Vortex 100 ES vs Wilson 99S

[yonexRx32]

Here are the specs for each of these two revolutionary rackets (which came first, I don't know, maybe someone can enlighten us)

Vortex 100 ES

Length 27 1/2 in.
Weight 10.8 ounces strung
Balance 6pts HL Strung
Pattern 14m x 16c
Flex: 70# RA


Wilson 99S

Length 27 in
Weight 11.3 ounces strung
Balance 3pts HL Strung
Pattern 16mx15c
Flex: 70# RA

They look very close to me, in terms of specs and one could easily saw-off 1/2in of the Vortex to bring them even closer.

Has anyone compared the two?

[tlm]

The vortex has been around for at least 4 years now.

[yonexRx32]

Vortex 100 ES on the market for 4 years already? Ouch... it will be hard to claim precedence when trying to patent the new Wilsons...

Oh well.. Snauwert had introduced the 12mx13c 30 years ago.. I wonder how those rackets would play with polyester.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by yonexRx32

Vortex 100 ES on the market for 4 years already? Ouch... it will be hard to claim precedence when trying to patent the new Wilsons...

Oh well.. Snauwert had introduced the 12mx13c 30 years ago.. I wonder how those rackets would play with polyester.

I don't think you understand how a patent works. A 14x16 pattern has nothing to do with a 16x15 pattern. There have been many racquets with open patterns. Wilson seems to be the first to use less crosses than mains in an attempt to enhance spin.

Wilson has probably already sold more 99s in the first 3-days of preorder than Vortex has sold in 4-years. There is nothing new about the Vortex.

[yonexRx32]

Originally Posted by sundaypunch

I don't think you understand how a patent works. A 14x16 pattern has nothing to do with a 16x15 pattern. There have been many racquets with open patterns. Wilson seems to be the first to use less crosses than mains in an attempt to enhance spin.

Wilson has probably already sold more 99s in the first 3-days of preorder than Vortex has sold in 4-years. There is nothing new about the Vortex.

So, if I understand your comment correctly, there is something inherently innovative in fewer crosses than mains? If so, that rationale would be outlined in the patent application, no doubt. It will make for interesting reading. That is until someone unearths an example of prior art.