Because the average consumer will pick one off the rack, swing it a couple times, say "That feels too heavy," and go off and buy a retail Pure Aero.
The whole light racket craze is consumer driven not racket manufacturer driven. The average tennis consumer thinks light is better, thinks the racket they are playing is the same as the pro and has no idea about the difference between polyester and nylon strings. So the manufacturers have gotten in an arms race to make lighter rackets that maintain the power of older heavy frames.
My guess is the retail frames are mass produced and produced with cheaper materials. The prostock frames maybe are built with better quality materials, strict QC and not mass produced, which could make them very expensive in retail. No matter how nice feeling the frame may be, I don’t think I would pay $500 or more per frame. Just my guess, though.
Because the average consumer will pick one off the rack, swing it a couple times, say "That feels too heavy," and go off and buy a retail Pure Aero.
The whole light racket craze is consumer driven not racket manufacturer driven. The average tennis consumer thinks light is better, thinks the racket they are playing is the same as the pro and has no idea about the difference between polyester and nylon strings. So the manufacturers have gotten in an arms race to make lighter rackets that maintain the power of older heavy frames.
Because the average consumer will pick one off the rack, swing it a couple times, say "That feels too heavy," and go off and buy a retail Pure Aero
I saw quite a few players at the challengers event wielding the Ultra Tour.On the other hand, the Wilson Ultra Tour is pretty close to being a pro stock and its popular on these forums, but I don't see many real people using it.
My friend got his hands on a pro stock used by Jeremy Chardy. It had all sorts of lead under the bumper which I had to remove before restringing it. Without any lead, it was super light. It was designed to be customized to suit the player.Because the average consumer will pick one off the rack, swing it a couple times, say "That feels too heavy," and go off and buy a retail Pure Aero.
Why dont manufacturers just sell pro stock rackets?
It seems a well known thing that players dont use the rackets they endorse.
Why dont manufacturers just make those rackets to the masses?
Yes. That’d be way too many choices for the general public.They are all different. Someone told me there are like 75 different h22's. A very respectable stringer here had 3 of feds when he was changing a few years ago. I got to hit with it, very soft and some flex, but good control.
Agree with you about the loss of marketing and sales opportunities with the annual BS tech introduction, but can you imagine a new player walking into a tennis shop and seeing a wall of tgk231.1, tgk231.2, tgk 231.3, tgt###, etc. I imagine he/she would be mighty confused as to which one to buy.Lots of myths going on in this thread. There’s no reason other than it does not fit in with the marketing being used to sell racquets. Every 2 years you have to “upgrade” to the BS tech that doesn’t do anything. That’s how they sell racquets. It doesn’t fit into their marketing plan to sell 25 year old racquets anyone.
Why dont manufacturers just sell pro stock rackets?
It seems a well known thing that players dont use the rackets they endorse.
Why dont manufacturers just make those rackets to the masses?
This is very very simple. and it is obvious. Pro stock rackets are in most part Heavier, more flexible, and much heavier swing weight and twist weight. While this is very appealing when hitting against 80 mph groundies and 130 MPH serves with 3500 RPM on them, it takes tremendous skill, precision and racket speed to be able to swing these rackets. 90 % of the amateur players simply can't handle these type of specs or want use them for that matter. So are you asking the racket company to cater to 10 % the market ?? That would be stupid business decision and fast track to bankrupsy.Why dont manufacturers just sell pro stock rackets?
It seems a well known thing that players dont use the rackets they endorse.
Why dont manufacturers just make those rackets to the masses?
No, exactly the oppositeThis is very very simple. and it is obvious. Pro stock rackets are in most part Heavier, and much heavier swing weight and twist weight. .
I don't think that is the myth. It is the same (or very close) mold as the H19, but not the Pro stock version.The myth of the Wilson Ultra Tour being a pro stock (H19) or pseudo pro stock probably will never die. More than half of the original UT thread was about it with one of the graphic designers and sales reps perpetuating that notion.
Lots of the answers make sense here.
I still think there is room on the market for those rackets. Manufacturers could sell them straight from their website so they dont need to make massive amounts to send to retail stores.
Exactly, even the Pros customize their pro spec rackets after getting them. They add more lead at various positions and make adjustments even more. So there isn't a true exactly same rackets pro uses right off the shelf.Pro stocks are meant to be customized, and the company producing them is committed to selling them without change long term. Aside from that they aren’t magic.
Because the average consumer will pick one off the rack, swing it a couple times, say "That feels too heavy," and go off and buy a retail Pure Aero.
The whole light racket craze is consumer driven not racket manufacturer driven. The average tennis consumer thinks light is better, thinks the racket they are playing is the same as the pro and has no idea about the difference between polyester and nylon strings. So the manufacturers have gotten in an arms race to make lighter rackets that maintain the power of older heavy frames.
What's your opinion of the new "Clash" that is suppose to have revolutionary technology? My take is that Wilson is taking advantage of the average tennis consumer trying to sell them "new" tech when they have been making frames with low flex ratings for years.Lots of myths going on in this thread. There’s no reason other than it does not fit in with the marketing being used to sell racquets. Every 2 years you have to “upgrade” to the BS tech that doesn’t do anything. That’s how they sell racquets. It doesn’t fit into their marketing plan to sell 25 year old racquets anyone.
You can buy pro stocks from reputable sellers on fleabay and the pro stock site. But you will be delivering a truck load of cash.Why dont manufacturers just sell pro stock rackets?
It seems a well known thing that players dont use the rackets they endorse.
Why dont manufacturers just make those rackets to the masses?
besides if you really want, there are specialized firms who can make you customized grips and or tune your regular of the shelf racquets, which is more than enough i think. Pro stocks dont make you a better player. Better players may not even need pro stocks. There are plenty of heavier pure controls and head prestige, or heavy Wilsons racquets on the second hand market for sale, if you want.Just to chime in: A pro stock is a hairpin that needs to be customized. Guess how many people would want to
- pay for professional customization on top
- customize the racquet(s) themselves
Those who want that either
- have a racquet contract or
- buy their pro stocks on the grey market. And even there you usually get asked about racquet specs, even though you can change them to whatever you like.
So in short, it's just not much of a business model to be had.
Yeah, I think the marketing is hilarious. The most flexible racquet ever made lol The marketing department has no shame. It has a flex of 55RA according to TW specs which are very credible. So it’s firm flex according to HEAD’s mid 80’s marketing department. But millennials have never seen a racquet that flexible just those Babolat’s and Babolat wannabe’s. So that BS marketing can be believable and it will also be believable to older people who’s arm is going to fall from stiff, light, wide body racquets, and poly.What's your opinion of the new "Clash" that is suppose to have revolutionary technology? My take is that Wilson is taking advantage of the average tennis consumer trying to sell them "new" tech when they have been making frames with low flex ratings for years.
231 is just the Radical. Babolat already does such a thing with the Pure Strike all painted exactly the same with different versions, Pure Strike 100, Pure Strike 98 16x19, Pure Strike 98 18x20, Pure Strike VS, Pure Strike VS Tour, and Pure Strike Team. That’s 6 different Pure Strikes, there isn’t 6 different TGK231.X Radicals.Agree with you about the loss of marketing and sales opportunities with the annual BS tech introduction, but can you imagine a new player walking into a tennis shop and seeing a wall of tgk231.1, tgk231.2, tgk 231.3, tgt###, etc. I imagine he/she would be mighty confused as to which one to buy.
Someone had said that the flex rating is 50..but who knows. Its just another super light, super powerful racquet with gimmick technology just like the Spin Effect models.Yeah, I think the marketing is hilarious. The most flexible racquet ever made lol The marketing department has no shame. It has a flex of 55RA according to TW specs which are very credible. So it’s firm flex according to HEAD’s mid 80’s marketing department. But know millennials have never seen a racquet that flexible just those Babolat’s and Babolat wanna be’s. So that BS marketing can be believable and it will be believable to older people who’s arm is going to fall from stiff, light wide body racquets and poly.
I’ll go by TW’s measured specs.Someone had said that the flex rating is 50..but who knows. Its just another super light, super powerful racquet with gimmick technology just like the Spin Effect models.
Yeah, I think the marketing is hilarious. The most flexible racquet ever made lol The marketing department has no shame. It has a flex of 55RA according to TW specs which are very credible. So it’s firm flex according to HEAD’s mid 80’s marketing department. But know millennials have never seen a racquet that flexible just those Babolat’s and Babolat wanna be’s. So that BS marketing can be believable and it will be believable to older people who’s arm is going to fall from stiff, light wide body racquets and poly.
Huh?? Everything I've read about prostock frames indicates they in fact are usually relatively light when sold, the heft coming after they've had all the silicone, lead and whatever added to them post-market to bring them to the desired specs.
The Clash appeals to delusional players who think they can get better by using a fancy racket. Pro stocks also appeal to delusional players who think they can get better by using a fancy racket. There are more delusional players of the first type, so racket companies sell rackets like the Clash but not pro stocks.What's your opinion of the new "Clash" that is suppose to have revolutionary technology? My take is that Wilson is taking advantage of the average tennis consumer trying to sell them "new" tech when they have been making frames with low flex ratings for years.
Because at the end of the day, it’s not the racquet that makes a difference. It’s the shoes!The Clash appeals to delusional players who think they can get better by using a fancy racket. Pro stocks also appeal to delusional players who think they can get better by using a fancy racket. There are more delusional players of the first type, so racket companies sell rackets like the Clash but not pro stocks.
...or sleeveless shirts.Because at the end of the day, it’s not the racquet that makes a difference. It’s the shoes!
Spike Lee said it was the shoes!...or sleeveless shirts.
That’s not the point. It’s about playing with a racquet you like and playing with a racquet that has the specs that compliment your game.Let's say money is no object and you have access to pro stocks. You get it customized by P1 to your optimal specs.
Now...what do you think of your chance in beating a decent D1 player? Let alone ATP pros.
That’s not the point. It’s about playing with a racquet you like and playing with a racquet that has the specs that compliment your game.
What level? I play with Pro Stock racquets. It’s becuse I prefer the classic feel that’s no longer offered at retail. That’s the only reason.Actually, my point is your point. The point is that there is no point in customizing to that level to win a point.
I’ve seen a pro stock in P17 but no labels or codes on it and specs are so similar to retail. It’s on the Pro stock tennis. Any insight what is the difference between them and retail?231 is just the Radical. Babolat already does such a thing with the Pure Strike all painted exactly the same with different versions, Pure Strike 100, Pure Strike 98 16x19, Pure Strike 98 18x20, Pure Strike VS, Pure Strike VS Tour, and Pure Strike Team. That’s 6 different Pure Strikes, there isn’t 6 different TGK231.X Radicals.
Of course pro stocks are nice and they provide a consistent platform to customize from. I am glad you are fortunate enough to play with them. However, the reality is that they are not easily accessible to the general public. When you consider all the aspects needed to play good solid tennis, the racquet becomes a very small variable. For me, fitness and technique affect my game much much more than the racquet I play with. My approach is to work with what I have and not wish for what I want. That's just my opinion.What level? I play with Pro Stock racquets. It’s becuse I prefer the classic feel that’s no longer offered at retail. That’s the only reason.