BB Melbourne Club

[basil J]

Originally Posted by sphinx780

After 2.5 hours of doubles last night I have my first impressions of the Melbourne strung with isospeed control at 56/53 per tom4ny's string job using a 3g dampener.

First a bit about me. 33y/o 4.5 all court player. My forehand is SW with a long stroke that I would say shear's the ball. So it's a flatter trajectory, the topspin catches at the end bring it in. I add more Topspin as needed. I use a 2bh for controlling the point but also use a slice for defense and variety.

First impression: This is one plush ride. I always loved how comfortable the BB11 was when hitting but after an hour on the Melbourne, I put the BB11 back in the bag after two shots, there is a highly noticeable difference in comfort.

Groundstrokes: Wow. For my long, aggressive swings this racquet gave me all the power I needed with an added level of precision that made it deadly. I could attribute a lot of this to the feedback that such a stable stick provides. I did notice when I hit the sweet spot, as others have mentioned but this seemed to only increase the ball pocketing and spin production of my stroke from both sides. This made for very easy access to changing the pace, spin and trajectory of shots directed at the net man. My weekly hitting partner in singles will not be pleased with this added ability.

Volley's: Touch? Check. Put-aways? Check. Stability and Maneuverability on reaction shots? Check. I never had an issue with the BB11's ability to volley, but I had to be 'feeling it' to have the perfect blend of touch and power...with the Melbourne, I don't have to compensate for the frame's limitations, an off day will still be a great day for volleying.

Serves: I'll wait on this one to see how it performs when my legs are fresh. With the BB11 I could cheat when the hip flexors and lower back tighten up by using the mass of the stick to generate easy power. I didn't feel like I could get away with that with the Melbourne, but I usually don't play a 3 hours singles match the day before. I could locate my serve just as easily but what I really want to test out before making an opinion is how my serve flies on all cylinders as the access to spin and the sweet spot should make this a very formidable weapon for both my flat and slice serves.

My opinion is that TM's reviews of this stick are spot on. It plays like an old school graphite frame but with an added stability through the hoop that you don't find often in todays sticks. This took everything great about the BB11, took the additional touches from the Legend and corrected both of their flaws to offer a response, feel and maneuverability that I have never found in a stock stick.

That being said, I don't find it a challenging frame to use at the 4.5 level and I'm guessing that's due to my game style compared to a flat hitter or someone with abbreviated strokes.

I'll be sure to update as I continue the extended demo but right now this is a clear contender for my main stick. Singles will be the true test and dialing in the serve, which is traditionally the strongest shot in my game.

Very nice review. I like that you added some comments on the contrats between the BB 11 & Legend, both good frames in their own right, but lacking the stability I was looking for.

[sphinx780]

Basil- with how close you came to keeping the legend, I think you owe it to yourself to demo if you get a chance.

TM- Many many thanks for your impressions on the sticks and helping me get a near perfect idea of how this stick would feel in hand given my racquet history. It gave me the frame to refernce to pull the trigger.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by sphinx780

Basil- with how close you came to keeping the legend, I think you owe it to yourself to demo if you get a chance.

TM- Many many thanks for your impressions on the sticks and helping me get a near perfect idea of how this stick would feel in hand given my racquet history. It gave me the frame to refernce to pull the trigger.

It is an impressive stick. If I were to start competing again, this would be my stick until I start moving slower than my opponents, then, I would go to the X10 325 to short-hop groundies--or the PB 7 if I lost more than one step. BB DC takes traditional graphite frames to a new level. The lines have really split now, as Organix, beam shape, and putting it in all four poles, puts Volkl into the future of tennis. BB/Volkl will give players a real choice as to how they want to play and how they treat their bodies.

[sphinx780]

I'm glad to hear Tom's sentiments of the stick echoed mine.

Hopefully my very subjective review when referencing my stick background will help others get an idea of whether this is worth a test run or not.

I find that referring back to the familiar is the best way for me to understand how a stick plays and hopefully that'll benefit others too.

[louis netman]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

... the future of tennis. BB/Volkl will give players a real choice as to how they want to play and how they treat their bodies.

TM- i'm back to my "therapy frames," -- and it's becoming obvious that all great frames should be therapeutic-- never harmful. melbourne and PB 10 are rockin K-A frames! thanx for the head's up in my other thread...

[gregor.b]

I am now officially excited because in about 13 hours I will be hitting with my new Melbourne.By all accounts this should be,if nothing else,a nice comfortable ride.Will report back afterwards for a comparison to the Organix 10.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

I am now officially excited because in about 13 hours I will be hitting with my new Melbourne.By all accounts this should be,if nothing else,a nice comfortable ride.Will report back afterwards for a comparison to the Organix 10.

Check out my "BB Melbourne vs X10 325" thread:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=377746

[sphinx780]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

The ball cupping ability really helps on serves if you use a lot of wrist action to grind the ball. The stick gives you a lot of time to make the ball's RPM move in the direction that you want--like pitching curve balls, sliders, and fast balls. If you don't use a lot of wrist or don't swing very violently, you'll still find a lot of pop with flatter serves and a lot of swinging spin with slices.

I am definitely a heavy wrist user and swing pretty violently. I tend to use a hard flat serve for 90% of my firsts with the occasional slice to keep the opponent off balance. My second has always been a higher arced slice that I move around the box pretty well.

When fatigue sets in to my hips my swing with the BB 11 slows down dramatically and I use the racquet mass to come down on the ball and direct the flat first serve. I find a combination of my wrist snap and the racquet balance allows me to get away with this. I couldn't get that from the Melbourne on the first try...but that is always my plan B serve when the arm and body are telling me I've pushed too far.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by sphinx780

I am definitely a heavy wrist user and swing pretty violently. I tend to use a hard flat serve for 90% of my firsts with the occasional slice to keep the opponent off balance. My second has always been a higher arced slice that I move around the box pretty well.

When fatigue sets in to my hips my swing with the BB 11 slows down dramatically and I use the racquet mass to come down on the ball and direct the flat first serve. I find a combination of my wrist snap and the racquet balance allows me to get away with this. I couldn't get that from the Melbourne on the first try...but that is always my plan B serve when the arm and body are telling me I've pushed too far.

The BB 11's string bed has more pop than the Melbourne, which was its primary negative issue; it was over-powered for a 10-line frame and its dwell time was too short, so it lacked feel--Boris never liked it, and he worked with R&D on it, even the SE. However, for those who needed the power, it fit. IMPO they should tame it and re-release it with DC instead of DNX. Its balance was very polarized, in numerous axis, but the Melbourne, addresses all of those issues. It's a better racquet by far.

As far as fatigue is concerned, it happens at all levels with the serve. That is why at GS events, many player's serves disintegrate after the middle of the fourth set; their legs are gone, and the modern serve is about legs--you're in good company. Perhaps you should change how you use your legs to last through the whole match. Think about losing 10-15% overall, but having that 85-90% for a whole match. You'll probably win more.

[gregor.b]

Righto! Have just finished a fairly solid hitting session with the Melbourne (not a match) and,if anyone cares,here is what I reckon.A two hour session of c/c drills,returning drills and volley drills ( no serves due to tricep injury)and I am not sure I will have too much positive support after what I have read from many of the posters.On a run of the mill,everyday c/c rally with 3/4 court heavy ball,I felt that the racquet lacked a little stability in the upper hoop.Before the haters want my head on a platter,I feel as though this racquet actually plays better slightly lower in the hoop ( maybe 1-2 strings).Next,what I found on returns was quite pleasing.Having come from a 340 plus s/w I found it refreshing being able to get through the return (when I could lay my racquet on the ball or it wasn't above my head) and really drilling the b/h return if the serve was a touch short.Easy stick for returning.On volleys,I think everyone on these boards have said it better than I could.This thing is ridiculous.I could control balls that were past me,balls that were at me,balls that were at my b*lls,high,low,etc.I tried to miss a volley,half volley and couldn't (maybe I didn't try too much to miss).My only real issue (which for me is a BIG ISSUE),is the BIG shot.There was a slight flutter in the hoop which I don't think I can live with.For me,almost,but not quite.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

I feel as though this racquet actually plays better slightly lower in the hoop ( maybe 1-2 strings).....My only real issue (which for me is a BIG ISSUE),is the BIG shot.There was a slight flutter in the hoop which I don't think I can live with.For me,almost,but not quite.

Why don't you just play the ball in the sweet spot?

No matter what the stick is, the sweet spot is going to get met after the 2nd or 3rd ball, and every ball after, regardless of where that matches-up to my regular stick.

[gregor.b]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

Why don't you just play the ball in the sweet spot?

No matter what the stick is, the sweet spot is going to get met after the 2nd or 3rd ball, and every ball after, regardless of where that matches-up to my regular stick.

I am not a tall/big guy, (5/9, 155) and have always preferred to take the ball a little higher in the hoop on the f/h,but unfortunately for me,it seems the racquet does not lend itself to this.On the b/h,not an issue,I get behind the ball,but I like to give myself room on the f/h and I find the flutter a little disconcerting.No such issue with my old bats.It almost feels as though the racquet needs more weight up high.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

I am not a tall/big guy, (5/9, 155) and have always preferred to take the ball a little higher in the hoop on the f/h,but unfortunately for me,it seems the racquet does not lend itself to this.On the b/h,not an issue,I get behind the ball,but I like to give myself room on the f/h and I find the flutter a little disconcerting.No such issue with my old bats.It almost feels as though the racquet needs more weight up high.

You lose a lot when you don't use the sweet spot. Hitting higher in the string bed, above the sweet spot, to accomplish additional leverage, would be counter-productive. If you think that you personally get more off the ball by having the top of the frame doing more of the driving, then modify the frame to do so and hit in the sweet spot for the maximum response.

[gregor.b]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

You lose a lot when you don't use the sweet spot. Hitting higher in the string bed, above the sweet spot, to accomplish additional leverage, would be counter-productive. If you think that you personally get more off the ball by having the top of the frame doing more of the driving, then modify the frame to do so and hit in the sweet spot for the maximum response.

So you would suggest lead at 3 and 9,10 and 2 or 12? I have never been a big fan of modding but in this one I will make an exception as it does so many things so well.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

So you would suggest lead at 3 and 9,10 and 2 or 12? I have never been a big fan of modding but in this one I will make an exception as it does so many things so well.

Are you slapping a flat FH or are you rotating the racquet's tip for topspin?

[gregor.b]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

Are you slapping a flat FH or are you rotating the racquet's tip for topspin?

I hit very few if any balls flat,maybe the occasional first serve return but otherwise,the shot is typically rotational,one way or the other.Mate,I have invested a lot of time and money trying to find new racquets and am starting to become frustrated.My blades are starting to show some signs of wear (slight vibration even in the middle) and I need a go to stick.

[TennisMaverick]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

I hit very few if any balls flat,maybe the occasional first serve return but otherwise,the shot is typically rotational,one way or the other.Mate,I have invested a lot of time and money trying to find new racquets and am starting to become frustrated.My blades are starting to show some signs of wear (slight vibration even in the middle) and I need a go to stick.

The Blade has a lot of heft in the head. To match it, try .5 inch of 1/2 in wide lead tape, sliced in half, putting each 1/4 in piece on the upper area of the Melbourne's hoop, directly on the black section of the DC Wing, by the 3rd/4th cross from the top. See how that works for you FH.

Have you tried the X10 295? I know that it is 16x19, but the bite is huge, and the ball does not fly as many 16 mains do. The center 12 mains are very tight. It is much like the Blade.

[DevilDog]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

I am not a tall/big guy, (5/9, 155) and have always preferred to take the ball a little higher in the hoop on the f/h,but unfortunately for me,it seems the racquet does not lend itself to this.On the b/h,not an issue,I get behind the ball,but I like to give myself room on the f/h and I find the flutter a little disconcerting.No such issue with my old bats.It almost feels as though the racquet needs more weight up high.

I changed from a PDR+ so I hit the ball very high in the hoop with lots of spin. I haven't noticed anything but a solid feel all the way to the top of the frame. I have mine strung at 57M/54C with multi and the sweet spot is huge.

Was the racquet you used a demo?

[sphinx780]

Originally Posted by gregor.b

Next,what I found on returns was quite pleasing.Having come from a 340 plus s/w I found it refreshing being able to get through the return (when I could lay my racquet on the ball or it wasn't above my head) and really drilling the b/h return if the serve was a touch short.Easy stick for returning.On volleys,I think everyone on these boards have said it better than I could.This thing is ridiculous.I could control balls that were past me,balls that were at me,balls that were at my b*lls,high,low,etc.I tried to miss a volley,half volley and couldn't (maybe I didn't try too much to miss).My only real issue (which for me is a BIG ISSUE),is the BIG shot.There was a slight flutter in the hoop which I don't think I can live with.For me,almost,but not quite.

I think you nailed it on returns and volleys from my impressions as well.

For the big shot issue, TM is much more adept at diagnosing than I ever would be but the one piece of information I would like to get from you is, what is your swing path/swing style like?

The reason I ask is that I felt this way with the BB11 at first (which is much more pronounced in it's flaws) but after finding a groove with the stroke and timing, I didn't find that same issue going forward after 4-5 hitting sessions. I felt this was due to a different balance point from my prior racquet (dnx10 MP) shifting my timing slightly.

[sphinx780]

Originally Posted by TennisMaverick

The BB 11's string bed has more pop than the Melbourne, which was its primary negative issue; it was over-powered for a 10-line frame and its dwell time was too short, so it lacked feel

From my impressions, I'm in 100% agreement here. What I'm finding off the ground with the Melbourne is that I am hitting a much more consistently aggressive ball than I did with the BB11 due to the dwell time. Their may have been more power off the 11 bed but unless I was in optimum hitting position to pull the trigger I had to go for a safer ball because of the potential for it spraying off target.

Of course, I still think that the maneuverability makes up for this by allowing me to hit that big shot with just as much pace because of how much quicker I am able to get through the ball.