Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by Gerco, Aug 25, 2013.
Wait a sec.. What about Tsonga? A flat hitter right.. Using what?
You are changing your argument. Babolat is not evil nor responsible. The players wanted that type of frame. There were other light weight, 100" frames available at the time. The Wilson Prostaff 4.7 comes to mind.
I was going to stop posting, but since you're encouraging me to continue, I will. Thank you.
The players couldn't have wanted a Pure Drive because Babolat didn't even make racquets before then.
Babolat racquets (and poly strings) changed the way tennis is played. Nobody wants to serve and volley against a guy using a Babolat strung with poly.
So lets see, lest bring your "reasoning" to other sports, lets say car race for example, in F1 if ferrari develops a better car between the rules and williams can't keep up or they can but they won't change to the new technology because they want a "classic" car the stupid is ferrari for inventing and push the game to the limit? how silly is that? if that would be the case in everything we would be living in caves, maybe you are...
You seemed to have missed my point, so I will spell it out more clearly: lightweight (comparatively), 100" racquets existed before the Pure Drive was released. You are old enough to know this fact. Babolat was not the first. Pure Drives became popular because players saw the benefit, especially when used in concert with polys, and wanted to use it. They would have gone to these types of racquet anyway.
This. All of this.
this comparison is interesting.
Fia changed the rules of F1 due to Ferrari dominance ("pushing the limit", as you described). They've limited the things, and now Formula 1 is way more exciting/interesting to be seen than in the earlier 2000's. Unfortunately there are the tilkodromes (slow hard courts), but then we have spa (wimbledon).
But Babolat gave away their racquets to just about any junior who wanted one. Now we're living with the result of that as these juniors eventually became pros.
Winning a tennis match and winning a car race are two completely different things and have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Technology doesn't apply to everything and doesn't make everything better. Faster is better in a car race but tennis is not a car race.
So? That is why players use Babolat, not why pros use Pure Drive type racquets. You are waxing nostalgic for something that was going to die-out anyway; and you are ignorantly trying to blame Babolat for it.
Assuming one is looking at matters from a competitive perspective--Which you do not. Faster is better in tennis. Faster foot speed and faster racquet head speed. While each of those do not guarantee winning/success it is better to have them.
If Babolat didn't give away tons of Pure Drives to juniors back then, those juniors may have chosen to use PS 6.0 85s, Prestige Classics, Yonex RD T90s, Dunlop MW200s, POGs, etc. instead.
Sampras used a 14 oz. 85 sq. in. racquet with a 400 swingweight. Did he need faster racquet head speed or a 100 sq. in. racquet to win?
You live in a charmed little world where if reality doesn't suit you, you dream a little dream.
Dream a little dream. That was not my point. Either your reading comprehension needs remedial development or you have a attention deficit issues. All I stated was faster racquet head speed and foot speed was better.
Faster racquet head speed is not necessarily always better. For example, I keep adding lead tape to the head of my racquet to slow down my racquet head speed as it swings too fast, which throws off my timing and my control.
Is this thread about Delpo's racquet? That was what I was hoping to see discussed.
Ah the marketing boogeyman theory, your last ditch effort to try and salvage some dignity. A sad and desperate argument.
Some marketing men came in and willed the sport of tennis to their desires and ruined everything!
Ah you have inferior timing. Nothing to be ashamed of but it explains why you don't understand how/why the game has evolved, instead blaming the evils of marketing.
I SAY FIRE TO THE RAIN
Wouldn't it be great if deplo went to solinco. Solinco makes box beam 95, they get a top ten rep. And I get to have a new racket to dream about getting.
Yeah, Netscape used to dominate the browser. Then Microsoft came in and gave everyone Internet Explorer already pre-loaded onto Windows. Guess what happened within a couple of years? Netscape ceased to exist and Internet Explorer had 90% market share despite having an inferior browser. People will use something if it's just given to them so they don't have to think about it.
I'd rather plow-through the ball than swing at it like I'm in a rodeo trying to rope a steer and risk banging my own head with my racquet. People think they need fast racquet head speed these days because they use such lightweight racquets that there's not enough momentum without swinging fast. Use a 15 oz. racquet and you won't need fast racquet head speed to crush the ball. Just ask Del Potro.
If Delpo uses a "Pro Staff Classic 6.1 95", then it's a hybrid contour and box beam and to me the K Six One 95 looks like it has the same or similar mold to me.
The Pro Staff 6.0 MP 95 is obviously a box beam...
So which one is he using? Pro Staff 6.1 Classic 95 or Pro Staff 6.0 MP 95?
Note: All pics here are borrowed from other threads here.
Except for the fact that people do make their own choice and use Firefox or Chrome.
Implying that del Potro doesn't have fast racquet head speed.
Like ProStringing said, he's using the Pro Staff 6.1 Classic 95. No one ever claimed he was using the PS 6.0 95. His racquet obviously has an oval beam with the angled indentations at the two corners of the throat bridge (which the PS 6.0 95 does not have).
Neither of which existed during the Netscape- Internet Explorer battle. People now use Firefox and Chrome after they finally realized after many years what a crappy browser Internet Explorer is. It's easier for a pro to switch browsers than to switch racquets after they've been using it ever since they were juniors.
Compared to Nadal and Federer, Del Potro has much slower racquet head speed. Yet, he hits the ball much harder than either Nadal or Federer.
millions of dollars in marketing.. and these guys are using 20 years old frames
even i am victim of marketing...when i bough new rackets some months ago i thought it was because my PS classic6.1 95 were getting old... but if someone told me delpo still used them, maybe i would think twice before spending the money
He said in the interview that he keeps stenciling them because he keeps a good relationship with Wilson.
He has 4. They can't because he doesn't use a K6.1, he uses a PSC 6.1 or a HPS 6.1. Even if they could supply him with a new batch they wouldn't feel the same way.
I guess "El toro" are the only words you know in Spanish. In the end of the article it says :
Del Potro is "on the market" and available to negotiate a new racquet endorsement contract. "Next season i'll be switching", said the player from Tandil.
He has very little market value, a company should sign him to a autograph model and give him five bucks a racquet he would be lucky to make five grand a year !
Seriously I hope Babolat put a Strike in his hands, as well as Tsonga (despite his APD+ being pretty far in specs). Would be a serious commercial move.
You are kidding right?, he would not sell 1000 racquets !
Look, we all know this stuff is super important to you. Nothing wrong with that on the surface but you have a compulsion and it could be a detriment to your health, either physical or mental. [I'm very serious here, not trying to belittle or make fun of you so please don't be defensive]There's no shame in that at all. It's caused by long term pain and that's not your fault. Nobody hates you here.
We've all seen threads where you're arguing against a dozen people, spending hours and hours trying everything you can.
Nearly a decade and 40,000 posts on this forum alone. I hope you truly feel satisfied from all that and that you are indeed healthy. But if you happen not to, don't despair, it's never too late to turn things around. There are resources that can help, many people use them everyday. They are there for a reason!
Just think about it. You definitely don't have to talk about it here. Take it as slowly as you need. Could be the best thing you ever did! Have faith, positive change is possible!
[yes I'm being 100% genuine]
You just don't got a clue about the tennis business do you?
When a brand signs a player they don't care about how many racquets he's gonna sell. Actually, very few players sell racquets only by endorsing them (Federer & Nadal). Even Djokovic and Murray don't sell that many racquets by endorsing them, except in their home countries of course.
Del Potro contract was just a way Wilson found to consolidate their position in South America. That's what is all about! Consolidating the brand across the globe. Because when a south-american tennis player looks at the W he'll remember Del Potro the guy from Tandil who hits the crap out of the ball and won the USOpen beating Federer and Nadal on his way. And that's the only psychological proof they need to buy their stuff, even if the products are a complete crap.
Also all the countries in South America speak Spanish (except Brazil, Guyana and Suriname) and even the Brazilians can understand spanish. They can also use him in the Spanish market.
Wake up man, he's one of the most marketable players on the tour.
Here's Delpo with the HPS paintjob. That's why i'm not sure if he uses the PSC or the HPS.
I read posted elsewhere in this forum that he uses a Hyper Pro Staff 6.5. But I have not seen it confirmed.
The pros aren't fooled by marketing. They know there hasn't been any "technologies" that have made any significant difference in at least the last 30 years. Weight and flex are really the only things that matter in a tennis racquet.
All I have to say is how many more people did Columbus or Copernicus have to argue against? Way more than a dozen, right? :wink:
But thanks for your concern anyway.
Are there noticable difference between the HPS 6.1 and the PSC 6.1?
Yes, the HPS 6.1 contained HyperCarbon while the Classic didn't. HPS 6.1 was a bit lighter and more muted feeling.
Self proclaimed "expert".
What're your credentials if you don't mind me asking?
There are almost 7.5 million posts on this board. To have been here since its inception (almost 10 years) and to have written more posts (almost 38,000) than anyone else here, I must have also read more posts on this board than anyone else in my estimation. That's a huge wealth of knowledge. I've also been playing, watching, and studying tennis for 40 years.
I remember when the 6.1 came out back in the day. God I hated that racket. Felt like a trampoline compared to the 6.0.
Just because you've been around the sport for a long time does not mean you have superior knowledge on the subject. Who cares about post counts? I could camp out in my moms basement for the next 6 months and fill up this board with mindless posts - Doesn't make me anymore of an expert on the subject.
To claim to be an expert you have to provide some credentials that are distinguished in that area - I'm sorry but being a "bionic" poster on a public forum does not qualify you as an expert.
Um...yes, it does. Who has more knowledge about molecular biology? Someone who's been studying molecular biology for 40 years or someone who just started last week?
First read all 7.5 million posts on this board and then get back to us.
Yes, but how many USEFUL posts?
Not to change the topic,
But it amazes me how people make assumptions. In the article, it says Del Potro has 4 frames left, won't change the grommets and agreed with Wilson to stencil them.
It is really revealing how "informal" the pros are with their gear and manufacturers.
Whether a certain post is "useful" or not is a matter of the reader's opinion. A reader may find a post useful while another reader may find the same post not useful. And just because some readers may disagree with a certain post does not necessarily mean it's not "useful". With that said, I tend to think I've had more useful posts than non-useful posts.
But what's more important is the number of posts you've READ. To write that many posts, I've had to read an incredibly large volume of posts. :shock:
Let me give you an example since your feeble mind cannot understand.
A young professor with a PhD in Molecular Biology has more knowledge on the subject than a HS teacher with 40 years experience teaching Molecular Biology.
No, I do not agree. A doctor who has been doing and studying brain surgery for 40 years knows more about brain surgery than someone who has never done one nor studied it.
Get your mind around that!
Separate names with a comma.