View Full Version : Slazenger Pro Braided compared to the TT Warrior
06-05-2004, 03:37 PM
Can you guys please tell me any signifigance between these 2 raquets?
06-05-2004, 04:33 PM
Played them both. Slazenger fit my game better. S&V, flat ball hitter. Warrior was too unpredicatable for me. Seemed to have hot spots where the ball would just fly off the racquet. Made "pinging" sounds. Seemed "tinny" in construction.
Slazenger plays a lot more flexible than its stiffness rating. A great racquet if you can generate your own power and like an open (16x18) string pattern. Can place serves on a dime. Solidly constructed. One of those undisovered frames that would sell more copies if promoted by the big mfgs.
06-05-2004, 06:46 PM
I think of the Slazenger PB as strictly a S&V racket wheras with the TT Warrior, you can trade some blows from the baseline as well. If you're looking for a good S&V, pick Pro Braided over the Warrior.
06-05-2004, 08:35 PM
I've tried both and I thought the Slaz Pro Braided was much better for groundstrokes than for serve and volleying. The racquet didn't do much for either my serves nor volleys as it was too stiff to provide enough feel on volleys and not heavy enough to really hit the big bombs on serves. However, I could really pound the ball from the baseline with great pace and accuracy. Perhaps that's why Henman was beating Coria from the baseline for the first set and a half in the French semis but lost 13 straight games when he started serving and volleying, chipping and charging, and coming to net too much. :? :shock: :cry:
I didn't find the Warrior to be much good for anthing. Overall, just too light and stiff and the beam width was too thick. Just OK from the baseline and OK on volleys but not enough feel to control the ball. :cry:
06-06-2004, 11:57 AM
I have played with both sticks and while the Slaz is great for s\v and is deadly accurate, I found it much more demanding and much more unforgiving when you miss the sweetspot! I prefer the Warrior and have tried several sticks and still find myself going back to the Warrior. IMO it is still one of the best playing frames around and fits my game. I would encourage you to give it a try!
06-06-2004, 02:04 PM
Agree with Onecoldcat about the sweetspot on the Slaz. The string bed is unforgiving if you miss hit the ball. Miss the sweetspot and the ball pretty much dies on the strings. But this is true for most player's racquets. But it rewards good form with a sweet, controllable game.
As a general observation I found the Prince Triple Threat series to be universally underwhelming, with the exception of the Hornet MP. I think Prince went to 10-2 weighting to try and circumvent the Wilson 3-9 weighting patent. For the most part the 10-2 weighting and light frame weight makes for tinny, erractic racquets. I've actually been able to customize the Hornet MP 2001 into a pretty good doubles racquet. The rest were just more trouble than they were worth. IMHO.
06-06-2004, 06:19 PM
There are several posts about the Warrior being tinny or the frame cracking...this is simply NOT true, in my experience! Please give it a try for yourself...as with any stick....one persons perfect weapon..is anothers weakness...you simply have to try for yourself. Good luck!
06-07-2004, 02:31 AM
in my view, the wilson ps tour95 is very similar to the slazenger pbh but with better serving qualities! but i did not like the warrior.
The PB is WAY more soild than the Tour 95 which IMO plays like a bamboo fly swatter with about as much feel & stability. The PB is deadly accurate but requires solid technique. Volleys are effortless & serves huge.
06-09-2004, 07:15 AM
Agree 100% with 007, the Slaz is much more stable and solid than the poorly thought out PS Tour 95. The Slaz is a true player's racket, the PS 95 is more of lightweight tweener but with not enough stability and weight to handle heavy balls, and not enough power from what you'd expect from a "tweener". What was Wilson thinking? At least it looks like Wilson corrected itself with the nCode Tour 95, giving it an appropriate amount of heft for the "player's" market who want something slightly more forgiving than a 90 sq. in. frame.
ALFA: have you tried the X1 and if so, what are your impression compared to the PB Henman?
ANYONE ELSE re: X1/PB Henman comparison?
06-09-2004, 09:25 AM
007: As long as it isn't raining tomorrow, I will get my first swings in with the X1! So I may be able to post my impressions soon.
06-09-2004, 09:47 AM
I liked the X1 more than the PB. The X1 is about 1/2 ounce heavier than the PB and that makes a big difference. The X1 also has the shock absorbing handle system which makes the racquet more comfortable and gives it a muted feel. It is slightly less stiff than the PB but still a pretty stiff racquet. Both volleys and groundstrokes felt more solid with the X1 and serves were much bigger. The X1 is a very solid and stable racquet, just a bit too stiff for my taste and I would worry about my elbow.
06-09-2004, 11:47 AM
Breakpoint - thanks for your thoughts on the X1.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.