Sampras goes to Babolat! (pics incl.)

[movdqa]

> I don't, as I'm simply not willing to speculate on how a racquet
> plays for a pro, let alone a great, other than to say he must
> prefer the new frame.

> You're telling me Pete isn't enough of a competitor that if he
> finds a frame he can thump a bit more with, he's not gonna
> enjoy smoking his old mates a little bit more?

You wrote both.

Appears you just wrote a contradiction.

[OrangeOne]

Originally Posted by movdqa

You wrote both.

Appears you just wrote a contradiction.

Originally Posted by OrangeOne

I said thump a bit more with, I essentially meant 'prefer'.

See? I clarified what I meant by thump about 5 posts ago. If you're going to dissect things I write, don't skip posts....

[movdqa]

I read it. I just didn't believe it. I guess we'll chalk it up to your poor writing skills.

thump Pronunciation (thmp)
n.
1. A blow with a blunt object.
2. The muffled sound produced by or as if by a blow with a blunt object; a thud.
v. thumped, thump·ing, thumps
v.tr.
1. To beat with or as if with a blunt object so as to produce a muffled sound or thud.
2. Informal To beat soundly or thoroughly; drub.
v.intr.
1. To hit or fall in such a way as to produce a thump; pound.
2. To walk with heavy steps; stump.
3. To throb audibly.

[OrangeOne]

Originally Posted by movdqa

I read it. I just didn't believe it.

Do you enjoy this style of debate? Ignoring when people clarify their own comments, debating endlessly?

I don't. I also don't think you have a single clue about how a tennis racquet performs for Pete, because...you simply don't.

I'm out. Have the last word. Insult my writing skills again. Dance the funky chicken, I couldn't care less.

[movdqa]

> Do you enjoy this style of debate? Ignoring when people clarify their own
> comments, debating endlessly?

Yes.

> I don't. I also don't think you have a single clue about how a tennis racquet
> performs for Pete, because...you simply don't.

I do know physics and I did place caveats in my statement.

> I'm out. Have the last word. Insult my writing skills again. Dance the funky
> chicken, I couldn't care less.

Have a nice day.

[LPShanet]

Originally Posted by quest01

What I meant is that when a player such as Sampras who has won 14 grand slams including 7 Wimbledons and has been a Wilson user for over 20 years, he shouldn't switch brands and use a completely different racquet. If he wants to use something else it should have been with the same company that sponsored him.

Why? They stopped paying him. Would you keep showing up to work if your company stopped paying you one day? More to the point, would you keep showing up if you didn't work there any more? There's a (not so fine) line between "loyalty" and psychotic behavior.

[Fee]

Originally Posted by LPShanet

Why? They stopped paying him. Would you keep showing up to work if your company stopped paying you one day? More to the point, would you keep showing up if you didn't work there any more? There's a (not so fine) line between "loyalty" and psychotic behavior.

Bingo. I've read this entire thread since the day it started. More than one poster has lamented Pete's lack of loyalty to Wilson without regard to the fact that Wilson lacked loyalty (and cash) towards Pete. If Pete got into conversations with Justin and Andy about Babolat racquets and decided to try some out, especially considering he was already very familiar with the company, more power to him. He has to do what is best for his body and his career for the rest of his playing days, and if his contract with Wilson was written in air, he had every right to try out other products.

[luishcorreia]

I guess the KPS88 is two demanding, even for sampras.

No trainning that mutch and with the years going by, maybe he needs a stick with more pop.

[dreamcatcher18]

Thanks for sharing.

[rh310]

I hit with a PSTGT this weekend on the basis of Sampras using it now, and my liking the original PS mid and KPS88.

Maybe it was the string (Black Code 17 mains, X-One 17 crosses, both at 56 lbs) but I thought it felt like complete crap.

[JoelDali]

Good assessment.

They are total crap and Pete won't be seen with one again hopefully.

[Pioneer]

I'm more interested in how it's set up. I don't think he can manage 400g anymore.

Apart from that, I don't think anybody besides the pros [and some forum members] swears by a specific frame or setup. I understand why a pro would want 1000 sticks that are made from the best graphite, with the best poly and gut, that feel totally the same. Using a bad stick for a pro would be like going to work in underpants for a banker. But for the recreational players, I think it's a bit over the top to want the same quality gear as the people who earn their living playing tennis. Not even the former pros care about their gear anymore.

[baseline_monster]

Originally Posted by Pioneer

I'm more interested in how it's set up. I don't think he can manage 400g anymore.

Apart from that, I don't think anybody besides the pros [and some forum members] swears by a specific frame or setup. I understand why a pro would want 1000 sticks that are made from the best graphite, with the best poly and gut, that feel totally the same. Using a bad stick for a pro would be like going to work in underpants for a banker. But for the recreational players, I think it's a bit over the top to want the same quality gear as the people who earn their living playing tennis. Not even the former pros care about their gear anymore.

I would be shocked if the weight was massively light, the weight ads to the power. I'm guessing Nate Ferguson is doing the changes

[Pioneer]

Originally Posted by baseline_monster

I would be shocked if the weight was massively light, the weight ads to the power. I'm guessing Nate Ferguson is doing the changes

I expect it to be a couple of grams lighter than the PS85s he used. After all, the frame is already more powerful than the 6.0 to begin with. I think I see lead at 3&9. Maybe he uses his old specs, dunno. It would be interesting to see what changes he would make to the weight and balance after switching

[zorg]

So, if Pete wasn't sponsored by Wilson and just used the PS 6.0 because it was the best racket for him, why did he still put on a Wilson stencil on the strings?

[JoelDali]

Cuz a PS85 without a stencil looks stupid.

[Recon]

---edited out..rather not waste time.

[nat75]

Ummm..there are a lot of misconceptions on this thread. The Pure Storm is a racket to get more control not more power. First of all the head size on the whole line fluctuates from 95/98 sq. in.
Then the stiffness for each of them is:
Pure Storm Limited and Limited + 67ra
Pure Storm 69ra
Pure Storm Tour and Tour + 69ra

Against:
Pure Drive Roddick and Roddick+ 74ra
Aero Pro Drive and Drive+ 72ra

A stiffer racket gives you more power.
A more flexible racket absorbs energy and gives you more control.

And Sampras used Babolat strings. The switch is not that crazy.

[LPShanet]

Originally Posted by nat75

Ummm..there are a lot of misconceptions on this thread. The Pure Storm is a racket to get more control not more power. First of all the head size on the whole line fluctuates from 95/98 sq. in.
Then the stiffness for each of them is:
Pure Storm Limited and Limited + 67ra
Pure Storm 69ra
Pure Storm Tour and Tour + 69ra

Against:
Pure Drive Roddick and Roddick+ 74ra
Aero Pro Drive and Drive+ 72ra

A stiffer racket gives you more power.
A more flexible racket absorbs energy and gives you more control.

And Sampras used Babolat strings. The switch is not that crazy.

Actually, the current Pure Storms are much more flexible than you state. The Ltd is in the 59-60 range, and the Pure Storm about 63-64, with the Tour versions being in the 61-63 range.

[nat75]

Originally Posted by LPShanet

Actually, the current Pure Storms are much more flexible than you state. The Ltd is in the 59-60 range, and the Pure Storm about 63-64, with the Tour versions being in the 61-63 range.

Thanks for updating the those numbers. My point was that the Pure Storm line was the control orientated racket on Babolat's catalog. Not the other way around.