Is the 93p the right choice for me?

Got my first 93p yesterday. For some reason I had a piece of Wilson gut that was probably cut out of an old 16 mains racquet. Lucky that there are 14 mains so crossed the gut w monogut ZX, which is my usual hybrid. I'm going to hit w it tomorrow a.m. and compare it to the graphite pro 90 and powerflex 90 I just got last week.

nintendoplayer said:

I had a funny feeling you might say something like that Well, I still have Hyper G 1.20 here and Hyper G Soft 1.25, probably the best strings in my repertoire regarding tension holding. Previously I was stringing Hyper G (soft) in the mains and PLE in the crosses. Maybe I should just switch them, put PLE in the mains and Hyper G in the crosses? Could that expand the tension holding period?

Click to expand...

Well, any way you combine them, you'll get better tension-holding than full-bed PLE. HG/HGS mains / PLE crosses will give you the most tension hold, whereas PLE mains / HG/HGS crosses won't give you quite as much, as the mains yield the bulk of the playability characteristics, but nevertheless, just putting HG/HGS in there somewhere will probably improve things fairly substantially.

nintendoplayer said:

Regarding power I cannot confirm the Racketpedia stats, PLE is more powerful than Hyper G in my opinion. I'd say Hyper G should be at 75 and PLE at 85.

The TW stats are quite different, PLE and Hyper G should hold tension comparably long according to their stats:

Click to expand...

Yeah, all of these stats are a decent general suggestion as to how the strings will play, but there's of course no substitute for real-world testing in your own frame.

As for the comparative power levels, I'd certainly believe your take -- most of Solinco's offerings are just on the lower-powered side of things, whereas most of the KB polys I've tried (PLE included) do have a bit more suppleness and spring to them. And in that vein, re- TWU's tension holding numbers, those can be very suspect, too, as they're only measuring tension loss over a fairly limited amount of impact and time, versus the real world where total number of impact and time in the racquet are likely much longer. As such, that's when other metrics, such as Durability and Stability come into play, and in those categories HG/HGS score a fair bit higher than PLE, thus helping them to maintain their tension longer in parallel.

Ok, had my first hit w/ the 93p. My usual racquet is the 97p, so not too much difference. If you hold the frames up to each other, there's a little more area in the throat, but the top of the hoop is nearly identical.

The transition between the two is minimal. Maybe a little more framed shots in the beginning, if you don't focus and watch the ball w intent. After a short warm up, it didn't feel any different to me. I've also been hitting w/ the graphite pro 90 and the powerflex 90 the last week or so. I don't notice that much difference in my shots. The powerflex feels like it holds onto the ball a little bit longer due to the increased flex, but I don't notice any loss of power or anything else between the three 90s. The frames are identical in shape, btw. The hole pattern on the 93p is visibly different, though.

As far as choosing a frame to play a match w/, I would choose any of these and be fine w/ it. Maybe I'm not picky enough, but the differences are subtle. I didn't pay more than $75 for any of these, including my 97ps, so cost wise, it's a wash.

Trip said:

Well, any way you combine them, you'll get better tension-holding than full-bed PLE. HG/HGS mains / PLE crosses will give you the most tension hold, whereas PLE mains / HG/HGS crosses won't give you quite as much, as the mains yield the bulk of the playability characteristics, but nevertheless, just putting HG/HGS in there somewhere will probably improve things fairly substantially.


Yeah, all of these stats are a decent general suggestion as to how the strings will play, but there's of course no substitute for real-world testing in your own frame.

As for the comparative power levels, I'd certainly believe your take -- most of Solinco's offerings are just on the lower-powered side of things, whereas most of the KB polys I've tried (PLE included) do have a bit more suppleness and spring to them. And in that vein, re- TWU's tension holding numbers, those can be very suspect, too, as they're only measuring tension loss over a fairly limited amount of impact and time, versus the real world where total number of impact and time in the racquet are likely much longer. As such, that's when other metrics, such as Durability and Stability come into play, and in those categories HG/HGS score a fair bit higher than PLE, thus helping them to maintain their tension longer in parallel.

Click to expand...

I currently have 3 98Ls in my bag, strung with

PLE 25/24
PLE 26/25
HGS 25/24

and measure the tension with the Stringster app regularly which is very interesting because I then have some objective data on when I feel like loosing control.

The 25/24 PLE frame started at 22.1kg and 11 days and a few hitting sessions later measures at 21.4kg



The 26/25 PLE frame started at 22.8 kg and 11 days later is at 22.1kg, with a bit less hitting than the 25/24kg frame.



I regularly start warming up with the 25/24 frame and also play the first games of a set with it until I recognize loosing a bit control. Especially when returning I then loose a bit control and regularly switch to the 26/25 frame for the 2nd half of the hitting session. Around 22kg measured Stringster-tension seems to be my optimal tension.
26/25kg definitely feels a bit too boardy, as if PLE is overstretched, 25/24kg like a better compromise of comfort and control.
With the 25/24kg frame (after a few hitting session) I feel like having to curve the ball more, cannot overhit but have to swing relaxed, a bit like Michael Stich.
The 26/25kg has to be used more in the style of Agassi, hit as hard as you can, go for winners as quickly as possible.

The 25/24 HGS frame is a backup in case I don't have enough control with either PLE frame, assuming HGS is generally a bit stiffer and more controlled than PLE.

Next steps:

1. potentially try 25.5/24.5kg PLE
2. Test a few sessions with HGS, should be controlled for a longer time, see how comfortable it is now that I have optimized racket specs
3. simply live with the fact that I can only hit 2-3 sessions with PLE and go with the comfort/control compromise

Interesting data and observations. IMHO, for as much as you enjoy PLE, you shouldn't have to go through that much jockeying inside of a mere couple/few hours, just to have a playable-enough setup that doesn't require you to change technique so drastically. As I said previously, I would try hybriding PLE mains with Ghostwire crosses and seeing if that improves playability enough to keep PLE in-play; otherwise I would look at moving on from it. If for whatever reason you prefer to keep stringing at such a high tension, either because you like the string bed behavior there, or otherwise, you'll probably need to focus exclusively on the latest softer co-polys that are as supple yet as tension-stable as possible. MSV Swift 1.25 would be my pick there.

But overall, I think perhaps a bit more firm poly at a lower reference tension is the better way forward, as you'll get a more physically-stable string to begin with, and have less tension available to lose. In that realm, you have HGS to test right now, and if you like the H-G feel but want more predictability, H-G Round was just released as well. Other round(ish) more firm options that should play very stable for at least several hours: Grapplesnake Tour M8 1.25 (start by string it low(ish), like 19/18.5kg or 19.5/19kg), Solinco Outlast 1.25 or 1.20, strung in the low 20's kg range, Head Hawk 1.25 or 1.20 (either full bed or as a cross to a softer/shaped main; strung no higher than 21-22kg).

So, those are some ideas to play around with, and I think the suggestions are safe enough to not overwhelm your arm. Some will be more stiff, certainly, but I don't think I've proposed anything that crazy.

Trip said:

Interesting data and observations. IMHO, for as much as you enjoy PLE, you shouldn't have to go through that much jockeying inside of a mere couple/few hours, just to have a playable-enough setup that doesn't require you to change technique so drastically. As I said previously, I would try hybriding PLE mains with Ghostwire crosses and seeing if that improves playability enough to keep PLE in-play; otherwise I would look at moving on from it. If for whatever reason you prefer to keep stringing at such a high tension, either because you like the string bed behavior there, or otherwise, you'll probably need to focus exclusively on the latest softer co-polys that are as supple yet as tension-stable as possible. MSV Swift 1.25 would be my pick there.

But overall, I think perhaps a bit more firm poly at a lower reference tension is the better way forward, as you'll get a more physically-stable string to begin with, and have less tension available to lose. In that realm, you have HGS to test right now, and if you like the H-G feel but want more predictability, H-G Round was just released as well. Other round(ish) more firm options that should play very stable for at least several hours: Grapplesnake Tour M8 1.25 (start by string it low(ish), like 19/18.5kg or 19.5/19kg), Solinco Outlast 1.25 or 1.20, strung in the low 20's kg range, Head Hawk 1.25 or 1.20 (either full bed or as a cross to a softer/shaped main; strung no higher than 21-22kg).

So, those are some ideas to play around with, and I think the suggestions are safe enough to not overwhelm your arm. Some will be more stiff, certainly, but I don't think I've proposed anything that crazy.

Click to expand...

If you remember, I already did some testing with MSV Swift, Ghostwire, Cream - these " roundish polys" - and none of them convinced me. They felt "not comfortable enough" while also "not being controlled enough", I had to string with such high tension to gain enough control that comfort wasn't much better than with stiff polys, in Germany we would say "neither fish nor meat"

HG round sounds interesting. But it doesn't seem to be available, yet?

I‘ve re-tuned my 98Ls to 326SW and 321.5g static weight, balance 334-335. Comfort and stability have improved with this spec.

Had a session with HGS 25/24kg today and the string showed its best side.

Good spin, good control, enough power, enough touch, above average comfort. A good fit for dictating rallies with aggressive strokes. Only a slight amount of inflammation in the upper arm. Will have to judge comfort after a real match day.


PLE in comparison has

Average spin, good control, good power, good touch, good comfort.


A few rallies with HGS:

Today's spec:

static weight 326,5g (unintentionally, had to add an overgrip while playing, was 318,5g before)
swingweight 320
balance 325

SuperSmashOrange / ProLineEvolution 24/23kg

good control, ok comfort

Looking good!

How do you like the latest 326g/320mm/320sw spec, versus the 321.5g/334mm/326sw spec from before?

My current target swingweight is around 320, I feel like not having enough maneuverability with a swingweight of 325 or higher. And my target static weight is around 320g.
Today's setup was an "incident", because I only had 1 overgrip on and felt that I needed a thicker grip after 10-20 minutes. 2 Overgrips reduce unpleasant vibrations a bit more, as well.
So I'm not thinking in "which one was better?" categories but am more and more focused on 320sw/320g and then try to dial in strings and tension.
SuperSmash crossed with PLE is a lot more controlled than pure PLE but also boardier. Still more comfortable than HyperG. Maybe not more comfortable than Hyper G Soft, but much better directional control. HGS on the other hand has more power to access and a bigger, mushier sweetspot I think.
I'll probably try 23/22kg with SuperSmash / PLE next.

By the way @Trip what kind of forehand grip do I have in your opinion? Is that eastern? Or already semi western?

First outdoor session on clay this year and I have a new favourite string setup: HyperGSoft/ ProLineEvolution at 24/23kg. It feels a bit chaotic, can feel the different attributes of the strings regularly, which can feel like a split personality in your hand. I have to play loose with this setup but when the strings work together in harmony, it's a comfortable yet penetrating experience. The sweetspot feels quite mushy, so you don't have that feeling of absolute control, but the ball still regularly lands inside the court with quite some power and spin. Comfort is obviously a bit worse than pure PLE but pure PLE is missing a noticeable amount of control and spin in comparison to this hybrid.
I usually strive for absolute control but more and more think that this "bit of chaos" is exactly what I need. Borderline territory between power/penetration and control. Maybe I could even try 23/22kg next time.

My 3 98L frames in rotation currently have the following specs

unstrung
static weight 298-300g
sw 287-289
balance 320-322

strung
static weight 318-319g
sw 319-320
balance 332-333

@nintendoplayer - Nice spec on those three sticks, and nice combo of HGS/PLE. Will be interested to see how you further hone in on string setup.

As for your forehand, looks like Extreme Eastern -- Eastern, tilting towards Southwestern. Keep up the good playing!

Hit with HGS/PLE at even lower 23/22kg today and had a nice experience. Control was a bit reduced, so some balls were going wide which wouldn‘t normally, but otherwise a very positive experience. More power, better touch, and I noticed my forehand swing looks a lot more relaxed and natural, especially the end of my movement when the racquet is rotating behind the shoulder. That seems to improve the lower I go in tension. I think 23/22 will be my new default with this string setup.
Racquet specs were the same: 319g static weight, 319 swingweight, 332 balance.

Another indoor session and some new insights. Tried pure ProLineEvolution again, this time at 23/22kg. Good comfort, relatively easy power, but not enough control, especially in faster paced rallies. That lead to me being too cautious, not swinging out and becoming too defensive, loosing points I shouldn't loose. Then switched back to HyperGSoft/PLE 23/22kg and instantly felt the raised control and spin. Balls were again landing inside which would fly with PLE, just because of the lower spin capabilities. I was then again able to dictate points and swing out without missing.
Apart from the strings, I had quite a few rallies where stability on my backhand was lacking. My opponent hit some deep powerful forehands into my backhand, I simply wanted to block the shot back but the ball "starved" on its way to the net, just landing short or directly in the net. So I will experiment with a bit higher swingweight again, 320 doesn't seem to be sufficient in such instances.

Not entirely surprising re- full bed PLE vs HGS/PLE. Solinco strings are all very controlled. Great for the modern game, either full bed or hybrid.

As for optimizing your spec, I'd keep your string setup of HGS/PLE @ 23/22 constant across all frames, then vary only the static/balance/sw. I'd imagine something with a swing weight in the mid 320's, with at least some of that weight out towards 9 and 3, might be closer to optimal for you.

Trip said:

Not entirely surprising re- full bed PLE vs HGS/PLE. Solinco strings are all very controlled. Great for the modern game, either full bed or hybrid.

As for optimizing your spec, I'd keep your string setup of HGS/PLE @ 23/22 constant across all frames, then vary only the static/balance/sw. I'd imagine something with a swing weight in the mid 320's, with at least some of that weight out towards 9 and 3, might be closer to optimal for you.

Click to expand...

Thanks @Trip I've re-customized my frames to 321g static weight, 325 swingweight and 334 balance. Previously there was no lead at 12, only at 3 and 9, resulting in 320sw. Now I've re-added 2-3g at 12, raising the swingweight to 325.

nintendoplayer said:

Thanks @Trip I've re-customized my frames to 321g static weight, 325 swingweight and 334 balance. Previously there was no lead at 12, only at 3 and 9, resulting in 320sw. Now I've re-added 2-3g at 12, raising the swingweight to 325.

Click to expand...

Love it. Do note, a 5sw point jump is probably going to take some time and partial remapping of muscle memory to normalize to. Initially, it's probably going to be feel more cumbersome at times that you'd ideally want, but just remind yourself in those moments of the overall benefit (hopefully more net-positive than net-negative) and know that you can gradually upregulate your body's ability to handle the extra heaving weight. It's may take a few sessions to do so, but in the end, it could very well be worth it.

Trip said:

Love it. Do note, a 5sw point jump is probably going to take some time and partial remapping of muscle memory to normalize to. Initially, it's probably going to be feel more cumbersome at times that you'd ideally want, but just remind yourself in those moments of the overall benefit (hopefully more net-positive than net-negative) and know that you can gradually upregulate your body's ability to handle the extra heaving weight. It's may take a few sessions to do so, but in the end, it could very well be worth it.

Click to expand...

Taking Wilson‘s famous QC into account and the fact that most tennis players never measure their racquets or even know what swingweight is….what would then be the logical conclusion?
Either 320 to 325 isn‘t that big of a deal to switch between or many tennis players are regularly messing up their game without knowing it due to inconsistent QC?

nintendoplayer said:

Taking Wilson‘s famous QC into account and the fact that most tennis players never measure their racquets or even know what swingweight is….what would then be the logical conclusion?
Either 320 to 325 isn‘t that big of a deal to switch between or many tennis players are regularly messing up their game without knowing it due to inconsistent QC?

Click to expand...

While in the general sense you're likely 100% right, in this case and regarding @nintendoplayer specifically, here we have a guy who can measure his racquet specs, and appears to be extremely sensitive to even 1-2 points difference in static and swing weights, or so he thinks... so I making my comments and suggestions in light of that.

First session with updated 325setup today and it worked nicely. I noticed more comfort when serving / easier serving / less vibrations and my serves had more power and spin, as well. My forehands had good punch, my hitting partner told me my balls have lots of spin which he isn't used to. So HGS also worked nicely in this regard. My opponent was a student in his 20s with a forehand that reminded me of Del Potro. He had a powerful serve but low confidence on his backhand. He generally tried to finish points with his powerful forehand. So I had to block a lot(!) of shots from this youngster, which definitely worked better than with SW320 before. And the raised plowthrough on serve helped a lot, my serve is steadily improving and winning me free points. I only had to switch from 23/22 to 24/23kg at a certain point, but comfort was still good. Staying with 23/22kg would have been better for comfort but worse for control and keeping his fast shots inside.
6:2 1:0



Next opponent, please

Some interesting statistics / measurements on tension loss with a Hyper G Soft 1.25 / Pro Line Evolution 1.25 hybrid:

I regularly measure tension with the "Stringster" app after each hitting session.
The 23/22kg frame



consequently lost 0.5kg of tension per session That's probably why I felt like loosing control the last time with it against the "Del Potro" student.

The 24/23kg frame



held up comparably. Generally they both lost 1kg of tension over a time period of 2 weeks with 3-4 hitting sessions overall.

The 23/22kg frame is now definitely ready for a new string job but can still be used for relaxed practice sessions with my daughter, the ball wall or some fun doubles play. But for serious matches I would definitely restring it.
Again I observe that somewhere around 22kg measured tension seems to be my sweetspot.

@nintendoplayer - Nice update. Nice to hear about the move to 325sw giving you a hopeful best-of-all-worlds scenario. Plus, as long as you can handle the extra heaving weight, you're increasing comfort by increasing recoil as well.

On the string front, I would actually call a drop of 1kg (~2.2lbs) better than average over the course of 3-4 sessions (~6-9 hours)? I'd say if you can get to 7-10 hours before really feeling the need to restring, then it's usable combo. I of course always like to get more then that, but that's typically my personal minimum (I don't like having to restring much more often and/or filling up landfills any faster than that -- and it's why I'm excited to try Gamma Sapphire very soon!).

@Trip 1 session actually is mostly 1 hour in my case, at least currently. Because most sessions have been indoor and we usually only book 1 hour indoors. So 1kg tension loss after roughly 4 hours of hitting. So 23/22kg works for me for roughly 4 hours.
Today is fun doubles day, will try how the "softened" 23/22kg frame holds up in this scenario.

nintendoplayer said:

@Trip 1 session actually is mostly 1 hour in my case, at least currently. Because most sessions have been indoor and we usually only book 1 hour indoors. So 1kg tension loss after roughly 4 hours of hitting.

Click to expand...

Gotcha. IMHO, that's still respectable. Although, if you feel like you have to cut it out after 4 hours, then you might need to find a replacement cross, and I'm willing to be PLE is more the culprit for the tension loss. So you might consider a replacement cross that holds tension a bit better, such as TP Ghostwire or MSV Swift, or even something a bit more firm, such as MSV Co-Focus, which would probably let you tension the P/P hybrid a bit lower, offering the additional benefit less tension to lose from the start.

One fun-doubles session later and the 24/23kg frame hasn't lost any tension, the 23/22kg lost 0.1kg
In my current logic, stringing the current strings at 23.5/22.5 kg sounds like it could make sense.
Will re-try Ghostwire and Swift as crosses.

Upcoming strings:

MSV Focus Hex Ultra 1.25 (mains), Co-Focus 1.25 (crosses), Swift 1.25 (crosses)
TP Ghostwire 1.27 (crosses), Atomos 1.25 (mains), Black Knight 1.23 (mains)

My plan is to first test HGS with the new cross strings, then the new main strings with PLE in the crosses. And probably stay at 23/22kg for now to be able to compare to my current default HGS/PLE 23/22kg.
Then continue mixing possible new hybrids depending on the results.

MSV has "won the first round", because the TruPro strings still haven't arrived, I received the MSV strings 2 days after ordering.
So the first test will include

HGS/PLE
HGS/Swift
FocusHexUltra/PLE

Today's session was on clay, only 1 hour and was thereby only able to compare 2 string setups: HGS/PLE against FocusHexUltra/PLE.
Both started at 21.8kg and now measure at 21.0kg in the Stringster app after hitting, although I hit with HGS/PLE twice and only once with FocusHexUltra/PLE. So from a statistical perspective, FocusHexUltra seems to initially drop tension faster.
But FocusHexUltra/PLE definitely felt more controlled and actually also more comfortable. Probably more muted, as well. I played the first part of the match with HGS/PLE and then switched to FocusHexUltra/PLE after half an hour and was able to hit with a lot more confidence, serving also felt better.
So my initial impression is that FocusHexUltra (in combination with PLE) offers more control and comfort than HyperGSoft - though I'm not certain about spin potential, yet.

EDIT: Now that I'm checking Racketpedia, FHUltra and HGS seem to be closer in attributes than I thought:





HyperGSoft crossed with Swift seems kind of obsolete in light of these new findings, because I feel like diving deeper into FocusHexUltra the next sessions.

After yesterday's session I'm reflecting on optimal swingweight, again. 325 means nice stability, especially on returns, and good depth - but on my top spin backhand it also means less maneuverability from time to time. Slice was fine and stable, but especially lower shorter balls were hard to hit with top spin from time to time. But these issues are probably also related to timing and getting used to clay. The 325 swingweight keeps comfort in check, having enough mass on collision, and the lowered static weight leads to less muscle stress in my body overall. I remember when hitting a longer match with the Head PT and also the 97p, the issue often was that my whole body and especially my legs were so sore the upcoming days that the soreness alone was enough reason to stay off court for multiple days.
I have even lowered static weight a bit further after yesterday's session, to nearly 315g. Yes, that makes the racquet even less headlight (now at 2pts HL) but I'm pretty convinced the lowered static weight helps my body overall, not getting as tired as before. I only have to get used to the balance and swingweight on my top spin backhand. All other strokes work pretty nicely so far.
When tinkering with my specs I often think about the last racquet I hit with back in the 90s: the Head TI.S2. Control racquet with head heavy balance, very light weight, very stiff. 310sw, 270-280g static weight, 8pts head heavy. It seems I'm naturally getting closer and closer to that spec.
Currently it feels like 320 is a good swingweight for a "spin day" when I have to play long rallies on clay against potential pushers and 325 fits "block back heavy hitters" days better.


But comfort, serving and depth is still a lot better at 325 so I will probably stay with that specification for now and work on getting used to hitting top spin backhands with it.

@nintendoplayer - Nice observations regarding static and swing weight. Ironically enough, I've had a similar experience. Last night, I played my 2021 Dunlop CX 200, spec'd at 330g/32.2cm/327sw, which, compared to my more normal spec of 340-345g/31.5-31.9cm/330-335sw in my Prestige MP-L's, felt like a fly swatter in comparison, but actually performed really well, including the benefit of a higher balance point as you decrease static weight. This is crucial to providing enough tip awareness and self-guidance of the stroke. With too low a balance point, you tend to loose both. So It's no surprise, then, that you're noticing the migration to an even higher balance point as you drop even more static weight.

As for swing weight, per your overall take-away, I would give yourself some time to ground your game to 325. Granted we all have a point of diminishing return, and perhaps 325 is slightly beyond that for you, but that can also change as you manipulate static weight and balance. I can guess your height accurately enough (5'8" to 5'11" / 172-180cm perhaps?) and an arm-length-to-height ratio of perhaps slightly on the shorter side, your newfound spec of 315g/~33.7cm/325sw would make for seemingly-low/early recoil weight of 148 (at least by @Brando's chart, anyways), but perhaps actually well matched for you, as it presents a certain level of effortlessness. That, coupled with a middle-of-the-road 20.6 mgr/i, should overall be fairly friendly setup for where you're at. I would keep at least one of your 98L's at that spec for a while, even as you cruise through different string setups, at least as a sampling tool, if nothing else.

Interested to see more of your progress as time marches on.

@Trip I'm more of the Diego Schwartzman prototype, 170cm. I remember reading an interview or listening to a podcast about Schwartzman where they said that he needs more weight in the hoop due to his size....?

And about my racquet specs: I regularly have 3 frames in my bag, all customized to as identical as possible specs. The latest change to 315static weight was easy, cause I just had to remove some Blu-Tak from the handle. But also when I change the swingweight, I always adapt all 3 frames to be able to compare strings as objectively as possible.

And one thing still irritates me regularly: even when I have those 3 frames at nearly identical specs, there's regularly one frame that still feels very different when shadow-swinging it. Although they are 95-98% similar in static weight, balance and swingweight.
As if in that case, the mass of the frame itself is proportioned differently...as if there were "weights inside the frame" and these are positioned differently in that 1 frame. Drives me crazy

After the first few outdoor sessions on clay, I get the feeling that the Blade works nicely indoors / on faster surfaces but on clay I regularly get pushed around cause I don‘t have the power and spin to push the opponent back. So what did I do? Of course…re-demo the Pure Drive.

First insight: their stifness is pretty(!) close. Nearly identical actually, 1 RA point difference max. So the 98L has about 68 and the PD 69.
Didn‘t expect that.

2nd insight: stiffness alone doesn‘t tell much about a racquet‘s power level. Beam thickness (and swingweight) seems to be the right attribute to judge power level by.

3nd insight: they actually don‘t feel that drastically different now with the same strings (FocusHexUltra/PLE), tension and (what a coincidence!) the exact same swingweight of 325. I‘ve also raised the weight on the Blades again to match the PD, all at 319.5g.
The Blades are more headlight of course while the PD is close to even balance.


With FocusHexUltra/PLE at 23/22kg the PD was much more controlled this time around, no uncontrollable rocket launcher. Yes, more balls went long than with the Blade, but the difference in spin and the ability to keep the opponent on his back foot was huge.
When switching back to the Blade you could instantly observe how I had to fall back with the Blade, cause my strokes simply weren‘t as powerful. Indoors I could redirect balls much better, use the opponents power. On clay it feels kind of working my way through quicksand in direct comparison.
And in this context the Pure Drive made a lot of sense. As if someone put a thin platform on the quicksand for you to walk on. Sometimes you still step into dirt (balls flying long) but overall life felt much easier.

So I‘m slowly leaning into changing my game tactics on clay. Not trying to play 1:1 the same as indoors, cause that probably won‘t work that well the more advanced my opponents are. But try to have consistency and enough power to push the opponent back and not being pushed around myself. And the rest will come by itself. At least that‘s my current theory.
I have no interest in playing endless rallies on clay. Too many pushers on amateur level, trying to wear you down.

The idea is that they won‘t be able to play their pushing game when I hit with consistent power and spin.


Comfort wasn‘t an issue so far, the amount of work I have to put into every stroke seems to be more relevant. Actually the Blade feels stiffer on contact, the PD very muted.


4th insight: I don‘t like Swift (so far). FocusHexUltra/Swift at 23/22kg felt boardy and uncomfortable. FHU and PLE feel and perform a lot better.


I will probably try going down to 22/21kg (FHU/PLE) on the Blade, giving it a bit more free depth.

Atomos and Ghostwire are also still on the demo-list. But right now FocusHexUltra is stealing the show, crossed with PLE. Comparable performance to HGS/PLE but much more comfortable.


5th insight: I need grip size 1 for Babolat and Yonex racquets and size 2 for Wilson / Prince / Head racquets.
The size 1 grip of the PD is nearly identical to size 2 on the 98L.

Another observation from last session: swing speed and age. Even at the beginning of this thread I remember talking about "swinging very fast hurts my shoulder". So all my customization-adventures also circle around finding the right weight and balance to swing at the healthiest speed to find the best compromise of performance and health. This is related to age but also my sensitive shoulder. The issue with control racquets always was that the only option I had was to raise (swing)weight. Which made all previous racquets too hefty at some point, hurting my shoulder again.
On the other hand, the 98L is very whippy right now. And combined with it's relatively low weight of 316-320g I can often feel the edge of "what swingspeed is still healthy for the shoulder". On good days, and especially indoors, the whippy control and relatively low power work quite well. But then on clay it feels like a lot more work, tiring my body in the process.
The PD somehow manages to find a good balance of beam width and weight, at least the frame that I have here right now with 300g static weight (with base grip removed and 2 overgrips on. With the base grip on it was 303,5g actually) and 325 swingweight. The overall static weight is close to 320g, so basically very close to the Blade. But the thicker beam forces me to swing slower, feeling generally healthier for the arm as a result. So I'm then also overhitting very rarely with the PD while this happens quite a lot with the Blade.
And while I have to play very sophisticated and work hard for every stroke with the Blade, especially if I want to finish points early, I can simply hit 2-3 forehands with enough spin with the PD and the high rpm alone regularly forces the opponent into an error. The age factor comes into play here, as well. This season I'll play in a higher league than last year, so I will certainly face more youngsters hitting with aggressive spin.

This is probably also related to the fact that the Blade is 98sq inches and the PD 100 - providing a bigger sweetspot and more margin for error. So a fair comparison would be the Blade 100.
Maybe I will dive into that racquet, as well. But right now I find the PD quite interesting, especially how similar the feel is now that I have strings and specs aligned on all racquets. The PD actually feels more comfortable, less harsh vibrations when hitting outside the sweetspot, especially. But again: the Blade 100 would probably feel quite comfortable, as well.

So I'm not opposed to the idea of hitting with the Blade 98 indoors and a powerful 100sq inch racquet outdoors. Or simply switching depending on the opponent and what strategy makes more sense: precise control and touch or pushing the opponent back with spin.
And most important is the comfort, of course. I had some irritation in my tendons last week, then went into 2 sessions with the PD, being afraid it could wreck my arm. The opposite was the case, I actually feel like my shoulder recovered better than it would have if I had continued hitting with the Blade most of the time - same strings and tension.
The main question will be if I can incorporate the PD in serious league matches without loosing too much control. Maybe raising the tension to 24/23kg for safety if 23/22 doesn't give enough control against heavy hitters.

Next week will bring more insights

Another match day where I switched between the PD (FHU/PLE 24/23kg) and the 98L (FHU/PLE 22/21kg) after half of the first set. With the PD I still hit too long many times, but otherwise had surprisingly good touch (scored several nice drop shots) and serving worked quite nicely, lots of easy spin. Also the stability on my backhand is noticeably higher than with the Blade, especially if the opponent is hitting cross court into my backhand and I try to redirect the ball longline. With the PD this works mostly fine, with the Blade the stability isn't sufficient and then the ball will fly out horizontally to my left.
On the other hand slices work much better with the Blade and the general control is higher of course, the much lower power alone guarantees that hitting long mostly isn't an issue.

But the horizontal stability is an issue. I see these possible solutions for the 98L:

1. Hit slices most of the times when being pushed cross court on the backhand

2. Don't try to hit a longline top spin backhand in this situation, go for cross-court as well

3. Raise the swingweight on the Blade to get more stability


22/21kg worked nicely on the 98L, so with FHU and PLE I can now also go lower in tension without loosing too much control.


PD Pros:
- Much more spin and power on the forehand and backhand, thereby pushing the opponent back a lot more without tiring the body that much

- Easier and more powerful serve, lots more spin as well

- Surprisingly good touch with FHU/PLE, nice drop shots and volleys as well

- Perfect stability on the backhand


PD Cons:
- Too much balls flying long, have to raise tension further

- Slices aren't that great

- The nearly even balance can make it hard to swing on the topspin backhand, especially when I'm late on contact


98L Pros:
- Nearly perfect allround-racquet, can hit any type of stroke

- Very good control, due to the lower powered nature, can swing out quite freely

- Perfect slice machine (in comparison to the PD)



98L Cons:
- A lot of work on clay, due to the low power. Have to go for aggressive flatter strokes to finish points early and not get into endless rallies with clay-spin-pushers, which raises the risk for unforced errors. If I get into long rallies over a long match, the 98L will tire and hurt my body more than the PD

- Not nearly as much spin as the PD, harder to serve

- Missing (horizontal) stability on the backhand from time to time

Interesting developments.

First off, on strings, very nice that you've found such a universally-workable combo in FHU/PLE. I'd say, definitely make that your base-constant setup while going through more frame trials.

On the frame side of things, similar to the Blade 98/98L paradigm, you may want to pickup a Pure Drive Team, so that you can make use of the lighter static weight, lower balance point, lower swing weight and lower twist weight, as a customization platform. A customized PDT might be able to help alleviate or even eliminate some of the Cons about the regular PD, especially ease-of-operation on the topspin one-hander.

As for the Blade side of things, this may be an opportune time to prove to yourself that you could, in fact, end up centering on the Blade 100L -- same mold as the 100, but with a stiffer, almost Pure Drive -level layup, but also 98L/PDTeam -class weighting. Could very well be the best of all worlds for all surfaces for you, which I would still suggest trying to pursue, over having to use multiple different frames.

Looking forward to updates!

The first changes I've made just now: raise the swingweight on the 98L to 329 and put it all at 3 and 9, remove the lead at 12. Keep the overall weight at 320g, so the balance is now 2pts headlight, slightly more headlight than the even PD. And I've restrung the PD with FHU/PLE at 26/25kg.

The issue with the 100L could be that I cannot find any v8 frames in grip size 2. And the v9 is still too expensive being so new. That's why I'm not bothering with the v9 Blades, in general. At some point I've made an internal decision to only purchase models on sale - if possible. I can get 2 PD team frames for 280EUR but only one 100L v9 for 230EUR. And then I could still send one PD team back and would've only payed 140 for one

So your theory is that the PD could work with a lower SW on my backhand, like 320 and then the balance would be more headlight?
But before customizing a PD team I would still try to match the strings in a way that I feel confident on court, not regularly being afraid of hitting long. Or is your theory that instead of raising tension, the lowered swingweight on a customized PD team would still offer the same amount of stability while being less powerful, thereby less balls flying long with the same string tension?

@nintendoplayer - Just PM'd you some ideas re- getting ahold of at least one or two L2 100L v8's. And completely understand the penchant for only buying frames on sale. I largely agree, especially when in a testing phase and not being sure of what you want yet.

Re- the PD Team, my theory is more based on being able to get a more customized mass distribution, balance and recoil weight, per your exact preference, while still coming in at around or under a desired playable spec, which would hopefully make it feel less cumbersome on your OHBH topspin backhand and allow you more optimal timing with less muscling of the racquet required, also helping to cut down on the the overly launchy nature of the PD as well. Also, given how much more stable/powerful it is per unit weight than the 98L, chances are the PD/PDT would likely be playable, even optimal, for you at an even lower spec than the 98L, at least in either static and/or swing weight, if perhaps all specs. So I figured starting with a PD Team would allow for that exploration, per how starting with the 98L did versus the regular Blade 98.

I only have one "issue" with the 100 / 100L: I already stacked up on the 98L And I assume selling 98L frames is harder than selling a regular 98 - or what do you think?
And my current research about the differences between the 98 and 100 is:

- power 10-15% more on the 100, paired with a slightly larger sweetspot
- but also slightly harder to swing on the backhand due to the larger head size
- control / precision should be reduced
- I also read a lot of comments about reduced stability on the 100

So I assume the 100L won't offer the level of stability the PD has - or I would have to customize its swingweight up to a comparable range like I do on the 98 now which would then kind of equalize the advantages, cause then I could also continue with the 98 and have higher precision and a better time on the backhand. I also like the fact that I'm now able to reduce the tension further on the 98L, stringing 100sq inch racquets in the 24,25,26kg range isn't my preference. I like that 20-22kg range I'm at with the 98 right now a lot more.
You could then argue that I simply have to use stiffer strings on the 100L to go as low in tension but then I would be afraid of loosing too much comfort again, now that I've found a relatively soft but still controlled string mixture. (Assuming that the 100L and 98L generally have a very comparable feel and amount of vibration dampening)

To me the 98 currently feels like the perfect base racquet for customization, balancing out pros and cons. That's why I think "if you demo any further frame, demo something noticeably different. Like the PD. Otherwise continue dialing in your setup until you reach a plateu". I think I'm close to that point with the 98L but not just yet.
Was also looking at the Ezone, but the Yonex head shape somehow didn't work for me so far, as well as their vibration dampening tech.
And then I'm still thinking "if you go for power, go for the real deal" and that's why I re-demoed the PD.

Another issue I had the past few weeks with the lead, especially at 12, is that it gets "squeezed" in the stringing machine clamps / stringing hooks on top - damaging/ cutting into the lead while stringing. I then have to replace the lead regularly. So customizing these frames is still a hassle from time to time.

@nintendoplayer - All good points, and intelligently thought out. You're want to stay with the 98L over the 100L is sound, as is your want to contrast what you already have against one of the most different options out there. Might as well, right? Perhaps then, you just fly a holding pattern right now with the 98L and PD, try to max out the performance of both with spec and string setups, then put the rest of your effort in a playoff to see which is overall the most strong for you across all facets (or, the least weak, if that's a better way to look at it). I have a feeling the exercise for the 98L is going to be "how do I bring enough stability/power to this control frame", whereas the exercise for the PD will predominantly be "how do I bring enough control to this power frame". Two legitimate means to approach similar ends; although, given we're not getting any younger, if you can somehow find a way to control the PD well enough and minimize/eliminate its biomechanical challenges, then it may end up being the better move for you in the long run.

As for solving the lead at 12 issue, it's most easily solvable by simply using four, not two, pieces, with a space in the middle just wide enough for the string machine mount (usually 7-8mm of space is sufficient). Yes, this makes applying/adjusting/relocating lead a little more tedious, but it also eliminates the disturbance issue, or so I've found anyways (I do the 4-piece @ 12 method every time now).

Will be interested to observe further developments as you make time.

@Trip That's exactly my perspective. Approaching the same goal from opposite ends of the power / control spectrum. There are two questions in my mind about the PD which will be answered the upcoming weeks by testing different string setups:

- can I find a string setup that isn't too stiff to feel uncomfortable while still giving enough control for competitive play?
- is there any truth to the myths that the PD can hurt your arm in the long run even if you don't feel any issues over several weeks or even months? At least that was one theory from Tennisnerd, like "you don't feel the vibrations but they're still potentially damaging your arm".

I have some doubts about the 2nd point, especially due to my high sensitivity. So the 1st question will be the tougher one to answer. My current assumption is that my FHU/PLE setup won't give enough control even at 26/25kg - but let's see. Maybe I'll end up with the same setup as Nic from Intuitive Tennis, but I doubt it (PD with KB SuperSmash)

And then there are still some BlackKnight, Atomos, Ghostwire and Co-Focus strings around for testing

Just stringing a Blade with Atomos/PLE and Atomos reminds me a lot(!) of TourBite Soft. Color, shape, how it feels, the stiffness, how the stringbed feels....interesting. I have the feeling Atomos is generally softer than BK.
Apart from that I recalibrated the Briffidi and it seems my previously measured swingweights were a bit too high and the PD actually seems to have a swingweight of 322. I have then re-customized my Blades to 323-324SW and am now comparing Atomos/PLE, BK/PLE, FHU/PLE.

Next session, this time with

Pure Drive FHU/PLE at 26/25kg
98L FHU/PLE at 22/21kg
98L BlackKnight/PLE 22/21kg
98L Atomos/PLE

and indoors(!), on a faster surface.

Started with the Pure Drive and won a lot of free points just with my serve which was noticeably more powerful than with the Blade. Serving is definitely a lot of fun with the PD.
And the extra power is more than helpful on defense when I have to reach out wide and the ball would normally land just behind the net but in this case still has good depth.
So from the baseline I had good depth but not enough consistency on my attacking game. If I won baseline rallies then mainly because I hit such a weird and high topspin stroke that my opponent was irritated just by the way the ball bounced. So the PD brings "spin chaos" to the baseline rally table, but I'm still not able to play a consistent game with it. That's why I switched to the 98L FHU/PLE at 1:3 and quickly got back to 3:3. But then I could observe how I'm getting pushed back. I had more than enough consistency and was able to hit 90% of the balls back into the opponent's field but my balls didn't have enough power - so I was more and more pushed back into defense. So my only chance with the 98L was to attack as quickly as possible and don't make any unforced errors. But the risk often was too high and I was then again pushed back into defense.
I then also mixed in the Atomos/PLE and BlackKnight/PLE frames. BlackKnight is still too stiff for my taste although it's a weird kind of stiffness, because it's still quite a powerful string in my opinion. Powerful but stiff - reminds me a bit of Hyper G (Soft) but Hyper G has better spin in my opinion. So unfortunately Black Knight probably won't become my best friend. Although I'm certainly able to hit consistently with it, the comfort/control ratio is not for me.
Atomos feels noticeably softer than BlackKnight or in other words "more muted". What I call unpleasant vibration can be "good feel" for other players, I suppose. Anyway, Atomos gave a well rounded performance as well, like an in-between string between FHU or PLE on one side and BlackKnight or TourBite on the other side of the spectrum. But in comparison to FHU/PLE the Atomos/PLE hybrid didn't offer enough better performance to justify the reduced comfort in comparison to FHU/PLE. FHU also feels spinnier than Atomos. Atomos to me feels like a good string for a player like Tsitsipas. Relatively flat aggressive strokes, looking for a lot of control, no arm issues or sensitivity.

Personally I would rank the stiffness of the strings I tested recently the following (top being the stiffest):

- TourBite
- HyperG, BlackKnight
- HyperG Soft, Atomos
- Focus Hex Ultra, Swift
- Pro Line Evolution

I mean when comparing it to Hyper G Soft, Atomos could be a bit more comfortable and a bit more controlled.


Next test will be stringing PD maybe with a full bed of FHU or another stiffer string at a lower tension. Reminds me a lot of my experiments with the Clash, actually. Only that the PD is actually(!) more comfortable than the Clashes so far. But I also wasn't as dialed in with my strings back then and modified the swing- and static weight to unreasonable levels partly.

And then I would try stringing FHU/PLE even a bit lower on the 98L to hopefully get a bit of more free depth / power. 22/21kg work really well so far, indoors as well as outdoors, so giving up a bit more control would be ok if I can possibly get out of the defensive corner.


Apart from matchplay, during the warmup the PD worked nicely and my hitting partner also recognized that I had good depth and power in my strokes. And again I noticed how natural the PD swings, you can watch the "out swing above the left shoulder" also in Tennisnerd's review:


The smooth way the hoop loops behind his left shoulder after hitting a forehand is exactly what happens to me when swinging the PD. So something about the shape of this frame in combination with its thickness and heft flows very smoothly and that's also why I'm willing to dive deeper into this racquet. It makes me swing in a smooth way which other frames don't. And if I compare the Nerd's review videos it's quite comparable for him, as well. When he swings the Blade 98 he doesn't nearly "out swing" as smoothly as he does in this Pure Drive review.

nintendoplayer said:

Today's spec:

static weight 326,5g (unintentionally, had to add an overgrip while playing, was 318,5g before)
swingweight 320
balance 325

SuperSmashOrange / ProLineEvolution 24/23kg

good control, ok comfort

Click to expand...

Loony Toons level egregious foot faulting

i don‘t want to give unsolicited advice in regard to technique, but based on this video you really could get a lot more power on your forehand side if you work on your weight transfer. the weight transfer has to go through the ball, in the video above, even if you have time, there is no linear energy transfer but more of a circular motion.
i found it important to point this out since you said you lack power and consider a move to the pure drive.

Hansen said:

i don‘t want to give unsolicited advice in regard to technique, but based on this video you really could get a lot more power on your forehand side if you work on your weight transfer. the weight transfer has to go through the ball, in the video above, even if you have time, there is no linear energy transfer but more of a circular motion.
i found it important to point this out since you said you lack power and consider a move to the pure drive.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your analysis. I have the impression in that video I had to hit back a lot of balls that landed close to my feet while being pushed back and that‘s why I regularly switched to this vertical swing.

Do you see the issue to the same degree in these videos?

Current interim conclusion after nearly 2 years of getting back into the game and 24 years of not holding a racquet: I overcame knee / meniscus issues, Tennis Elbow, chronic shoulder / arm pain for nearly the first 1.5 years.....
hit with almost any racquet you can name, from super light to extremely over-customized....from natural gut to the stiffest strings out there....
and though I'm not yet on the level I would like to be (especially on clay), I can now hit multiple times per week without hurting badly, getting more and more consistent.

I regularly need to remind myself that issues like "not having enough power" are luxurious problems to have in comparison to 2023 and 2022.

So, is this thread still about the 93p?

The 93p always has a seat reserved in this thread

nintendoplayer said:

Do you see the issue to the same degree in these videos?

Click to expand...

yes to a certain degree. look at the forehands around the 1:10 min mark. you have time to setup the forehand, no time pressure, but every time the energy transfer is kinda circular and you are falling to the left. look what your left foot is doing, instead of grounded and a source of power its in the air moving backward. sometimes if the opponent hits a deep ball that is inevitable, but if you have time it robs you of a lot of power.
and even if you prefer an open stance forehand, you can see in the video that your energy always goes to the left side instead of through the ball.
in short, if you have time, your forehands from the baseline should look like, weight transfer wise, like the ones when you are inside the court and forced to go into the ball, these look fine, because the situation forces you to get the weight linear into the forehand.
backhand looks better in that regard.

good model to compare