gardening shears! I think it's significant though that prince released the 100% graphite recently. And that it's getting such good reviews. This shows that graphite was a massive step, but that really the tech since then hasn't made a huge difference, if a 100% graph is getting such good reviews today. Those racquets with the little indentations were pretty good too. The ones that Guy Forget used to use?

The double-handed racquet, while quite strange, is not as bogus as many, many, many other "technologies". Besides, the double-handed racquet does not market itself as utilizing technology, just making it easier to hit a two-handed backhand, which it does for some people.

Double bagel
07-27-2009, 05:36 PM
Outside of the Prince (and Wilson Sting..err...that copied Prince) stabilizer bar, the Pro Kennex line of Kinetic tech, and the ncode line of pro staffs, I think its all rubbish.

I mean the ncodes feel very different from past pro staffs. I could be wrong though, but it feels legit.

Zielmann
07-27-2009, 05:51 PM
Eh, I would still doubt nCode being anything significant. They probably just used better materials or something.

I stick with my criterion: If the company can't explain to the customers in a way that makes sense, it's likely not legit. Do you really understand what nCode really is? Like, can you explain what it is in your own words, and also why it is supposedly helpful?

Wilson just gave those frames a different feel than anything they had before. Same with the k-factors. Nobody should believe in the least that this 'karophite' is any different than graphite. Maybe the just changed suppliers or something...

Virtua Tennis
07-27-2009, 09:16 PM
The craziest technology is Prince's Vortex technology which used Viscoelastic polymers; to make the racquet stiffer at impact on hard shots and more flexible on softer shots. Also the string bed was very unique in that it was a concave string bed that helped cup and pocket the ball.