best 'old school feel' racket suitable for modern game?

[BreakPoint]

^ Says who?

^ Says who?
Based on what criteria? Sales numbers?
Kennex obviously doesn't put nearly the amount of money into marketing that Wilson or the other major racquet companies do.
According to what I've read on the board, many people who tried the Type C very much liked it.
Whether it feels similar to the PS 85 6.0 or not, it seems to be a fine, solid, 'ols school' type racquet in its own right.

Wait, you've never hit with the ProKennex Heritage Type C and I have but YOU'RE telling me what it is and isn't and how it plays? :roll:

It was obvious what PK was trying to do with this racquet, i.e., using the same 80% graphite/20% Kevlar composition, box beam, and heavy weight of the PS 6.0 85, but it failed to deliver because it didn't play nearly as well as the PS 6.0 85. I expected a lot more from this racquet but the difference between serving with it and serving with the PS 6.0 85 was like night and day. I also found it to be lacking in feel. It was very disappointing indeed.

 

[Deuce]

Wait, you've never hit with the ProKennex Heritage Type C and I have but YOU'RE telling me what it is and isn't and how it plays? :roll:

^ Here we go with the infamous BreakPoint twisting and manipulating...

I am very obviously not telling anyone how I think it plays - I am merely recounting what I've heard others say about it. That is clear to any honest person reading what I wrote.

As well, the OP mentioned that he'd be interested in a Graphite/Kevlar combination - so I mentioned the Type C as a possibility.

And you continue to use 'emoticons' with the frequency of a pre-pubescent girl.

It was obvious what PK was trying to do with this racquet, i.e., using the same 80% graphite/20% Kevlar composition, box beam, and heavy weight of the PS 6.0 85,

^ Once again - all this tells me is that you draw your conclusions from viewing only the surface of things.
Because the Type C is 80% graphite and 20% Kevlar, and of a certain weight, it is "obvious" that they were trying to copy the PS 85 6.0??
You are a simple thinker, there's no doubt about that.
Could it be that the graphite and Kevlar in the Type C is layed up differently and placed in different areas of the frame than they are placed in the PS 85 6.0?
Are all "100% graphite" frames "obviously" trying to copy each other, as well?

The PS 6.1 also had 80% graphite and 20% Kevlar - and it was on the heavy side. By your (incredibly simplistic and flawed) 'logic', the PS 6.1 was also "obviously" meant to be a clone of the PS 85 6.0. They "obviously" wanted the same racquet as the PS 85 6.0, but without the box beam, right?
Fact is that the 6.1 'Classic' plays significantly stiffer than the PS 6/0 85 and 95.

Geez - the PS 95 6.0 played very different from the PS 85 6.0, despite the 2 frames sharing the same characteristics (80/20 graphite/Kevlar ingredients, box beam). Just because two racquets share some qualities certainly doesn't mean that they are meant to play the same, or that they will play the same.

You always claim that every opinion and perspective of yours is absolute fact - but nothing could be further from the truth.

but it failed to deliver because it didn't play nearly as well as the PS 6.0 85. I expected a lot more from this racquet but the difference between serving with it and serving with the PS 6.0 85 was like night and day. I also found it to be lacking in feel. It was very disappointing indeed.

^ Ok - so YOU liked the PS 85 6.0 better (likely in large part because of your bias toward Wilson). But that's all it is - your opinion.
Then again, you're the one who considers the Catapult 10 as being "stiff" - that, combined with your more than questionable track record on this board for honesty, makes me take your opinions on racquets with a huge grain of salt.

No doubt others preferred the Type C over the PS 85 6.0. so who's to say which is 'better'?

 

[BreakPoint]

No doubt others preferred the Type C over the PS 85 6.0. so who's to say which is 'better'?

Then why the tremendous uproar when the PS 6.0 85 was finally discontinued but barely a whimper when the Type C was discontinued? Gee, did anyone even notice? And why are PS 6.0 85's going for upwards of $1,000 on the big auction site while you can barely give away a Type C? And why does the Redondo Mid have a much larger following than the Type C did?

And, no, I don't have a bias towards Wilson. I do have a bias towards solid feeling, "old-school" racquets that play well. Haven't you noticed all the commotion I've caused here after I wrote my review of the Dunlop AG100 a year ago? Or how about my incessant endorsement of the Donnay Pro One and the Vantage 90?

 

[morten]

Yonex rdx 500 mid felt old school to me, like it a lot.

 

[origmarm]

For old school feel I would second what a poster said here about the 70flex Vantages. Hit for me flexier than that but with the power of a stiffer racquet. Very similar to a PSC6.1 without the harshness to me.

The K90 has that feel, as do most of the Fischers (2) that I tried though they were older models. My brother has just acquired a Pure Storm Ltd and says very good things about it. I would defo give the new POGs a go, if they are anything like the old ones you could be on to a winner.

For me nothing comes close to my Vantage in terms of old feel but with the power I wanted for today at a slightly lighter weight (mine is about 305g).

Good luck

 

[rev200g]

I too just got back into the game after an absence of 7 years. I was and still am playing with the Revelation 200g and this is after trying the MW200g, Mfil 200 and the Aerogel 200. To me, I still preferred the solid, control and stiffness of the Revelation vs the others. So I patiently waited for the opportunity to purchase 2 more.

All I can say is, if you like the Revelation you may want to continue with it. Cheers!

 

[GPB]

i'm currently transitioning off my dunlop 200g revelations, which i've played for years. before that, it was the wilson ultra fpk 95, so i'm used to very feel-oriented rackets.

I never saw *why* you're switching from your Dunlop 200g Revelations. If you like that spec, why don't you see how close to it you can get with the Vantages? If you're looking for something else in the racket, maybe the Vantage design can help you there, too. Just sayin'.

 

[mental midget]

I never saw *why* you're switching from your Dunlop 200g Revelations. If you like that spec, why don't you see how close to it you can get with the Vantages? If you're looking for something else in the racket, maybe the Vantage design can help you there, too. Just sayin'.

i think i'd like it to be a bit more headlight, with a touch more power. basically, as i play myself back into shape, and as the speed of my game has been improving, i'm looking to retain as much of that feel as i can while adding a touch of firepower and maneuverability. again, i don't need something tremendously strong, but i'd like a frame that responds better to a quicker, whipping stroke of both sides, without forfeiting the control and softness for slices and volleying.

i'd love to check out a vantage. i didn't see any demo program available on the site, do you know of an alternate resource for trying one out prior to purchase?

 

[BreakPoint]

Yonex rdx 500 mid felt old school to me, like it a lot.

I agree 100%. The Donnay Pro One Int'l actually has a similar feel to the Yonex RDX 500 Mid.

 

[NLBwell]

Prince Graphite Mid (POG) - Diablo Mid -- Depends whether you like the Diablo "rubber" feel or the more traditional feel. POG has somewhat bigger head (93), bigger sweetspot, more spin, than old Pro Staff, not as powerful on the serve. Translates well to modern game, a few top college players playing with Diablo, so that would be modern.
Alternate choice is MG Prestige Pro - big spin with Luxilon, only over 95sq in that I've been able to serve well with (I calculated it to be 95.8sqin). Less old-school feeling than POG, but not as tinny as the Fishers, new Princes, etc.
Next choice is Yonex RQis 1 Tour. Good feel (better than Prestige Pro), very wide-spaced stringbed for big spin. Needs some lead on the head (like a lot of Yonexes), but will play really well once you get it tuned up right.

 

[aaron 3000]

gotta go with the babolat pure storm limited or any iteration of the head prestige mid.

 

[Deuce]

Then why the tremendous uproar when the PS 6.0 85 was finally discontinued but barely a whimper when the Type C was discontinued? Gee, did anyone even notice? And why are PS 6.0 85's going for upwards of $1,000 on the big auction site while you can barely give away a Type C? And why does the Redondo Mid have a much larger following than the Type C did?

^ The answer is quite simple: Marketing.
Wilson spent lots and lots of money marketing the PS 6.0 85. Plus the #1 player in the world used it for about a decade.
Plus the frame was on the market for 20 years.
Those are the clear reasons why it was more popular than the Type C and the Redondo. I would have thought even you could figure that one out.

As for the Redondo being more popular than the Type C... again - marketing.
Kennex doesn't do a lot of marketing - but they marketed the Redondo more than the Type C.
As well, this message board has helped to raise awareness of the Redondo... whereas this board was not nearly as popular when the Type C was on the market.

And, no, I don't have a bias towards Wilson. I do have a bias towards solid feeling, "old-school" racquets that play well. Haven't you noticed all the commotion I've caused here after I wrote my review of the Dunlop AG100 a year ago? Or how about my incessant endorsement of the Donnay Pro One and the Vantage 90?

You and your ever present ego may find this difficult to believe, but no, I did not notice that "commotion that you caused".
In fact, the only commotions I've noticed you causing have been when people have questioned your honesty - which occurs rather often.

I have, however, unfortunately seen enough of your posts to firmly believe that you do have a definite bias in favour of Wilson.

 

[BreakPoint]

^ The answer is quite simple: Marketing.
Wilson spent lots and lots of money marketing the PS 6.0 85. Plus the #1 player in the world used it for about a decade.
Plus the frame was on the market for 20 years.
Those are the clear reasons why it was more popular than the Type C and the Redondo. I would have thought even you could figure that one out.

As for the Redondo being more popular than the Type C... again - marketing.
Kennex doesn't do a lot of marketing - but they marketed the Redondo more than the Type C.
As well, this message board has helped to raise awareness of the Redondo... whereas this board was not nearly as popular when the Type C was on the market.

No, it's because one racquet is better than the other. No amount of marketing is going to have people clamoring to bring back a discontinued racquet nor pay $1,000 for an old racquet that hasn't been advertised in over 10 years if that racquet was a piece of crap.

What marketing did PK do for the Redondo? You mean like all those TV commercials they did during the Super Bowl? :roll: PK did almost zero marketing for the Redondo.

You and your ever present ego may find this difficult to believe, but no, I did not notice that "commotion that you caused".
In fact, the only commotions I've noticed you causing have been when people have questioned your honesty - which occurs rather often.

So I guess that must mean you have a bias against Dunlop? :-?

I have, however, unfortunately seen enough of your posts to firmly believe that you do have a definite bias in favour of Wilson.

So if using a Wilson automatically means that I have a "bias towards Wilson", then I guess I do. Just like you have a bias towards Head, and Roddick has a bias towards Babolat, and Gasquet has a bias towards Head, and Davydenko has a bias towards Prince, and Verdasco has a bias towards Tecnifibre, and Djokovic has a bias towards Wilson, and Blake has a bias towards Dunlop, and Hewitt has a bias towards Yonex, and Seppi has a bias towards ProKennex, and.........

Believe it or not, when one is not sponsored, it is possible to be biased towards racquets that play well. In fact, it's amazing, but I actually choose to use racquets that play well versus racquets that do not. :shock:

 

[Deuce]

No, it's because one racquet is better than the other. No amount of marketing is going to have people clamoring to bring back a discontinued racquet nor pay $1,000 for an old racquet that hasn't been advertised in over 10 years if that racquet was a piece of crap.

I really like the PS 6.0 85. I used them for about 3 years as my main racquet. I certainly have nothing against it.

The PS 6.0 85 is a very solid racquet that was very heavily marketed for 20+ years - including half that time with the #1 player in the world using it.
If you don't think that those two ingredients were an absolutely major influence in the sales numbers, you're even more irrational than I thought.

Plus, the entire 'St. Vincent mystique' created and perpetuated by message boards such as this one have resulted in the ridiculous prices being fetched for them.

Very simple logic.

The Kennex Type C, by comparison, endured perhaps 3 years on the market, without much if any marketing, and without any top pro player using it.

I think it's very clear why the PS 6.0 85 was far more popular than the Type C.
Clear to any thinking person, that is.

What marketing did PK do for the Redondo? You mean like all those TV commercials they did during the Super Bowl? :roll: PK did almost zero marketing for the Redondo.

They did more marketing for the Redondo than for the Type C. But they still didn't do very much marketing.
All I said was that they did more for the Redondo than for the Type C. Then you typically twisted and manipulated that into me saying that Kennex did a lot of marketing for the Redondo.
You're as dishonest as they come.

And, as I also said - but you very typically and conveniently ignored - the Redondo is more popular on this board than the Type C was simply because this board is more popular now than when the Type C was on the market.

So I guess that must mean you have a bias against Dunlop? :-?

So if using a Wilson automatically means that I have a "bias towards Wilson", then I guess I do. Just like you have a bias towards Head, and Roddick has a bias towards Babolat, and Gasquet has a bias towards Head, and Davydenko has a bias towards Prince, and Verdasco has a bias towards Tecnifibre, and Djokovic has a bias towards Wilson, and Blake has a bias towards Dunlop, and Hewitt has a bias towards Yonex, and Seppi has a bias towards ProKennex, and.........

You are truly certifiable.
Your almost neverending praise and defense of Wilson on this board is the clear evidence of your Wilson bias.
Your worship of Sampras and Federer is also very strong evidence.
Your praise of all things Wilson outnumbers your criticisms of Wilson about 100 to 1.
By comparison, my praise of Head perhaps outnumbers my criticisms of Head about 1.5 to 1. Most of the racquets I've criticized the most on this board have in fact been Head racquets.

One day, you will have an epiphany and realize what so many of us on this board have observed:
That you're crazy.

 

[mawashi]

guys, seriously can we just get back to the OP's question?

 

[Deuce]

guys, seriously can we just get back to the OP's question?

This happens every time someone calls BreakPoint on his habitual crap.
And it's happening more and more often as more people get wise to him and see who he is.

Besides, the OP's question has been answered tenfold in this thread already.

 

[BreakPoint]

The PS 6.0 85 is a very solid racquet that was very heavily marketed for 20+ years - including half that time with the #1 player in the world using it.
If you don't think that those two ingredients were an absolutely major influence in the sales numbers, you're even more irrational than I thought.

Plus, the entire 'St. Vincent mystique' created and perpetuated by message boards such as this one have resulted in the ridiculous prices being fetched for them.

Very simple logic.

The Kennex Type C, by comparison, endured perhaps 3 years on the market, without much if any marketing, and without any top pro player using it.

I think it's very clear why the PS 6.0 85 was far more popular than the Type C.
Clear to any thinking person, that is.

Can you read? When did I say anything about the PS 6.0 85 being more "popular"? I said people don't clamor to bring back a discontinued racquet nor pay $1,000 for an old racquet that hasn't been advertised for 10 years if that racquet was a piece of crap.

The Ford Pinto was a very popular car but did you hear people clamoring to bring it back or willing to pay $70,000 for a 10-year old one after it was discontinued? No, because it was a crappy car.

People don't clamor to bring back below average racquets nor pay top dollar for them no matter how popular or unpopular it was.

They did more marketing for the Redondo than for the Type C. But they still didn't do very much marketing.
All I said was that they did more for the Redondo than for the Type C.

Please show me where all this marketing for the Redondo is. You must be hallucinating.

Your almost neverending praise and defense of Wilson on this board is the clear evidence of your Wilson bias.
Your worship of Sampras and Federer is also very strong evidence.
Your praise of all things Wilson outnumbers your criticisms of Wilson about 100 to 1.

Really?

I just wrote this post last night in another thread on the subject of the new Sampras racquet:

Wilson's other racquets don't matter. :shock:

In fact, I've written many times here before that other than the PS 6.0 series of frames (which includes it's descendants), that I think everything else Wilson makes is terrible - this would include racquets, shoes, strings, balls, socks, clothes, wrist bands, bags, dampeners, grips, and basically anything else related to tennis.

 

[Deuce]

Can you read?

^ Clearly better than can you.

When did I say anything about the PS 6.0 85 being more "popular"? I said people don't clamor to bring back a discontinued racquet nor pay $1,000 for an old racquet that hasn't been advertised for 10 years if that racquet was a piece of crap.

The Ford Pinto was a very popular car but did you hear people clamoring to bring it back or willing to pay $70,000 for a 10-year old one after it was discontinued? No, because it was a crappy car.
People don't clamor to bring back below average racquets nor pay top dollar for them no matter how popular or unpopular it was.

^ Who in this thread even so much as vaguely suggested that the PS 6.0 85 was a bad racquet?
Besides you?

Please show me where all this marketing for the Redondo is. You must be hallucinating.

The Redondo is more widely available than was the Type C.
Google "Pro Kennex" with "Redondo", then Google "Pro Kennex" with "Heritage Type C" - and see the difference.

Really?

I just wrote this post last night in another thread on the subject of the new Sampras racquet:

In fact, I've written many times here before that other than the PS 6.0 series of frames (which includes it's descendants), that I think everything else Wilson makes is terrible - this would include racquets, shoes, strings, balls, socks, clothes, wrist bands, bags, dampeners, grips, and basically anything else related to tennis.

As I previously wrote - your praise of Wilson outnumbers your criticisms of Wilson about 100 to 1.

You're even delusional to the point where you actually believed that Wilson made the K90 because YOU asked them to!

Put simply, you're nuts.

 

[BreakPoint]

^ Clearly better than can you.

Clearly NOT.

^ Who in this thread even so much as vaguely suggested that the PS 6.0 85 was a bad racquet?
Besides you?

If I suggested the PS 6.0 85 was a bad racquet, then what must I think of the Type C? Hint: Go back and reread my posts.

There's a word to describe people like you who defend racquets they have never even hit with.

The Redondo is more widely available than was the Type C.
Google "Pro Kennex" with "Redondo", then Google "Pro Kennex" with "Heritage Type C" - and see the difference.

Gee...could the fact that the Type C was discontinued like 3-4 years ago and hasn't been available for a very long time have something to do with that?

You're even delusional to the point where you actually believed that Wilson made the K90 because YOU asked them to!

I guess it went right over your head.

No, Wilson made the K90 for Federer, but the public (that would include me) clamoring for it certainly influenced their decision to finally release it to the public, just like the public clamoring for the PS 6.0 85 or a "PS 6.0 90" influenced their decision to create this new Sampras K-ProStaff.

 

[Deuce]

If I suggested the PS 6.0 85 was a bad racquet, then what must I think of the Type C? Hint: Go back and reread my posts.

You're the only one in the thread that mentioned the PS 6.0 85 in the context of being bad - when you said that people don't ask for the return of bad racquets.
But where in hell did you get the idea that anyone referred to the PS 6.0 85 as being bad?
Just because I said that many people liked the Type C does not mean that I'm saying the PS 6.0 85 was bad. That's just you - yet again - jumping to the defense of Wilson in an overzealous and irrational manner.

There's a word to describe people like you who defend racquets they have never even hit with.

All I'm saying is that many people liked the Type C and do not agree with your assessment that it's a bad racquet.
That's simply stating fact - something that is foreign to you.

Knowledgeable people will take your racquet assessments with a grain of salt, anyway. You are, after all, the ONLY poster to refer to the Catapult 10 as being stiff and uncomfortable. Pretty much everyone else who commented on it said the precise opposite.

Gee...could the fact that the Type C was discontinued like 3-4 years ago and hasn't been available for a very long time have something to do with that?

Yes, that may be part of it.
And the other part is that Kennex got the Redondo out to more retailers than the Type C.
The Google ratio of Redondo to Type C results is about 4 to 1.

No, Wilson made the K90 for Federer, but the public (that would include me) clamoring for it certainly influenced their decision to finally release it to the public, just like the public clamoring for the PS 6.0 85 or a "PS 6.0 90" influenced their decision to create this new Sampras K-ProStaff.

^ That is pure and absolute Bull. Nothing new as far as you're concerned.

I vividly remember you taking credit for the K90's arrival, saying that you believed the K90 was the result of YOUR E mails to Wilson. You mentioned no-one else - either individually or collectively - you took full credit for the K90 being brought to the public.
You also insisted ad nauseam that the K90 is Federer's exact racquet, despite, as usual, having zero evidence to support your wild claim. And you were all excited about using the "same racquet as Federer".
I remember clearly - irrationally ridiculous ego-posts like that are not easily forgotten.

There's a reason that dozens of people on this board see you as a dishonest ass.
Many reasons, in fact.

 

[morten]

hm.. i dont like this, i enjoy both break and deuce posts...

 

[mawashi]

hm.. i dont like this, i enjoy both break and deuce posts...

I agree, this is going nowhere and the post is trashed.

They should just get a room and trash it out.

mawashi

 

[Big Tigger]

Deuce X BP.. This is boring...

 

[007]

although it has an RA of about 68, I suggest the SLAZ X1. This thing can serve the lights out, spin the cover off the ball, volley with your eyes shut, and has enough stiffness to handle pace. It's 12 ounces strung, about 10 points HL and swings effortlessly. Great for 1H backhands. It's stiff but has a well-damped muted feel and you can hit any shot in the book with this frame. I've never hit a racquet that feels so perfectly balanced in the hand and during the swing as this does.

 

[basil J]

I was a longtime user of the 200GMW. and revelation series. The closest with a modern feel I found was the redondo Mid & MP. Both high flex, head light with excellent spin on both frames. The Yonex Ultimum RD TI80, my current stick is very close as well but harder to find since it is out of production.

 

[GPB]

i think i'd like it to be a bit more headlight, with a touch more power. basically, as i play myself back into shape, and as the speed of my game has been improving, i'm looking to retain as much of that feel as i can while adding a touch of firepower and maneuverability. again, i don't need something tremendously strong, but i'd like a frame that responds better to a quicker, whipping stroke of both sides, without forfeiting the control and softness for slices and volleying.

Ahh, I see. That makes lots of sense - good luck finding a frame that fits your new game.

i'd love to check out a vantage. i didn't see any demo program available on the site, do you know of an alternate resource for trying one out prior to purchase?

I've heard of people around here calling/emailing Vantage and asking for a demo. They don't seem to market this program, but it's worth a shot. Also, I think if you buy a frame and don't think it's perfect, you can trade it in for something else. This is sorta like a demo, I guess. Email 'em, tell them what you've told us, and see what they say. It's worth a try, right?

 

[ls206]

Yup I would try and get a Vantage demo.

They are definitely quick and whippy, I found I needed some stability in the hoop however. I chose a 12pt HL version so I had loads of "lead room", when I finished, the racquet was still quick and whippy but with a solid feel.
I added tape at the "corners" 2,4,8,10 nearabouts

 

[mental midget]

although it has an RA of about 68, I suggest the SLAZ X1. This thing can serve the lights out, spin the cover off the ball, volley with your eyes shut, and has enough stiffness to handle pace. It's 12 ounces strung, about 10 points HL and swings effortlessly. Great for 1H backhands. It's stiff but has a well-damped muted feel and you can hit any shot in the book with this frame. I've never hit a racquet that feels so perfectly balanced in the hand and during the swing as this does.

took this suggestion, poked around on the net. the x1 sounds like a candidate to throw on the pile. i don't see many around, however. tough to demo.

 

[basil J]

Slaz x1 is a great frame but I know quite a few peopole who used it and gave it up due to developing tender elbow with it. I used it over a summer and found it fairly low powered but pretty comfortable. Shines with a soft string for sure.

 

[frekcles]

If you're looking for Kevlar & Graphite, I think the Kennex Heritage Type c had Kevlar mixed into it, didn't it?
Apparently, it's quite a unique frame.
Another tough racquet to find, though.

I have one......but a midplus.

Will string it up and give it a go. Last time I played with it the pallets were loose so it felt like the racquet would just launch whenever I would swing it. It's been fixed since.

 

[GPB]

Yup I would try and get a Vantage demo.

They are definitely quick and whippy, I found I needed some stability in the hoop however. I chose a 12pt HL version so I had loads of "lead room", when I finished, the racquet was still quick and whippy but with a solid feel.
I added tape at the "corners" 2,4,8,10 nearabouts

Yeah, my Vantage was dead in the upper head, but some lead tape at a WIDE 3 & 9 solved that problem. Actually, I centered it a few strings higher than 3 & 9. And I had to add weight to the butt to get it comfy again. I love the feel, so I didn't get rid of the foam in there; I just added lead tape between the foam and the trap door.

 

[BreakPoint]

You're the only one in the thread that mentioned the PS 6.0 85 in the context of being bad - when you said that people don't ask for the return of bad racquets.
But where in hell did you get the idea that anyone referred to the PS 6.0 85 as being bad?

Man, you are dense. And also don't know how to read.

No, people don't ask for the return of bad racquets. Now was I referring to the PS 6.0 85 or the Type C? Which one did people clamor to bring back? And why?

Just because I said that many people liked the Type C does not mean that I'm saying the PS 6.0 85 was bad. That's just you - yet again - jumping to the defense of Wilson in an overzealous and irrational manner.

So YOU'RE jumping to the defense of Wilson? I see.

All I'm saying is that many people liked the Type C and do not agree with your assessment that it's a bad racquet.
That's simply stating fact - something that is foreign to you.

Yet, you've never even hit with the racquet. What if you had hit with the racquet and hated it? Would you still disagree with me?

I think it's in the best interest of this board that you should keep you mouth shut regarding the playability of racquets that you have never even played with.

Knowledgeable people will take your racquet assessments with a grain of salt, anyway. You are, after all, the ONLY poster to refer to the Catapult 10 as being stiff and uncomfortable. Pretty much everyone else who commented on it said the precise opposite.

Yet, people are always telling me that I'm "spot on" with most of my racquet reviews. They even send me e-mails to tell me so.

Most of "everyone else" have not hit with as many different racquets as I have.

Yes, that may be part of it.
And the other part is that Kennex got the Redondo out to more retailers than the Type C.
The Google ratio of Redondo to Type C results is about 4 to 1.

Sure, that's why my local shop carried the Type C but never saw the Redondo. PK never got the Redondo to more retailers than the Type C. In fact, there has been a chronic shortage of Redondos so very few retailers got them.

I vividly remember you taking credit for the K90's arrival, saying that you believed the K90 was the result of YOUR E mails to Wilson. You mentioned no-one else - either individually or collectively - you took full credit for the K90 being brought to the public.

Then you must have a very poor memory.

You also insisted ad nauseam that the K90 is Federer's exact racquet, despite, as usual, having zero evidence to support your wild claim. And you were all excited about using the "same racquet as Federer".
I remember clearly - irrationally ridiculous ego-posts like that are not easily forgotten.

I am correct, the K90 is indeed Federer's exact racquet: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=222350

And, no, I've never been "excited" about using the same racquet as Federer because I DON'T!

You really need to work on your reading comprehension skills. Perhaps going back and actually getting a high school diploma would help?

 

[ls206]

Yeah, my Vantage was dead in the upper head, but some lead tape at a WIDE 3 & 9 solved that problem. Actually, I centered it a few strings higher than 3 & 9. And I had to add weight to the butt to get it comfy again. I love the feel, so I didn't get rid of the foam in there; I just added lead tape between the foam and the trap door.

Ah, so I wasn't the only one that thought that. I've read a lot of posts but none mention it.
Is yours a 90in? It starts at V111 now, I see you've got a V002

So MM, what racquets are on your list now?

 

[mental midget]

question for the ag100 users:

like i mentioned, i thought this stick played well. the demo was clearly strung too tight, but even so, it was obvious there was a decent amount of feel to the frame.

the one thing that really bothered me was i found my slices coming up short, typically on the service line if not just inside it. i had the sensation that i was sliding under it, using the same stroke that produces a much deeper, heavy slice with my 200g. the question is a. did anyone else notice a similar phenomenon, and b. would the addition of some lead tape, as many of you seem to have done, likely cure this? i'm guessing i was just skidding right through the stroke due to the lower swing weight, just wanted to bring this up.

all i know is both serves and returns were amazing with the 100, and that's an awful big slice of the game.

 

[NLBwell]

question for the ag100 users:

like i mentioned, i thought this stick played well. the demo was clearly strung too tight, but even so, it was obvious there was a decent amount of feel to the frame.

the one thing that really bothered me was i found my slices coming up short, typically on the service line if not just inside it. i had the sensation that i was sliding under it, using the same stroke that produces a much deeper, heavy slice with my 200g. the question is a. did anyone else notice a similar phenomenon, and b. would the addition of some lead tape, as many of you seem to have done, likely cure this? i'm guessing i was just skidding right through the stroke due to the lower swing weight, just wanted to bring this up.

all i know is both serves and returns were amazing with the 100, and that's an awful big slice of the game.

Referencing my previous post, I would put the Diablo (Mid) and Prestige Pro as the best serving rackets while still being good a the modern game. Both are excellent as slices.

 

[mental midget]

Referencing my previous post, I would put the Diablo (Mid) and Prestige Pro as the best serving rackets while still being good a the modern game. Both are excellent as slices.

i liked everything about the diablo other than the swing weight, which i felt to be a bit heavy for what i'm looking for. the prestige should be easy to demo and have a look at, will do.

 

[Deuce]

BreakPoint, you are nothing more than a dishonest manipulator.
As such, it is impossible to argue - much less discuss anything rationally - with you.
You make up your own 'rules' as you go along, even if it totally contradicts what you previously wrote (then you blame the others for "not understanding" you!).

Many, many people on this board possess the same extremely negative perspective of you as I have.
There are valid reasons for that.

Because others have requested that this thread be left void of this ridiculous and juvenile interaction between you & I, I'll not prolong it by responding to your latest manipulations to point out how wrong you are again.

I'm out.

 

[db379]

This thread is a great idea. I'm in the same boat looking for a solid classic feeling stick for the modern game. I have to say it's not an easy task but among the newer sticks, I'd highly recomment the K90 or the TF335. With some lead added on both sticks, they feel super solid and maneuvrable. Lots of feel as well. If you can generate your own power then you'll love them.

To the OP, if you'd consider selling your Rev200g, email me to: drb379@gmail.com . Thx.

 

[mental midget]

mentioned it earlier, i like the k90 but swingweight's just not there for me. probably going to demo the tf335 at some point.

considering how i played with the ag100, it's a strong contender. not particularly 'old school,' necessarily, but then again, there's always going to be that trade-off. certainly enough feel to make the cut. like a million people have pointed out, a little tape to the head, we might have a winner.

although i'm really interested in demoing the donnay pro 1, and maybe grabbing a gamma g325 from somewhere. and a fischer. and the volkl. whatever, no hurry.

 

[raygo]

I'm confused...can someone please explain what is meant by the 'modern game'?

 

[raygo]

quick clarification--

by 'modern game,' i'm just talking about a frame that rewards a very quick, wristy SW forehand, and a 1hbh generally hit with a lot of topspin. and something that can react quickly to the same sort of stuff thrown back at me.

Never mind, I just caught this on Page 1. My apologies--can't edit yet.

 

[gocard]

This has been mentioned a few times already, but I'll throw in my vote for the Redondo, both the mid and mp. Very comfortable and easy to maneuver, and hitting the sweet spot gives you amazing shots.

 

[ls206]

I retract my advice to demo a vantage and suggest an AG100.

 

[VPB]

for me!

for me (38 yo, ex max 200 g player...have a lot of frames and...) http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCWILSON-KPT95.html (very very control oriented and very arm friendly.

hope it helps

 

[jrod]

mentioned it earlier, i like the k90 but swingweight's just not there for me. probably going to demo the tf335 at some point.

considering how i played with the ag100, it's a strong contender. not particularly 'old school,' necessarily, but then again, there's always going to be that trade-off. certainly enough feel to make the cut. like a million people have pointed out, a little tape to the head, we might have a winner.

although i'm really interested in demoing the donnay pro 1, and maybe grabbing a gamma g325 from somewhere. and a fischer. and the volkl. whatever, no hurry.

I didn't like the ag100...felt tinny, even after multiple experiments with lead, grips, etc. I thought the Donnay felt much better, but was lacking in plow through like the k90 has. My Fischer M Pro #1 98 weighted up with lead is great, but lacks in depth off groundies (incredible spin though). The C10 Pro was also nice, but not quite right. I finally settled on the BB11 mid. Perfect weight, balance, feel, control, power (low) and spin. Definitely worth a test drive.

 

[slice bh compliment]

Babolat Pure Storm Ltd. Old school specs, but light and ripe for customization. Woofer System to make a fairly powerful stick feel soft. It's really the finest piece of engineering I've seen since the Dunlop Max 200g.

I love it. I've got four. Even the grommets are really high quality, and as a bonus, it comes with a leather grip.

With a grip sleeve, leather pads and a little lead, I've got mine up to 13.1 ounces and 9 pts HL. Very happy with it.

 

[sunnyIce]

i never understand when ppl say the diablo slices well. its abt the only thing it doesnt do well. everything else is great.
AG slices surprisingly well. i thought the wt may be a factor but it was good. still falls a bit short, but will work. after all why wud we want the other guy to get to the slice!

 

[sunnyIce]

Babolat Pure Storm Ltd. Old school specs, but light and ripe for customization. Woofer System to make a fairly powerful stick feel soft. It's really the finest piece of engineering I've seen since the Dunlop Max 200g.

I love it. I've got four. Even the grommets are really high quality, and as a bonus, it comes with a leather grip.

With a grip sleeve, leather pads and a little lead, I've got mine up to 13.1 ounces and 9 pts HL. Very happy with it.

gave up on the ag100?

 

[slice bh compliment]

No, I still love it. I use the PS Ltd full-time, now, good catch. The ag100 doesn't come in my grip size, so there's more effort to building up the grips (from size 4 to size 6). Plus, I tend to break strings less often with the dense pattern of the Babolat.

Both of these sticks, I think, deserve mention in this thread, for sure.

 

[ls206]

^^ how would you compare the PS ltd to the ag100??
I had a great interest in the racquet but was put off by the string pattern (it's 18x20 right?)