If the former great Italian professional/craftsman Gianluca Pozzi (all slice or flat groundstrokes, and someone who actually looked to get to the net) switched from the Max 200G to the lighter, longer, larger Dunlop Super Revelation +1.00" at some point in the mid to late 90s, lesser mortals should take note. It is okay to be wrong, but not when your paycheck is on the line. Here is an actual example of someone making the switch to stay competitive and "play their best tennis". If you remember, Pozzi was the guy who took Safin to 5 sets in the 4R 2000 USOpen, the year Safin mugged Sampras in the final. He actually beat Safin at Queen's Club earlier that same year. Did Pozzi, McEnroe and Graf all switch from the Max 200G to play less then their best?
Hi
I do not enter the forum to debate with other colleagues and this will be my last reply for you.
ok let's talk about professionals.
The ex-atp (with victories over Nadal, Ferrero, Ferrer, Monaco and others) who leads my training group tells me privately that the rackets I use are better than the modern ones used by my young training partners and that he has sold off your sponsorship brand. According to him in the last 20 years there has been no significant improvement and the quality is much worse.
In this forum we all know that Murray plays with a 1993 PT57A (with 16x19). Nadal has been wearing it since 2005. Djokovic has a 1999 tgk frame.
Let's look at the case of Federer. He does play with a new racket.
Until 2002 he played with Ps85 from 1982. This for Wilson was very unprofitable in the market. They pressured Federer to switch to a bigger hoop and after much discussion Roger agreed if the new racket was an enlarged copy of the PS85. With that racket and his multiple paintjobs he has won 17GS.
As for the issue of why Dunlop abandoned the manufacture of the injected graphite mold, there is extensive information in the forum from very competent colleagues.
One last question: we all buy products made in China because it suits us, but we must be aware of the involution of quality that this implies. You can't be so naive as to believe that a $ 5 manufacturing cost racket is a quality product.
I respect your opinion and arguments and I will not enter into any further debate.
a cordial greeting