Originally Posted by ChicagoJack
Hi Tlm - Yeah cool, but the open pattern concept predates the Vortex company by several decades. Of the seven Vortex racquets currently in production, none has fewer mains than crosses. Vortex is simply reading from the same script that has been around since the early eighties.
This thread is now 50 pages deep, and I think just about every open pattern frame ever produced since the beginning of the graphite era has been mentioned three times over. To the best of my knowledge, none of those frames has fewer crosses than mains. For more on why that might be an important distinction, you might want to look at my brief timeline found on post #973 the previous page. If fewer mains isn't a big deal for you that's fine with me. I don't have a dog in the fight surrounding any Wilson product. I'm a Donnay fanboy LOL, what do I care! Just be clear that is the key distinction here.
And just to re-iterate, I think Wilson is just shooting themselves in the foot with this over the top copy writing. It's left those of us who simply want to inform about what low inter string friction is all about, and how it came to be discovered, deflecting a lot of arrows in the process.
Hi corners - Cool, thanks for the confirmation. I always swing by to see what you've got to say in a thread whenever I see your name on the big board. Always good stuff from you here.
Ya you are right the vortex does not have fewer x's than mains, but it does have huge spacing with its 14x16 pattern on a 100 sq inch head size. Which to me is what is creating the monster spin not how many mains to x's it has.
In other words okay the wilson has fewer x's than mains but I really don't think it makes as big a difference as the big gaps in the string bed and I don't think it will be much different than the vortex. But I will see for myself when I get a chance to demo one.
I am afraid that it will pose the same problem of being to powerful, just like the vortex was.