Originally Posted by yonexRx32
Sure there is a reason to ridicule his claim. He is trying to position himself as an authority in the matter by stating he holds the racket and can confirm that it works as described. It is obvious that just by holding to racket you cannot confirm or infirm what is going on at a molecular level. The same way you cannot confirm that a car can break the barrier of sound just by judging its color. "By looking at the exterior of this deep red automobile and I can confirm that it does 800mph." or "I hold the Enquirer in my right hand right as I speak and I can confirm that Jennifer Lopez rear end weighs 65 lbs".
I'm not looking to get into a debate here, but re-read his post. He said nothing about holding a racquet
or saying that a racquet
lived up to its claims. He was simply talking about the material, itself.
Originally Posted by TennezSport
Well I have actually held D3O in my hands and I can tell you that it is a reactive material...
Does D3O "work"? Hell yeah. They even use it in military-grade ballistic armor. (You'll find some info on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D3o
). Does it do squat in a tennis racquet? That's another matter altogether, and the point behind this thread, so let's keep the discussions about how these materials and technologies affect racquets.
(By the way, based on what svarthofde reports, D3O seems to cause a weakness at that racquet's throat, so it looks like it's a failed technology for racquets).