Originally Posted by tlm
The racket I demoed had TNT in it and it was moving all over, this stick is made for poly. A multi will not last long, the way the new string was moving on me it had huge gaps between the mains from hitting top spin. This racket is definitely over hyped, it is not that special.
Originally Posted by tlm
Where is the proof that this racket is not over hyped? I have used the vortex racket and if you want super spin it will beat the 99s easily.
Hi TLM - You are the umpteenth person to come into the thread, comparing the racquet to a Vortex, then wondering what all the hype is about. Anybody who puts a full bed of nylon in this frame clearly has no idea what the 99s is designed to do. Fewer crosses than mains (something none of the vortex frames have) reduces string on string friction, and promotes the sliding and snapping back of the mains as the ball exits the string bed. The extra spin comes from string movement. You need to put slippery strings in there or it defeats the whole purpose. Your full bed of TNT is sliding, which is good, but they are too sticky to snap back into place, like a Gut/Poly or full poly bed. If you want to know more about this you can check my post #1000 a few pages back.
Low string to string friction, (which promotes string movement) is far more important to spin production than high ball to string friction, or "ball bite". There is nothing to believe or dis-believe about that statement. It is, simply said, an observational fact. It has been observed, confirmed, re-confirmed, and re-confirmed again.
These four independent confirmations took place starting in 2005, by two Physicists working in Japan, by the International Tennis Federation circa 2006-07, followed by Crawford Lindsey's studies which can be found right here in the TW university which occured 2009-2011. Wilson's in house R&D studies are only the final confirmation.
There are dozens of high speed film studies available to show exactly how this happens. The net is littered with these videos like broken dreams at a redneck bar, they are everywhere. I will provide a link to Joshua Speckman's article published in the Atlantic, because the online version contains excellent video illustrating very clearly ( see 2:50 - 5:50 ) how the mains sliding and snapping back creates additional spin.
The New Physics Of Tennis
By Joshua Speckman, The Atlantic Magazine
It's wicked ironic, that for a very long time, (especially following the University Of Sheffield Studies) the brainiacs in the white lab coats were telling us that string makes no difference at all with regards to spin. Zero, Zip, Nada. Around 1999-2003, as poly began hitting the pro tour in quantity, that idea seemed down right goofy. Now we have clear evidence from the lab explaining why poly is so spinny, and lots of us simply don't want to accept the explanation.
This is old
news. Old thinking dies hard. This information has been available since somewhere in 2005-2008, yet the board continues to be pounded with questions about how to increase "ball bite" with the regularity of waves crashing into the beach.
Bite is dead. Slide is the new King. Get over it.