Tennis Warehouse Playtest: Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Shoes

Attention Talk Tennis Members:

We will be playtesting a very limited number of Head Sprint Pro 3.0 shoes (launching January 2020) for a playtest.

Playtest application is now closed. Chosen playtesters have been notified via email.

If you are selected, you must reply to our confirmation email and confirm that you are able to perform this playtest.

We select playtesters based on a number of factors, including past performance on playtests and message board participation

*** Please turn in your comments by February 14, 2020.**

If you do not post a review or if your review is clearly lacking effort, you will be excluded from future playtests.

Please use the following to write your review:

Tennis experience/background:
Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):
Current shoe:
How many hours did you play with the shoe?
Normal Size:
Playtesting Size:

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort:
-arch support:
-stability/support:
-ventilation:
-sole durability:
-toe durability:
-traction:
-weight:

General reaction/comments on overall performance:

As always, we ask that this thread to be used only for questions, discussion and playtest reviews. Extraneous comments will be deleted.

Thanks,

TW Staff

Does this fit like the Sprint Pro 2.5? Listed as slightly narrow.

Thank you.

djNEiGht,

Our playtesters stayed in their true size but they do fit slightly narrower than medium.

Thanks,
Brittany, TW

@TW Staff , Do you know what colors that the Sprint 3.0 will come in?
Thx.

mogo,

I don't know at this time. They will be sending the shoes to me shortly.

Thanks,
Brittany, TW

Looking forward to playtesting my first Head shoes. I’ve been actually impressed with the shoe build & quality of both Babolat and Wilson. Hoping Head impresses, too.

Is there a break-in period for the Head Sprint Pro 3.0 ?

Any pictures from playtesters for their shoes?

tennisgurl said:

Any pictures from playtesters for their shoes?

Click to expand...

I don’t think the shoes have been sent out to the play testers yet.

I just got the notice. Will post some pics as soon as I receive the new Head Sprint Pro 3.0. Excited!

Playtest shoes have been sent out and should arrive in 1-5 business days. I have adjusted the due date to:

February 14, 2020

Thanks,
Brittany, TW

Just received my pair and tried them on around the house!

First impressions: Good looking design, light on the feet, seem well-ventilated. Definitely runs 1/2 size small unfortunately... toes are crowded at the side and seems like a potential risk for toe jamming at the front. Will have to hope they expand...

Just received the Head Sprint Pro 3.0, will be breaking them in a little on court today.
Here are some pics, really digging the color on these!! Thx TW and HEAD!!

Very good looking shoes indeed. Like the colors on it, and also fits nice. It is slightly more towards the snug feel, but I am not calling it tight. I walked around in it in the house a few hours and did not feel any issues with tightness. I have to see how it feels on court.



I give it at least a weeks time on court, before judging on anything related to tightness, because seems like this is really made for performance and that snug feel. Even though there may not be any official break in period, I believe any snug shoe may take a week on court before it adjusts to the shape of your foot.

By the way I was discussing about the laceless design trend now a days with tennis shoes in another thread, and this head shoe, even though does have laces, still have the new style of tongue. It just adds to that snug feel (in a good way).

Anybody already tried them? I'm really curious how they compare with the Asics solution speed ff.

terg said:

Anybody already tried them? I'm really curious how they compare with the Asics solution speed ff.

Click to expand...

Have never tried Asics, but my recent shoe I have been using on court is the vapor 9.5. The Head sprint pro is true to size, snug, and comfy. I would say they are a little narrow compared to the vapor and break in is needed for 2 or 3 days. But a great glove like fit and awesome ventilation. One other plus is they are light. I'm still trying them out before my official review, hope this helps.

mogo said:

Have never tried Asics, but my recent shoe I have been using on court is the vapor 9.5. The Head sprint pro is true to size, snug, and comfy. I would say they are a little narrow compared to the vapor and break in is needed for 2 or 3 days. But a great glove like fit and awesome ventilation. One other plus is they are light. I'm still trying them out before my official review, hope this helps.

Click to expand...

For me the Nike zoom zero also feel tight, did you ever try that one?

terg said:

For me the Nike zoom zero also feel tight, did you ever try that one?

Click to expand...

No, have not tried that shoe yet. Not sure if anyone has compared the zero to the vapor 9.5 on this Playtest that could give some feedback.

They are more snug in the toe box compared to the Zoom Zero imo. Actually find them to be a bit too narrow and I have a slightly narrow foot. Have worn for about 4-5 hours. No change in fitment as far as widening/loosening up.

Just recovering from the severe case of the winter flu. Will be putting the shoes through 4 to 5 hour tennis tomorrow. Will report back with some pictures and the initial results.

Impressed with the build quality and finish. Just looks like a well designed shoes. Seems like a lot of thought went into designing it. Really a nice looking shoes for sure.

Just a little blurb until I get a chance to do a more thorough review...so far, no break in period, comfy right out of the box. At first a bit snug but all is good now. Really loving the shoe so far.

Great shoes from Head. To me, the Sprint Pro 3.0 feels a lot like the ASICS Gel Resolution without the heel slippage. It feels a bit firmer in cushioning than my current go to shoes (*Wilson Rush Pro V3), not as grippy as Wilson but not slippery like the ASICS, supportive (*my ankles felt secure) and armor like protection for my toes.

I was afraid that the shoes might fit too narrowly for my wide feet. It wasn’t the case at all. The toe area felt a little tight in the beginning, but it loosened up and felt snugly comfortable. The sizing was true to its size,

Very impressive. Just have to see how the durability will be like.

I’m so impressed with this shoes! Well ventilated, superbly supportive - yet so comfortable, and most importantly, well-cushioned without being mushy/pillowy. This may be the best shoe I’ve worn. If the outsoles last, which seems like it should, this may just be the ultimate tennis shoes.

When is the white/neon version launching?

Having that armor-like protection in the toe area not only eases impact but helps with durability in the high wear areas. I put about 15 hours on the shoes, and so far the shoes still fit like gloves without any visible signs of wear on the soles. The shoes feel supportive, protective and comfortable at the same time. Though it does feel more snug than highly comfortable shoes like the Wilson Rush Pro 3, it never felt constrained. I was confident in going after the shots knowing that I have the superb ankle support as well as nice grippy soles that help In sprints and quick stops.

My Official Review:

Tennis experience/background: 4.5NTRP Male, Former D1 Track athlete
Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): Aggressive all-court attacking style
Current shoe: NB Fresh Foam Lav
How many hours did you play with the shoe? 20 hrs
Normal Size: 10.5US
Playtesting Size: 10.5US

Comments on shoe performance: The Sprint Pro 3.0 feels like a softer version of the Nike Vapor Tour 9.5. It breathes well, has good stability, and has very good cushion for a "speed-oriented" shoe. The overall fit is a bit snug but not uncomfortable.

-comfort: I'd give the shoe a 8.5 out of 10. It runs a little narrow and short but not too uncomfortable for a "normal" width foot. Cushioning is soft and flexy.
-arch support: 5/10. It seemed to have a fairly neutral arch support. I prefer to use my Superfeet insoles and did so after the first time on-court.
-stability/support: 8.5/10. Very stable feeling shoe. It has a flared outer edge in the rear toebox region for stability.
-ventilation: 9.5/10. The upper has a nice ventilated mesh as well as the vents in the midfoot region of the midsole. This would be a great shoe for hotter climates.
-sole durability: Unknown. I play-tested exclusively on HarTru clay courts.
-toe durability: Unknown, I play on clay
-traction: 8/10. Though I played on clay courts, the sole offered better traction than Asics Spped 3 or NB FF Lav that I normally wear. I think they would offer good traction on hard court.
-weight: 9/10. Very lightweight yet soft and flexy.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
I could easily switch to this shoe. It required little break-in, offered a soft ride and good flexibility as well as good ventilation. My only concern is the tight fit.
The shoe gives you a snug and locked-in fit to allow aggressive movement. I haven't worn a Head tennis shoe since the Head Radial.(way back in the day). These shoes are worth a look for anyone looking for a replacement to the Nike Vapor Tour 9.5, Adidas Ubersonic 2 or the Asics Speed 2 or 3.

Thanks for playtest opportunity TW!

Tennis experience/background: seasoned player - play leagues and recreational, 10-12 hours/week, (85% hard court/15% clay)

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): all court

Current shoes:
Prince T22 White/Navy/Silver (4.5/5 overall, 3.5/5 for recent iterations – white PU around the little toe area split and stitching came apart)
K-Swiss Ultrashot Blue/yellow (3.5) – not used when I am going to be on the court for 3-4 hours or for match play because it does not provide good cushioning

How many hours did you play with the shoe? 30 hours over four weeks including two hours indoor on carpet.

Normal Size: US12.0/UK11.0
Playtesting Size: US12.5/UK11.5

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort: a little less than the T22 because of the narrower fit, but this was still extremely comfortable from the outset and did not need a break-in period for me. I may have to add a thin insert for slightly more cushioning. As a two-sock person I had to wear a thinner outer sock because of the snug fit.

-arch support: low/medium: I have a high arch so no shoe is perfect out of the box. The lacing system was a hybrid of the traditional eyelet and a red triangular channel strap that allowed the upper mid-foot to feel comfortably snug. Some of this upper mid foot comfort may be attributable to the one-piece tongue sleeve’s sponginess. However, because the tongue is thin, only a long-term trial will reveal whether that sponginess is retained. I suspect this user will need a sock with a thicker top portion at some point down the road to not feel the last lace crossing biting down at the end of a long match or training session.

-stability/support: I requested a 12.5US size, one half size larger than my normal tennis shoe, and the shoe fit well. There was no slipping of the fore foot on court sprints to get to a drop shot and there was very good heel support. The ankle area was very comfortable compared to some other shoes that place pressure or cut into the ankle bones (the malleoli)). there was adequate support around the ankle and the shoe felt stable on lateral plants as well as for darts up to the net, making quick adjustments of feet at the net, and back pedaling on lobs

-ventilation: definitely a cool shoe for me and not hot like my K-Swiss experience or even the T22s which feel warm compared to the Head Sprint Pro 3.0

-sole durability: I am light on my feet so it takes awhile for soles to show any appreciable amount of wear. I did not play on the sandier hard courts or on clay in these shoes. Generally, outside of this first playtest of shoes, I keep several pairs in rotation.

-toe durability: not being a toe dragger I have only very light scuff marks. The toe and sole material seems quite heavy duty.

-traction: excellent. I am not a slider on hard courts and felt there was a balance between how the sole gripped the court generally and the times when one needs some give. Initially the sole felt less grippy than the T22, but over the play test I did not have any hesitation in covering the courts with the new shoe. I loved the tread pattern.

-weight: the shoe is appreciably lighter than the Prince T22 so I felt a lot quicker around the court. Each shoe weighed about 14.2 oz out of the box

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
The shoe has great looking Navy/Red cosmetics, it was noticed on court and there were many positive comments on the shoe especially since I wear the comparatively “boring” T22s.

Tennis experience/background: USTA 4.0 rated. Been playing on and off for 17 years
Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): All court, counter punching style
Current shoe: Nike Zoom Zero
How many hours did you play with the shoe? ~25 hours
Normal Size: 11
Playtesting Size: 11

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort: Coming from the Zoom Zero's, these shoes felt less cushioned. In particular I found the forefoot to feel firmer and also thinner. As a result, I found myself more connected to the ground, but didn't get as much impact protection. Never felt any adverse affects from the lack of cushioning, but am more used to a plusher ride. If I had to compare this to a shoe I've used in the past, it would most resemble the Vapor X - Low to the ground and not terribly cushioned. Cushion aside, even though my foot is slightly narrow, I found the toe box on this shoe to be too snug. I had pinching on the lateral side of my forefoot. I was hoping the forefoot would open up a bit with some playing, but it never happened. As a result, even at the 25 hour mark, I could never fully play comfortably in them.
-arch support: Arch support was probably neutral. I have a neutral to slightly flat foot type and I found them adequate. Never found them uncomfortable in this regard. Definitely not a stability shoe as shoes that are on the stability side for arch support would hurt my feet. All in all, no complaints about the arch support and was adequate.
-stability/support: Shoes were stable given how much mesh was noticeable throughout the shoe. Side to side movement was solid and never felt like I would roll an ankle. The heel cup, or at least the plastic piece that was more outwardly obvious, served its purpose. Heel felt locked in. Didn't have to use the last eyelet either. In comparison to the Vapor X and Zoom Zero, felt more stable and supportive.
-ventilation: To preface, it's winter time and never really got to play in temps above 70 so hard to really say if the shoe is really well ventilated or if it's because it just wasn't that hot. That said, I'd rate this shoe to be well ventilated based simply on looks. Forefoot has a noticeable amount of mesh to it. During my hours of play, foot never felt like it overheated. Would definitely like to try these out in the summer if the same hold trues, but as it stands, I would say these are very well ventilated shoes.
-sole durability: After 25 hours of play, I didn't notice any wear to the outsole. Probably the most durable shoe I've worn in a while. The Zoom Zero, in comparison, showed wear only after a couple of uses. So by comparison, I'd say Head made a very durable shoe. Will continue to wear to see if I'm able to put a dent in them.
-toe durability: I am not a prominent toe dragger when it comes to serving, though I do drag my foot slightly on my backhand. That said, the toe held up adequately and showed no signs of wearing through. For reference though, while I do drag on my backhand, I've never actually put a hole through any pair of shoes. I would rate these shoes to be well built to withstand toe dragging.
-traction: Though I don't slide, I do occasionally lose footing trying to recover from hitting when pulled wide. I never had that this issue with these shoes. I'd rate the traction high as well. A bit surprising since I didn't expect a shoe that had such good durability to also have such good traction.
-weight: Weight feels on par with the Zoom Zero, and felt slightly heavier than the Vapor X. However while they felt similarly weighted to the Zoom Zero, they didn't feel as clunky. I'd attribute that to the more streamlined design vs the bulkier Zoom Zero. For the level of stability and durability these shoes have shown so far, I'd say that more than justifies this weight.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
Overall, I'd say Head did a great job with this shoe. Blended the qualities with a low profile, speed oriented shoe with the outsole of a durability/stability shoe without making it clunky. Think those with a narrower foot would enjoy these best, while wide footers may have issues. The color scheme on this pair was also quite nice. The subtle blue with a splash of pop from the red outsole was much appreciated. If I had to knock the appearance, it would be that I'm just not a fan of the Head logo. Other than that toe, seems to be a great performing shoe and a nice alternative to the mainstream offerings. If the price point comes in lower than Nike or Adidas, definitely worth a look.

Tennis Warehouse Playtest: Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Shoes Official Review

Tennis experience/background:
5.0(bumped this year and appeal failed ) singles player mostly and some doubles.

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):
Baseliner and counterpuncher.

Current shoe:
Nike Cage 2’s, Vaper 9.5, Have the cage 3 and X but not the same feel.

How many hours did you play with the shoe:
30 hrs. total, about 10hrs a week.

Normal Size: 10

Playtesting Size: 10

Comments on shoe performance:
-comfort:
Stiff break-in, I would recommend walking a day in or playing some light doubles to break in or else you will get blisters. Great comfort, whether tied or untied. The shoe was great, no slipping or jamming. I thought I would get some jamming since it is true to size but no issues at all. Love to wear on court and off. 9/10

-arch support:
I had no issues, but I do not have arch issues. I did not feel any soreness playing with the shoes at all. Heel is a little stiff in the back, not a big deal just more noticeable than other shoes I have worn before. 9/10

-stability/support:
Firm outside, the cushioning was stiff the first week. They are glove like, so very stable. If you lace them up it only increases. I did use all the eyelets, at first the shoes bent out if not tied all the way. I preferred them secure with the full laces used. I could also use them untied with the booty support feeling very stable. 9/10

-ventilation:
100% awesome, I kept the shoes on after play which is not a norm for me.
Usually I take them off to air out, but I had no issues after playing. Best part of the playtest by far. 10/10

-sole durability:
Really good no streaking or breakdown that I can see. Sole was very grippy on court but that is normal at first. Has worn a little but still has great traction. I want to see how the outside of the sole last after 3 months to see if there is any significant breakdown. 8/10

-toe durability:
Built to last, I am not a toe dragger so not an issue for me. But I don’t see any looseness or wear and tear after 3 weeks of use. 10/10

-traction:
Traction was good, I could slide well if needed and felt stable. Interesting pattern on the bottom with the holes, did not affect play at all. Has worn a little but still has great traction and can slide without issues. No jamming on the front or sides of my feet. 8/10

-weight:
Together these shoes weight a pound and couple oz. Very light, I really liked the stability and light weight. 9/10

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
If you find that the Vapor X front foot is snug for you, I would not get these as the front is narrow. For me it’s great but for others with wider front foot it could be troublesome unless you try a size bigger. Also, I don’t ankle wrap or use double socks but if I did, I would need a bigger size to accommodate. But I loved the great glove like feel for me it was amazing on court. Color was great too. I would buy these shoes again as I am looking for a shoe to play in this year. This maybe a top choice for me.

This shoe is a winner for me, my foot fit like a glove and in a great way. Comfy and snug, the laces could have been a little longer for me. I had to use the last eyelet because if I did not the shoe would squish out and not wrap my foot. I like the booty sock tongue design, fit well for me and if you want to just wear unlaced it supports well. I worked out in these shoes, did squats, jump rope, calf raises and felt secure and comfortable going untied during my workouts. All in all, Head has really impressed me with the Sprint Pro 3.0. Honestly this is a great shoe, light, well made, and I really endorse it.
Thank you to TW and Head for the opportunity.

Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Shoes PlayTest
=============================

Tennis experience/background:
Late boomer with 10+ years playing tennis at different levels. Currently plays mostly recreational singles tennis at level 4.5. Also enjoys social doubles and singles/doubles strategic discussions. Also a trusted “free” stringer for buddies and usual go to person for the tennis strings/accessory/equipment related questions for the folks at the club.

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):
Strategic counter puncher. Move the opponent from compromised positions, and beat them in counter-attack is a usual play.

Current shoe:
Prince T22 Lite

How many hours did you play with the shoe?
12 Hrs

Normal Size:
10.5

Playtesting Size:
10.5

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort:
Initially I was a bit skeptical because of the snug fit of the shoe, especially since I won’t describe my foot as narrow. But the playtest did really went well, and the shoe is very comfortable considering that this is still made for speed. There were no toe-jam issues, and the shoe broke in nicely to fit the shape of my feet. I have used are other shoes which are more comfy, but at the expense of bulk and slow. Head Sprint nicely divides the middle, and is a very fast shoe which you can comfortably wear for your daily tennis use. So I will give 8/10 for comfort.

-arch support:
Good. The inner material is comfy but at the same time have good friction. I personally do not have any arch issues, and does not have any extreme needs of arch support. So I would say there is nothing extraordinary there, even though it really felt good, and kind of wear and forget.

-stability/support:
Excellent. So this shoe is relatively light when compare to shoes known for their stability. So my first impression was that this cannot be considered as a stability shoe. I still love some extra weighted shoes like my Prince T22 (Lite) as my first choice. But I personally know that most of my friends hate that much weight on the shoe, and what Head Sprint Pro 3.0 does is it provides close to that stability with no added weight. For comparison, the Prince T22 (lite) is 15+oz vs the Head Sprint Pro is only around 12oz, and it does feel light on your feet. The key is the midsole section which has this new wrap around design. This keeps the feet from any unnecessary movement, even when you aggressively moving sideways and stopping, which is pretty much multiple times on every rally, if you are active on foot, irrespective of level. In summary I am very happy with the stability this shoe provided on movements, especially on side to side movements.

-ventilation:
Excellent. The real test would be summer. But I can see that the shoes does have a lot of breathing design. The uppers does have a spongy inside, and perforated outside, the insoles does have holes for breathing. So the design was done with good breathing in mind.

-sole durability:
Very Good considering that this is a speed shoe. I believe there are a lot of other shoes which may provide more durability on soles. But again that does come at the cost of extra weight. I usually don’t go with fast category shoes, since most of them feel too unstable for me, and does cost a lot more as a daily tennis shoe. But Head Sprint Pro does provide a really good durability without adding much bulk/weight. So for anyone who love fast/light shoes, but does not want to trade durability shoe look into Head Sprint Pro 3.0 seriously.

-toe durability:
Excellent. Disclaimer: I am not a toe-dragger, and have a platform stance on serve. So for me the toe is not really a point of weakness, and it does hold up well.

-traction:
Excellent. Yes, so I did play a couple of times in relatively slippery surfaces, pretty much right after rain, and cleanup, and so really did test the traction of the shoe to its extreme. The sole material does provide really good traction and you can be really confident even in slippery surfaces. I am not a slider, but one disadvantage probably for those hardcourt sliders, would be that it may not provide much of a slide. Also it is a relatively quiet shoe, even when you are moving aggressively.

-weight:
I think this is a personal preference. I believe most folks do like fast/light shoes. And this shoe is more towards the fast/light side of the spectrum. I personally like a bit more weight on my daily tennis shoe, even though I may choose to go with a lighter shoe on a critical tennis match. But “Head Sprint Pro 3.0” is very stable even at its lighter weight, that I may actually consider experimenting with it for a longer term as my daily tennis shoe and see how it changes my mindset.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
This is definitely a wear and forget shoe. When you don’t think about what shoe you are wearing during the whole match, then you know that the shoe does its job very well. As some others have already noted, this is a very snug fitting shoes, because of its new design. But it did not add any discomfort, even though I used my usual shoe size. Originally I was skeptical about comfort as well as stability. But the more I use it the more I feel confident about the shoe. Also I am starting to really like the new wrap around design, where the tongue of the shoe really does wrap around your feet in midsection and goes all the way to the insoles. Pretty much like a laceless shoe, but with laces on top providing the full confidence you need. Essentially this provides really good mid section support, and I think that was the key design element in keeping the shoe so stable on side movements.

Overall really enjoyed the playtest, and made me think outside my usual comfort. I am going to continue using this shoe to fully test its durability.

- If you are looking for the lightest shoe, this is probably not it.
- If you are looking for the most durable shoe, this is probably not it.
- But if you are looking for a really good balance between fast/light and stability/durability you should really give “Head Sprint Pro 3.0” a try.

Tennis Warehouse Playtest: Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Shoes Official Review

Tennis experience/background:
4.5 mainly doubles player

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):
Baseliner who works way in to net

Current shoe:
Nike Flare 2

How many hours did you play with the shoe:
25 hours...weather in NC has not been the best and no indoor courts in my town

Normal Size: 7 (ladies)

Playtesting Size: 7

Comments on shoe performance:
-comfort:
These were stiff when I first put them on and snug for my medium width foot...I wore them around the house for a day before I played in them. These shoes ended up being a very comfortable shoe, I would wear them once done on the court, not in a rush to take them off.

Arch support:
I had no issues with the arch and found them to be very comfortable for my lower arch foot. Again, these were a pleasant surprise in how comfortable the shoes were/are.

-stability/support:
These shoes as mentioned before were firm and needed breaking in. I also thought there would be too snug but after a couple hours of wear the loosened up and were the perfect fit. I will say I felt like the cushioning was ok, which was normal for a lighter weight shoe. Although they were too snug at first they were a perfect glove like fit in the end, making them stable but I did have to use the last eyelet to ensure no heel slippage.

-ventilation:
This shoe had awesome ventilation, as mentioned above with the comfort I would keep them on after play, which was also in part due to the face my foot did not get too hot. I noticed how the ventilation was all around on the shoe and my feet appreciated this.

-sole durability:
I played in these on mostly the artificial sand grass courts. My sole still looks really good with little to no wear showing. On both hard and the omni courts the sole had great traction, I did notice how the sole was quite different from the normal herringbone pattern a lot of shoes have.

-toe durability:
I am a toe dragger, mostly with my right foot & my serve. I did notice quite a bit of difference and wear on the toe. The durability is not the best but it would not be a deterrent in me purchasing these shoes in the future.

-traction:
Traction was good for me. I am not a slider (I wish I was!) but again felt safe and secure with the traction on both hard & omni courts.

-weight:
I felt like these shoes were lightweight with great stability, especially considering how light they are (compared to an Asics Gel Resolution)

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
This shoe was a perfect fit for my medium fit...I do not wear ankle braces, if I did, I may order a size up. Although they are a snug medium, I feel like the open up after some wear but not too much. t I loved the great glove like feel for me it was so comfortable and yet stable. I also enjoyed the color and would totally purchase these shoes. They are definitely going in my rotation. One of the only negatives is because I had to use the last eyelet, the laces could have been longer. I also like the booty/sock fit with the attached tongue. Many thanks to Head and TW for the this great opportunity. I totally give this shoe a thumbs up.

Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Playtest

Tennis experience/background:

Have been playing since the 80’s. Div. 2 Tennis. Approximately 4.5

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):

Aggressive baseliner but trying to be more of an all-courter

Current shoe:

Wilson Rush Pro 3.0, New Balance 996 V3

How many hours did you play with the shoe?

25 hours

Normal Size:

Size 11

Playtesting Size:

Size 11

Comments on shoe performance:

The Sprint Pro 3.0 is great shoes for the aggressive players who seek comfort, stability, protection and durability. It has all the protection that heavy, armor-like shoes offer but feels light playing in them. Also, though it feels snug out of the box, it does loosen up. The thing I found most impressive was how stable it felt and the ankle support was superb. The outsole is grippy but not extremely grippy like the Rush Pro. It doesn’t help with skidding like the Gel Resolution, but it offers sure footing and gives confidence to go after the balls without worrying about losing grip. The toe area is well protected, snug but comfortable with no toe jamming issues.

Overall, the Sprint Pro 3.0 is one of the best tennis shoes I’ve ever tried. It isn’t as comfortable like the Wilson Rush Pro 3.0 or the Babolat SFX, but the shoes are still extremely comfortable and offers a lot more protection and support.

-comfort: 8.5/10

I’d say it’s probably 9/10, but in comparison with other extremely comfortable shoes I’ve tried, it felt more protected but came with a bit more rigidity. Honestly, more nitpicking than anything. The shoes are really comfortable, even for my wide feet.

-arch support: 10/10

I have flat feet and do not need so much arch support. The shoes provided all the support I needed.

-stability/support: 10/10

The shoes felt a lot like the Gel Resolution as far as the stability and support goes. The Sprint Pro 3.0 offered solid support and stability for my ankles without having any heel slippage issues, which gave me the confidence to go after the balls without any worries that my shoes might slip off.

-ventilation: 10/10

Though I have not worn these shoes in the summer, I could tell the shoes are well ventilated and helped to keep my feet from getting overheated and clammy. I never felt my feet were getting too hot or overly sweaty from not having enough ventilation.

-sole durability: 9.5/10

The outsole in the toe area is super durable. I hardly noticed any wear after 25 hours. The only concern is in the heel area, which is one of my high wear areas. Though I didn’t notice any wear, the outsole looked thin in the heel area and may wear out quicker than well-protected toe area.

-toe durability: 10/10

The outsole in the toe area looked like there was almost no wear. That was impressive because I’m pretty hard on my shoes and usually start notice some wear starting in the high wear areas. Another thing is that the outsoles in the toe area really helps to protect the toes from taking poundings.

-traction: 10/10

I’d say the traction is just about right. It isn’t overly grippy like certain shoes that makes the squeaky noise every time steps are taken. It isn’t slippery where the soles will help the player slide a little. It just feels right. The steps are sure footed and a plenty of grip.

-weight: 9/10

It feels nice and somewhat light. Though the shoes are not super comfortable like the Rush Pro 3.0, the weight was never an issue. It had the real nice balance of having all the support and stability in a well-protected, lighter shoes.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:

To me, the Sprint Pro 3.0 is the best tennis shoes that I have worn so far. From the lacing system that is well secured in the toe and ankle area with providing comfort for the mid and side of the feet. All the stability and support provided usually by the heavier armor-like shoes were still provided, but came in a lighter package that never had my feet feeling like they were being baked inside the shoes because they were so well ventilated. I rolled my ankle badly about a week before the playtest and the ankle was still tender when I began the playtest. Having nice predictable grip, along with sock-like fitting for feet and support and stability for my ankle, I began to get comfortable and confident immediately and played aggressively right away. Even after many hours playing the shoes still fit like glove. The feet felt fresh without having any pains,

To me, these shoes offer the best of both worlds - comfort and aid in performance & protection. However, it feels like these shoes balance both better than any tennis shoes I’ve worn so far. I’m really impressed with these shoes and will make these shoes my go to shoes from now on.

A must try for any serious and competitive tennis players.


Thank you, Tennis Warehouse! Thank you, Head! Thank you both so much for the opportunity.

Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Playtest

Tennis experience/background: USTA 4.5 player
Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): All court player
Current shoe: Nike Vapor 9/9.5/X
How many hours did you play with the shoe? 22 hours
Normal Size: 9
Playtesting Size: 9

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort: From the moment I put it on, the shoes felt very stiff and cramped. As others have pointed out, the shoes run small and I could definitely tell. Even just walking around, it felt like the front toe area did not want to bend. Because of the sizing, toe jamming was a big issue for me. Also the pinky toe knuckle area felt very cramped and would rub constantly. So even after multiple plays, I still felt reserved on the court, as I didn’t want to go all out running after everything, fearing pain in my toes. Hopefully this is an issue because of the smaller sizing.

-arch support: The arch support was sufficient. In my usual shoes, I would need special insoles to add more arch support, to prevent paint after playing. If these shoes, I did not notice any type of pain in that area of my feet.

-stability/support: I felt the shoe came up a little low around the sides of the ankle so it felt like I might roll the ankle if I was in the wrong position. Also, I had issues with the lacing system. The last 2nd and 3rd lace eyelet, I am not a fan of. So after lacing up the shoes, moving around in the court, at the last 2nd and 3rd eyelet, the laces would loosen there and affect the entire snugness of the shoe. I would have to adjust constant the lacing. The design for the heel area was done very well, as my heel really locked in.

-ventilation: Ventilation was very good. The shank ventilation system is very innovative and works very well. The upper felt breathable enough, did not have breathability issues.

-sole durability: The outsole is nice and thick. Even after all my play, the durability looks very high and still lots of play left on them.

-toe durability: I am not much of a toe dragger, so I did not have any issues with it. It seems like there is enough protection around the shoe to help with the heavy toe draggers.

-traction: Traction was very good. Lots of squeaking when moving around and allowed me to stop when I needed to stop.

-weight: Shoes felt very lightweight which is exactly how I like my shoes. I am more or a fast runner, so I need to be able to move my feet quickly.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
They look of the shoes is very nice, matches the Head Gravity Rackets. Performance wise, it does not work for me. Throughout the playtest, I was left with toe jam issues, foot pain, and just a stiff overall shoe. When I look for shoes, I want some to fit on my foot so well, that I forget I have anything on my feet, and allows me to just RUN. With these shoes, I was always cautious when running, fearing I would hurt myself more. I hope these problems were caused by the smaller sizing of the shoe and not the overall design of the shoe.

Thank you to @TW Staff and Head Tennis for allowing me to playtest these shoes. Even though they aren’t a winner for me, it was a good playtest and I’m thankful for the opportunity.

ATTENTION PLAYTESTERS,

Reminder that your reviews are due by tomorrow, Friday, February 14th.

Thanks,
TW Staff

Head Sprint Pro 3.0 Playtest

Tennis experience/background: USTA 4.5

Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): Aggressive Baseliner, will work my way into the net when the opportunity is there. Will mix in the occasional serve and volley.

Current shoe: Asics Court FF2, Typically my go to shoes are Asics Gel Resolutions

How many hours did you play with the shoe? About 15 hours.

Normal Size: 11.5

Playtesting Size: 11.5

Comments on shoe performance:

-comfort: Initially there was some discomfort under my right forefoot. However after a few hours of wearing them the discomfort went away and the shoes molded to the shape of my feet. They are especially comfortable for a speed oriented shoe. Not has comfortable as the Asics Court FF2. Comfort is 8/10.

-arch support: I have a medium arch. Typically I don't have arch support issues with shoes and I did not have any arch support issues with the Sprint Pro 3.0. Arch support 10/10.

-stability/support: The stability and support is great for a speed oriented shoe. Overall the stability and support is very solid. I did not experience any heel slippage. My foot felt locked in and I felt confident when changing directions and going after shots. 9/10

-ventilation: I live in Florida and the last week or so it has been in the 80s and humid. The ventilation is fantastic. I really like the shank ventilation system. The upper is also very breathable. 10/10

-sole durability: I am typically hard on shoes and typically go with shoes that have an outsole warranty. I am currently using the FF2 but typically go with the Asics Gel Resolution. Very minimal wear so far on the outsole. The last speed oriented shoe I wore was the Asics Solutions Speed FF. The Head Sprint Pro 3.0 seem to be more durable than the Asics Solutions Speed FF.
8/10

-toe durability: I am not much of a toe dragger so can't comment too much on the toe durability. 10/10

-traction: Great traction. No issues when changing directions and chasing down balls. No slippage. The outsole provides plenty of grip. 10/10

-weight: Definitely a light weight shoe. Lighter than my typical shoes. As I mentioned before, I typically go for shoes that have an outsole warranty and they tend to be on the heavier side. I was pleasantly surprised by the level of support and stability with such a light shoe. 10/10


General reaction/comments on overall performance:
The Head Sprint Pro 3.0 is an excellent all around shoe. I really like the glove like fit. After wearing the shoe for a few hours it seemed to mold to the shape of my feet. It provides a snug, yet comfy fit. It is an excellent all around shoe. With how light the shoe is I would assume it would lack in support or stability, which it did not. Overall, the shoe is very stable, supportive, seems to be durable for a speed oriented shoe, light weight with excellent ventilation. Well done Head!
I really enjoyed the playtest.
Thank you Tennis Warehouse and Head!

Good looking shoe. Can anyone compare them to the original Sprint Pro? The very first one?

Lex said:

My Official Review:

Tennis experience/background: 4.5NTRP Male, Former D1 Track athlete
Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley): Aggressive all-court attacking style
Current shoe: NB Fresh Foam Lav
How many hours did you play with the shoe? 20 hrs
Normal Size: 10.5US
Playtesting Size: 10.5US

Comments on shoe performance: The Sprint Pro 3.0 feels like a softer version of the Nike Vapor Tour 9.5. It breathes well, has good stability, and has very good cushion for a "speed-oriented" shoe. The overall fit is a bit snug but not uncomfortable.

-comfort: I'd give the shoe a 8.5 out of 10. It runs a little narrow and short but not too uncomfortable for a "normal" width foot. Cushioning is soft and flexy.
-arch support: 5/10. It seemed to have a fairly neutral arch support. I prefer to use my Superfeet insoles and did so after the first time on-court.
-stability/support: 8.5/10. Very stable feeling shoe. It has a flared outer edge in the rear toebox region for stability.
-ventilation: 9.5/10. The upper has a nice ventilated mesh as well as the vents in the midfoot region of the midsole. This would be a great shoe for hotter climates.
-sole durability: Unknown. I play-tested exclusively on HarTru clay courts.
-toe durability: Unknown, I play on clay
-traction: 8/10. Though I played on clay courts, the sole offered better traction than Asics Spped 3 or NB FF Lav that I normally wear. I think they would offer good traction on hard court.
-weight: 9/10. Very lightweight yet soft and flexy.

General reaction/comments on overall performance:
I could easily switch to this shoe. It required little break-in, offered a soft ride and good flexibility as well as good ventilation. My only concern is the tight fit.
The shoe gives you a snug and locked-in fit to allow aggressive movement. I haven't worn a Head tennis shoe since the Head Radial.(way back in the day). These shoes are worth a look for anyone looking for a replacement to the Nike Vapor Tour 9.5, Adidas Ubersonic 2 or the Asics Speed 2 or 3.

Thanks for playtest opportunity TW!

Click to expand...

Great Review. So no issues playing on clay - it is an all surface sole? Did you remove the venting sticker inside? Did you get a lot of clay in the shoes? I play 75/25 hard to clay courts. My ASIC Court FF 2 are the most comfortable shoes I have ever worn but don’t breath at all and get too hot as we get in to summer. The Res 8 feel long and have heal slippage. I need a new go to shoe.

I did remove the sticker and haven’t experienced any clay coming in through the screen of the mid foot area. I do use aftermarket insoles though. Overall, the shoe is very breathable.
The sole could be better on clay but I’ve used worse.

GTR0814 said:

Great Review. So no issues playing on clay - it is an all surface sole? Did you remove the venting sticker inside? Did you get a lot of clay in the shoes? I play 75/25 hard to clay courts. My ASIC Court FF 2 are the most comfortable shoes I have ever worn but don’t breath at all and get too hot as we get in to summer. The Res 8 feel long and have heal slippage. I need a new go to shoe.

Click to expand...