Discussion in 'Racquets' started by timmyboy, Jan 8, 2006.
how demanding is it? how much power do you get?
check this one:
Wilson ProStaff Original 6.0 85: just bought one...
yes, you need to move your legs well
but it offers very good control
for more power, you might need some lead
Check out TW's review and the comparative reviews -- all well written and very informative.
I demoed the 85 a few months ago. Truly outstanding in many respects, but, alas, I'm not good enough to play with it.
I am not sure how people determine they are not good enough to play these racquets...I have said it before if you started with wood a ps85 was a huge upgrade in sweetspot, power, control etc...if you started with a oversized stiff power stick and went to a 85,90in stick I can see how someone would say that.
I can hit with it and love it but my arm makes me retreat to lighter racquets.
Arm pain, so you go to a LIGHTER racquet?
Conventional wisdom says the opposite, no?
Maybe it is the ProStaff's stiffness you do not like.
I think people who are honest about their abilities and know that the modern game is diffrent from the game when it was played with wood, <or even the ps85> would determine they shouldnt play with a frame like this. Modern technique vastly differs from wood technique and even ps85 technique. Small headed heavy racquet technique is diferent from the tecnique that is used in the modern game. You get power from frames like this thru weight transfer and longer swings with a much longer viable contact zone than what is needed with modern gear. Old fashion technique also doesnt put you in the best position on the court to recover for the next shot when someone playing the modern game with modern gear smokes the next shot by you. Modern game is all about racquet head speed and creating spin for control and getting power from a big shoulder turn rather than weight transfer...very difficult to do with a small headed heavy frame
Then you're not using the right technique with it. As many others have said you need to have long full swings with this racket. If you start to muscle it with your arms you will be tired very quickly. Another factor that I find important is to have a good responsive string that's not to "stiff".
I get more than enough power for my shots with that racket. I've also tried playing with larger headsize rackets and the difference isn't much (I mean you still need to hit in the general center of the racket for the ball to go it the right direction).
I play with a PS 85 when I'm back in CA, usually against a friend who plays with an Aero Pro Drive, and I can usually hit along with him from the baseline. It is a demanding racquet at first, but nothing a little getting used to and attention to proper form won't couldn't take care of. I'm not sure if I'd ever use it as my primary racquet... also, I have it strung with gut... anything less, and it'd probably feel like a brick. One thing I like about hitting with the PS 85 is how much it demands me to pay attention to my form and to look at the ball while making contact.
To sum all that up.. a guy using a Pure Drive Plus playing the modern game will smoke a player using the PS85 and old school strokes. Even Pete was complaining late in his run that the players with the new frames and games were making to hard for him to stay on top. Now Fed Ex is playing with an "Old School" frame producing "New Game" racket head speed and strokes.. and you really can't use Fed for an example.. he is the exception.. and not the rule.
Let's try a different angle. I have always played with a western forhand even when I was on wood. I still have exactly that, a long loopy whippy stroke, same as it was 15 years ago. That said, I believe the compact size of the PS 85 allows for a more compact, maneuverable stick. Therefore easier to whip. If you combine that with the weight of the racquet I believe the racquet has plenty of power and surgical accuracy. When I swing larger headed racquets and it doesn't matter if they are lighter or heavier I feel I can't get on top of the ball as well. I assume swingweight is a combo of weight and mass. Can someone substaniate why I feel so strongly about headsize?
Demanding: I'm 37, 6'3 and 210lb - I can still hit all night long with my ProStaff 6.0 85" (2-3 hours or so) and I really feel afterwards as though I've had a good workout.....however, the next day my arm aches quite badly round the inside of my elbow. This may be due to numerous factors:
1 - trying to 'arm' my serve across the net
2 - incorrect technique...not relaxing enough when serving/strokeplaying
3 - Racquet stiffness
However, I have this ache I have had when using both the ProStaff Tour90 and the nCode Tour90 so it may not be #3.
Power: I tried using it at it's default weight of 355g and I was surprised, especially as it's essentially a racquet from the 80s and 90s - nice with serve, great on volleys - seems to 'cut' through the air with ease. I've since added 18g of lead tape at 3 and 9 o'clock and I get more power from it - I regularly play against a friend who has a Babolat Pure Drive at 300g and 100" head and I can go toe-to-toe with him from the baseline, however, I do feel I have an advantage over serving-speed and volleys. His serves, 1st and 2nd I find I can move forward to return back for winners, when previously, he was using a Prince 90" MidPlus from 1992, which I felt he got more 'pop' with....however, having said that, neither of us play at high-standard (Id say we are 3.4 - 4.0 rated players), so two top-class pros playing with these racquets...I don't know who would come out on top (see SteveI's post, above)
Going back to the issue of the racquet being demanding: when I say I feel Ive had a good workout, this is due to me using my entire body to get maximum power: I use my legs, torso, shoulders - it's a very low-powered racquet so the added lead tape and my 210lb behind the ball really pays off when baselining and serving....
The question is "What is a 'small headed heavy frame?" Is that a woody, an 85, a 90, a 93, a 95, a 98, a 102 or a 135? Is it 300 grams, 320, 340, 400?
Are you suggesting there is a minimum head size and a maximum weight for the "modern" game? And, which modern game are we talking about? The "NEW" modern game with more backspin shots or the "OLD" modern game with mostly topspin? And whose modern game is the model?
Zx14 Vs Hayabusa
Galactus, I am worried about yourself, get to a coach, check your technique problems. We should continue this discussion in Health though.
As stated previously, I also believe that the Pro Staff 6.0 85 will force you to move into position early, have a good technique and hit every shot with 100% focus and intent. When you do these things, you will get more control, power and enjoyment than you can handle.
The PS does require different technique to get the best out of it, but every racquet will make you do that.
aye SteveI..and the game has changed much even since Sampras has retired. The game since Sampras retired favours small headed heavier frames even less. not even arguable. Also Sampras toyed with going to a larger headsized frame so he would have a better chance at winning the French.
People will still try to flush hit the ball to the best of their ability no matter which headsize they have...saying that a smaller headed frame makes you concentrate better and gives you better technique is ridiculous and only proves that someone is lacking in discipline and concentration to begin with. And even if they do make the frame work, they must use obsoleted inefficient technique to make it work, and that stuff gets gobbled up by better players...unless of course you ARE Federer or Safin or equivalent or you are playing 3.0 players or something...otherwise it simply doesnt parse.
Disclaimers: Like anythng there can be the occassional exception. Also everyone is certainly welcome to use whatever gear they wish to no matter how inappropriate. If someone chooses to attack me for posting this, it only serves to prove what a real jerk the attacker is. This post is directed at nobody specifically and is a statement of GENERAL fact and is no way an attack directed at any one specific individual, their family members, offspring, heirs, pets, or anyone they know. Sorry if these disclaimers havent covered every possible eventuality.
To me, there is no question that the 85" head contributes to the maneuverability of this stick -- it's reputed to be "scalpel-like" and that's exactly what I experienced. I think the 17mm beam width is a part of this also.
The tradeoff for me at my current level of proficiency is too many mishits with such a small head. I can play with a 90" head with no problem -- feels no different in terms of hits vs. mishits from a 95" or 100" frame. Somewhere between 90" and 85", my accuracy hitting the ball takes a dive.
Too bad because I would really love to play with the 85 -- good hits feel so good!
Thank you MoJo....I would have preffered something positive related to my question using your considerble knowledge. BUT your tone is once again to teach us a lesson. PS....and I must say your new disclaimer theory is quite ingenious...a very nice polite way to say 'I am correct and I don't have time for anyone who disagrees"
Keifer....since you used to be a PS85 user and I am NOT ruling out the fact that technology has probably advanced (I don't even have the 85's anymore) what is your thought on how the 90/93/95 headsize plays? Tell me the positives and negatives..I still have to demo 4 racquets before I purchase. Thanks for your help.
emerck as you might be able to see by my post, it was directed to SteveI and not to you as evidenced by it being prefexed by the words 'Aye SteveI'. That seems to be a pretty good indicator that it wasnt directed to you in any way and i even tried to disclaimer lots of eventualities and cearly state that my comments arent directed at any specific person. i had you on my ignore list and happened to open up one of your posts and decided to respond to it..i dont think that is evil or malicious....and i can see why i have you on 'Ignore'. You really need to give this stuff up...it's pretty sad. back on Ignore you go, so feel free to attack away..my back will be completely turned
Hmmm....interesting then how Sampras with his old school strokes and old school small headed PS 6.0 85 smoked Roddick with his modern strokes and modern big headed Pure Drive Plus in straight sets, 6-3, 6-2, 6-4, at the 2002 US Open QF, on his way to smoking another player with modern strokes and a big headed modern racquet in the final, Agassi.
You know, it occured to me that it really doesn't matter whether a player using an "old" racquet beats a player using a "modern" racquet or vice versa. You can't compare me with my 6.0 85 to NBMJ with his Volkl. You have to compare me with my 6.0 to me with a Volkl...or PD, etc. The issue is: are there people that can beat me when I use the 6.0 85 that I can beat if I used a "modern" racquet.
Also, a question...would the 6.0 95 be considered a "modern" racquet?
One more question...what are the characteristics or specs that would generally be considered to be those of a "modern" racquet?
emerckx53, I've not owned or regularly played with an 85 for at least 15 years. I did demo one from TW last August, though, and that's where my comments above came from.
Last October, I demoed and subsequently bought a 6.0 95, and it's been my league match racquet of choice ever since. I'm 9-1 in competition with it so you could say I'm pretty happy with it. (Strung with Wilson Reaction 16 @ 62lbs.)
The 6.0 95 is spec'd at 10 points HL. With an overgrip, mine is just over 11 points HL, and I find it just a treat for s&v, fast volley exchanges at net, and, my favorite, those shots where I have to lunge to my left to retrieve a ball that is almost by me (groundie or volley). IMO, the 20mm beam of the 95 also has something to do with how easy it is to get the racquet head to the ball -- the 95 is not as scalpel-like as the 85"/17mm, but it's still very good. Along with its nice flex pattern (stiffer in the throat, where ra stiffness is measured, and flexier in the hoop), and its graphite/kevlar composition, the 95 gives me a greater sense of control - by which I mean the ability to hit the ball exactly the way I want to hit it - than pretty much any of my other racquets.
Now, more about head sizes and beam widths. Let's call "how easily the racquet moves through the air" -- tta. This is different from "maneuverability," which is most commonly equated with swingweight, "how heavy it feels to swing the racquet," a function of how much mass the racquet has AND how that mass is distributed along the racquet's length.
I reckon smaller head sizes and thinner beam widths both contribute noticeably to tta, and that's why I prefer 90-93-95 inch and 17-20mm racquets. Swingweight impacts tta, too, of course, but let's stick with head sizes and beam widths for now.
NoBadMojo has a valid point that 85" frames are not nearly as effective for hitting modern strokes as, say, 100" or larger. But I don't hit those strokes, and neither do my typical opponents. So if I can, I like to stay at or below 95" and below 20mm. I can feel the tta difference if I go above 95"/20mm.
So I would suggest demoing the 6.0 95, the Pro Kennex Type C 93 (19mm) and the Yonex RDX 500 (90", 18-20mm) -- those are the ones I know best at this point. You could also use TW's Racquet Finder to get other candidates.
Lastly, I'm hoping and waiting for Wilson to produce a 90" version of the 6.0 85 that also splits strung weight, balance, swingweightand stiffness with the 95; same 17mm beam width, same composition. THAT would be one helluva fun racquet to hit with!
Let me know if you have other questions or comments. Cheers.
Thanks for the credit on the PS 6.0 90, Keifers!
But just to clarify, I think I said I would like to see Wilson produce a PS 6.0 90 which splits ALL the specs between the PS 6.0 85 and PS 6.0 95, including the beam width, which would make it around 18mm or 18.5mm. BTW, I've heard the nCode 90 is actually 18mm even though the specs say 17mm. I think when they design the racquet they need to make larger headed racquets with a slightly thicker beam in order to stiffen it to support the larger head and minimize the twisting from the greater torque from off-center mishits. Or else it may twist too much and/or feel too floppy, flexy or unstable.
Thus, in splitting the PS 6.0 85 and 95's specs, the PS 6.0 90, once again, should be:
Weight: 12.4 oz.
Balance: 9 pts. HL
Beam Width: 18.5mm
String pattern: same 16x18
Construction: same 80% Braided Graphite/ 20% Kevlar (NO HyperCarbon nor nCode)
Same leather grip.
I do hope Wilson finally comes to their senses and decides to make the PS 6.0 90 soon. They can even give it the newer nCode style paintjob if they like, I don't really care.
Marius - Im not sure: I have played just twice since mid-November - and each of those times was an hour each. other than that, I've not done anything tennis-related until last week.
The ache on the inside of my elbow started back in the summer when I started playing again after a long layoff and used the ProStaff Tour 90 - I had coaching lessons since and raised this subject with him - he said it was definately a technique issue as he noticed that:
a) I was trying to hard to serve
b) using my arm way too much
The thing is - the more tennis I played last summer, the less the pain and ache in my elbow....
But thanks for your concern - if it does start to get real serious and the ache lasts for days after, I will go to my GP and pick up with coaching again.
Here is the bottom line.. How many pros are winning with the PS 85 vs players winning with a modern frame? End of story for me. The only pros out there winning with old school frames are Safin and Fed.. and they are the expections. They are the gifted few that can still compete and win with these frames. Almost no lady pro uses a old school frame. The numbers do not lie. Of course... this is all IMHO. Have a great day!
I'm not sure about the game changing too much since 2002 - the only way I see it has changed is that it's now purely a baseliner's paradise using 100" sized racquets.
Saying that using a smaller headed frame proves that someone is lacking in discipline and concentration to begin with - can't that be said for the same male player that uses a 100" head racquet so they can find the sweetspot easily in the same way women's tennis players did in the 80s and 90s?
Example: why does Federer switch from a 85" ProStaff to a Wilson custom-built 88" racquet? Why not get Wilson to build him a 95" or even 100" special so he can crush the rest of the field with even more ease?
"Example: why does Federer switch from a 85" ProStaff to a Wilson custom-built 88" racquet? Why not get Wilson to build him a 95" or even 100" special so he can crush the rest of the field with even more ease?"
Fed does not really apply when speaking in general terms regarding this issue IMHO. He is most likely the greatest player ever to touch a frame. We can debate that also.... but I have to get to work...
Breakpoint, Keifers...(and any others that want to answer)
Do ya'll consider the 6.0 95 to be a modern racquet?
If not, what specs or characteristics do modern racquets have?
You mentioned that modern racquets are more suited to the modern strokes. If I don't have modern strokes, do you recommend I relearn the game in order to play with the newer racquets? If not, then wouldn't I probably play better with an old school racquet that meshed better with my strokes? And if so, would learning newer, more efficient technique with a modern racquet enable me to move from a 4.0 to a 4.5? I understand there are many variables but just in general....bascially, would it make me a better player.
Again, I think we should leave the pros out of this. They obviously will have a "modern" game...they are all young. They have unlimited resources to match their racquet to their game, and vice versa.
These are sincere questions, not meant to give offense or promote one stroke or game over another and certainly not to say that one racquet is better than another.
I dont understand this reasoning. He is the greatest player to touch a frame so he likes to make it harder for himself? Or he doesnt know what he is doing? He hasnt seen the research? He is stubborn?
I've seen him mishit balls too, so why didn't he think to change to a bigger racquet?
Why did Pete Sampras and now Federer, the two greatest players ever in my opinion and have dominated tennis for the last decade and a half, use these racquets?
And if they are so good that it doesnt matter what they use, do you think its just a coincidence that they happen to choose the smaller head? Couldnt have somebody when they were growing up tell them, hey start with this bigger racquet?
Point about the PS 85 and Pete Sampras Game.
Something that is overlooked in this discussion is that Pete served and volleyed with this racquet almost exclusively. He relied on this racquet for bomb serves and put away volleys. Yes, Pete had good groundies but this was not his strategy and he did not win from the baseline. In today's modern game, serve and volley is almost extinct, due to the power and accuracy of the baseline and return game.
The ps 85 is much like the persimmon golf woods of the 80's, they worked fine and it required great skill and practice to utilize them effectively, but when titanium woods of the 90's came out, it was easier to get the same or better results and even the most die hards on tour switched.
Would love to spend time on the court with you. If you ever come to Texas, give me a shout...I will do the same if I ever manage to get that vacation to NC? for some golf and tennis.
In the meantime...is this debate strictly about headsize, or does it involve other racquet specs also? (I realize that some specs tend to move together)
Sorry, to take this off-topic, but...NoBadMojo, are you in NC as oldguysrule stated? I'm in NC too. Drop me an email, I'd love to meet another player here in NC.
Fed is one of the only players that can "blend" new and old style tennis.. play various styles.. switch gears and utilize spins/power/court angles like no ever has. He seems to make these changes durning points.. sets.. matches.. that is one of the big reasons he is so hard to beat. If there was a edge Fed would realize from a larger head.. I am sure he would be using it. Fed is someone that is always breaking-down things and making changes.. that is one of the reasons he is staying ahead of the field. Pros take any edge they can to win matches... how could Fed win more than he has in the last two years? That one is open to debate.. guy has only lost like 8 matches in the last two years or something like that???
Oldguys i live on the first coast of Florida and if you're ever in the area, i would be happy to give you a lesson or two if you like and see what we can do about morphing your game a bit if we both feel it is necessary. To answer your question, going along with the small headsize of the 'players' frames is typically high swingweight and for most players, that doesnt work so well in the modern game either, since modern tennis is about very high racquethead speed and spin for control which is very hard for most players to accomplish with small headed heavy frames.
So to summarize, you get to attack me in another thread and then you wish for me to have a nice friendly hit? How does this work? Oh great..i'd be happy to forego the hitting lesson fee for you, and then how about i buy you some dinner and drinks after our hit and you can insult me some more? amazing........
NoBadMojo, I never "attacked" you. I was just hoping you and Bill could stop your nonstop argueing. I merely pointed out that you had instigated the fights just as much as he had...it takes two to argue/fight. I'm sorry if it was interpreted as an attack.
As a reminder this is what you wrote.
<snip>First there was Bungalow Bill and NoBadMojo. (I respect both of your opinions, but you've both lost respect as people with me) Now this. Grow up, people. So what if you don't agree with what someone says. State your opinion...and then LET IT GO! It was bad enough when it was kids doing this....it's downright embarassing for adults. <end snip>
If you followed what was going on at the Tips forum you would know that I rarely post there, but when I would drop in the ocassional post i would be stalked by Bungalo Bill who is very insecure and protective about his little kingdom when somone well credentialed shows up in 'his' forum. Lots of other posters are also hacked off at Bungalo Bill. When I told him I was puttng him on my ignore list he responded with something like 'oh good, i will just follow this guy (me) around the forum and pick all of his posts apart since he (me) wont be able to see what I wrote.' You may call that acceptable behaviour..it is not. and you may conclude that i was trying to fight with this person..i was not...i was trying to avoid him
i didnt find your conditional partial apology acceptable at all when you said it wasnt 'entirely' my fault, whch easily implies you thought it was 'mostly' my fault.
ya now what..this isnt worth it. please dont engage me in discourse anymore as i wont respond..thanks..i appreciate it
Originally Posted by Ash Doyle
NoBadMojo, I never "attacked" you. I was just hoping you and Bill could stop your nonstop argueing. I merely pointed out that you had instigated the fights just as much as he had...it takes two to argue/fight. I'm sorry if it was interpreted as an attack.
Ashe.....don't you know if you disagree with NBM in his eyes you are attacking... In 10 years of being on various forums I have never seen arrogance like his.
NBM, Ash was seeking to meet up with your for a hit for crying out loud! This doesn't sound like an attack to me! Having a hit is what tennis is really about, not these message boards. Lighten up and go and play some tennis instead of getting agro on your computer.
he attacked me earlier as i clearly pointed out and then he asked me to have a hit...sorry you cant seem to understand that isnt very nice. i am glad for the ignore list and you're on it as well. why dont you at least make an attempt at understanding something prior to beng critical of someone..and why dont you go play tennis instead of typing criticisms
Keifer, thanks for the reply.....good info. I am coming to the realization that if I can duplicate as much as possible the 85 feel...and take advantage of some sq in....probably is the ticket...
I have to agree with mojo here -- the game is slowly making the 85 dated.
the game is played with more power...which causes
more angular and open stanced mechanics...which results in a much more compressed hitting zone with less adjustment time -- a larger headsize is a natural response.
Wow, Radical Shot you made the list in record time. Congrats.
Back on topic (somewhat) ... NBM, what do you expect the post-modern game to look like? Do your junior clients emulate Fed such that his "blended" style will shape and form the post-modern game or "maybe it's something really cool that I don't even know about?" Will the smallish midplus frames become the weapons of choice for these post-modernists?
What!?!? So what's not nice about inviting a fellow tennis player to meet and have a game? You had a difference of opinon on an internet discussion board!!! Keep things in perspective man, otherwise your logon ID will become more and more a misnoma.
Hey, you know what's funny? I just looked up the word "paranoid" in the dictionary and guess who's screen name popped up? LOL :mrgreen:
tell us whose screen name popped up please.
Hmmmm....I thought I was on the top of your ignore list, no? If not, please feel free to put me back on.
Separate names with a comma.