Graphite VS. Technology

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

I've been reading here a lot about how graphite is superior to the new stuff and how most of the pros if not all use their older graphite rackets.

So i'm wondering, why is graphite is better than all the new materials? Or not?

Let's take two rackets. Both are exactly the same in weight, flex...why does the graphite racket perform or feel better to all you guys??? I'm guessing it comes down to that vague term "feel". Really, if it weighs the same and reacts the same at contact what's the difference?

I use differnte rackets...I don't play much...they are Dunlop revelation 200g (graphite?), Dunlop 200g (Muscle Weave??? whatever) and sometimes a Tour 90 (techno). I can't feel a differnce between the two dunlops. Sometimes I think the Muscle Weave even feels better than the revalation,but I hear from people telling me that's impossible???

Just curious...no big deal.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

Ha! Nobobdy knows! I figured this much.

Got love the internet, a place where people gather to talk about nothing.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

I just clicked out giving up that anyone on this board could answer or cares to answer this seemingly simple question. I mean, it really should be a simple question, considering how many people here worship older graphite frames, they should at least know a couple reasons why these frames deserve they're worship.

113 peole clicked on this thread. Maybe it's a boring topic to you guys, but I think it's a valid argument given how many of us use the new stuff vs. the guys who swear by older frames that many pros use.

Not one of you has any opinion? Tech guys? Gear dorks? Nobody??? C'mon!

purple-n-gold · Jan 29, 2011

Different is as different does...

I really like my Babolats and probably play my best tennis with these bats, but I would really love if they felt like my older classic frames.

btw..1st time I've seen your thread

Deleted member 21996 · Jan 29, 2011

rajah84 said:
I've been reading here a lot about how graphite is superior to the new stuff and how most of the pros if not all use their older graphite rackets.

So i'm wondering, why is graphite is better than all the new materials? Or not?

Let's take two rackets. Both are exactly the same in weight, flex...why does the graphite racket perform or feel better to all you guys??? I'm guessing it comes down to that vague term "feel". Really, if it weighs the same and reacts the same at contact what's the difference?

I use differnte rackets...I don't play much...they are Dunlop revelation 200g (graphite?), Dunlop 200g (Muscle Weave??? whatever) and sometimes a Tour 90 (techno). I can't feel a differnce between the two dunlops. Sometimes I think the Muscle Weave even feels better than the revalation,but I hear from people telling me that's impossible???

Just curious...no big deal.

dude... muscle weave is just another sheneigans name for cheap graphite! so is most of the names companies come along with!

SirGounder · Jan 29, 2011

For the most part, a lot of the new technologies tend to dampen the feel of the racquet. While this may be more comfortable for some people, more advanced players like to be able to feel more.

Ultimately the difference is in the hands of the player. It might hit the same shots but a different feel is still noticed. Something like this may be distracting to more advanced players. They can feel a difference and thus start to believe that their shots aren't as good etc.

Your Dunlops are still pretty similar and both fall into the category of older racquets. It would be more telling if you hit with the revelation and then an aerogel or biomimetic. For the most part, guys who swear by older racquets are just set in their ways. They know what they like and don't feel the need to upgrade. Ultimately it comes down to how much satisfaction you get out of the racquet.

SirGounder · Jan 29, 2011

Dude, it's no big deal if your thread doesn't get a response the same day. Give it some time. A lot of people click on it but decide not to answer because they don't have a good answer. A lot of threads have hundreds of views but not posts.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

Something else to think about.

Rackets are now being designed by laboratory scientists who use mathematics to calculate the effects of weight, size, and material changes. Since the rules governing acceptable rackets are very broad, innovators have a lot of leeway. New rackets are also being made with computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM), which allows precise calculation of material rigidity and center of gravity. So this answers the question then. With all this time and research and I assume money why are pros sitll using old frames? Is it just an issue of familiarity and comfort? I have trouble believing that. And if new rackets are junk, which I also have trouble believing, why would Wilson, Head, Dunlop...poor time and money into new technoloy. Don't tell me it's down to marketing here, where the manufacturing giants basically creating an industry on ********...that I don't want to believe! I think it would be in their best interest to continue the advancment of racket technology, developing "better" rackets for pros. It seems to be working in the string department.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

Gorecki said:
dude... muscle weave is just another sheneigans name for cheap graphite! so is most of the names companies come along with!

Wow, I think were getting somewhere now.

Ok, seriously though, then "cheap" graphite is inferior to the older higher quality graphite? Making it better for...

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

SirGounder said:
Dude, it's no big deal if your thread doesn't get a response the same day. Give it some time. A lot of people click on it but decide not to answer because they don't have a good answer. A lot of threads have hundreds of views but not posts.

113 people checked it out. To me it looks like peole don't give a **** or don't feel like answering.

I thought it was an intersting topic so forgive me for being a little bummed.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

purple-n-gold said:
Different is as different does...

I really like my Babolats and probably play my best tennis with these bats, but I would really love if they felt like my older classic frames.

btw..1st time I've seen your thread

What did you like about your older frames that's non-existant in your Babolats?

First time i've posted. I'm always a little scared

You get the un-filtered experience from people and I'm not always in the mood for that

Deleted member 21996 · Jan 29, 2011

rajah84 said:
Wow, I think were getting somewhere now.

Ok, seriously though, then "cheap" graphite is inferior to the older higher quality graphite? Making it better for...

ok. let me put it this way. have in mind this is IMHO.

older 100% graphite racquets were built with better quality standards and better materials (fibers, resins... etc)

these days, added the economical demands, and the game geared towards more power game, more complex (not necessarily better) compositions are used in the production of frames, diferent layups or stiffer resins are used hence the intelifibers and basalts and all those suposed new "technigans"etc etc...

so imho, apart from this ir that diference in grommets or other parts of a racquet, it all boils down to different percentage on compositions of Graphite + ______ (insert alternative fibers)+resins...

and of course the balance which imo plays a enormous role in the overall apreciation of a racquet by a player.

but calling them technologies is a bit farfetched...

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

Gorecki said:
ok. let me put it this way. have in mind this is IMHO.

older 100% graphite racquets were built with better quality standards and better materials (fibers, resins... etc)

these days, added the economical demands, and the game geared towards more power game, more complex (not necessarily better) compositions are used in the production of frames, diferent layups or stiffer resins are used hence the intelifibers and basalts and all those suposed new "technigans"etc etc...

so imho, apart from this ir that diference in grommets or other parts of a racquet, it all boils down to different percentage on compositions of Graphite + ______ (insert alternative fibers)+resins...

and of course the balance which imo plays a enormous role in the overall apreciation of a racquet by a player.

but calling them technologies is a bit farfetched...

As with many things in life "technology" is becoming more and more a relative term.

pshulam · Jan 29, 2011

rajah84,
You would get more response if posted in the classic racquet forum.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

pshulam said:
rajah84,
You would get more response if posted in the classic racquet forum.

THanks. I couldn't decide where to post this. I posted it here because it applied to pros rackets...they use older stuff, blah,blah,blah...follow me?

Buckethead · Jan 29, 2011

Rackets are made with new materials that are stiffer, weigh less and therefore give more power.
20 years ago, for you to increase power you'd probably have to add more weight to the rackets, or the rackets were a lot heavier(harder to handle, more demanding), nowadays it still happens ( with lead tape in small qtts), but a lot less frequently since most rackets are already powerful enough. So, rackets are more powerful ( with new materials) and easier to play with. Isn't it what people wanted?
But you can't have it all, so in my opinion the feel was lost, and most of the new rackets are just hollow POS.
That is why I don't buy any new rackets anymore.
But to contradict myself I have to say that the Volkl DNX 10 mid, PB 10 mid were great rackets, without the hollow feel.
Last I will say that YONEX EZONE is a great piece of engineering with new materials that actually works really well, unlike most techs the other companies say it works (BioDumbetic stuff among others) while it doesn't make any difference.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

Buckethead said:
Rackets are made with new materials that are stiffer, weigh less and therefore give more power.
20 years ago, for you to increase power you'd probably have to add more weight to the rackets, or the rackets were a lot heavier(harder to handle, more demanding), nowadays it still happens ( with lead tape in small qtts), but a lot less frequently since most rackets are already powerful enough. So, rackets are more powerful ( with new materials) and easier to play with. Isn't it what people wanted?
But you can't have it all, so in my opinion the feel was lost, and most of the new rackets are just hollow POS.
That is why I don't buy any new rackets anymore.
But to contradict myself I have to say that the Volkl DNX 10 mid, PB 10 mid were great rackets, without the hollow feel.
Last I will say that YONEX EZONE is a great piece of engineering with new materials that actually works really well, unlike most techs the other companies say it works (BioDumbetic stuff among others) while it doesn't make any difference.

And it's not a case of perception? Are we being influenced by what the pro's use? Pros' use the "older" stuff so I feel better when I hit with the older stuff? It just seems weird to me. How can string make such huge advancements and to the point where basically all the pros use poly now and rackets are stuck in the 90's???

I've hit with some Volkl rackets and like the feel. They're on the flexible side and feel very solid, power is another thing. Bobolat PureDrives feel like they could explode into shards when I hit with them, but many pros use them. I guess theyr'e leaded up. But adding lead can't remedy a flimsy feeling frame.

THESEXPISTOL · Jan 29, 2011

Dunlop + graphite = win

Buckethead · Jan 29, 2011

rajah84 said:
And it's not a case of perception? Are we being influenced by what the pro's use? Pros' use the "older" stuff so I feel better when I hit with the older stuff? It just seems weird to me. How can string make such huge advancements and to the point where basically all the pros use poly now and rackets are stuck in the 90's???

I've hit with some Volkl rackets and like the feel. They're on the flexible side and feel very solid, power is another thing. Bobolat PureDrives feel like they could explode into shards when I hit with them, but many pros use them. I guess theyr'e leaded up. But adding lead can't remedy a flimsy feeling frame.

I still use a fairly modern racket the RDS mids due to how it works altogether, but it is noticeable the difference in fell from my old R-22. What pros use or don't use don't influence my choices, I have my own preferences.
I jus like to know what they use.

NLBwell · Jan 29, 2011

Older rackets did use more expensive technology, were less stiff, and less powerful (in general - though the most powerful rackets ever were the original widebodies).
Given the inflation rate a $150 racket then would cost over $300 now. The cost of rackets has been brought down around 50% and to the average player the difference is not very noticable. The pros don't care about the lower price (they are free), don't need or want the extra power, and value feel highly.

bluetrain4 · Jan 29, 2011

Most rackets are still graphite and graphite composites, nothing has changed. They're made from exactly the same materials.

rajah84 · Jan 29, 2011

NLBwell said:
Older rackets did use more expensive technology, were less stiff, and less powerful (in general - though the most powerful rackets ever were the original widebodies).
Given the inflation rate a $150 racket then would cost over $300 now. The cost of rackets has been brought down around 50% and to the average player the difference is not very noticable. The pros don't care about the lower price (they are free), don't need or want the extra power, and value feel highly.

Off the top of your head can anyone rougly tell me the average stiffness of pro rackets, this might help explain things a little, or not

I mean, do they generally use more flexablie frams? I noticed that most of the Babolats are on the stiff side, do the players using Babolats (not paint jobs) have their's made with more flex?

Thanks.

SirGounder · Jan 29, 2011

rajah84 said:
And it's not a case of perception? Are we being influenced by what the pro's use? Pros' use the "older" stuff so I feel better when I hit with the older stuff? It just seems weird to me. How can string make such huge advancements and to the point where basically all the pros use poly now and rackets are stuck in the 90's???

I've hit with some Volkl rackets and like the feel. They're on the flexible side and feel very solid, power is another thing. Bobolat PureDrives feel like they could explode into shards when I hit with them, but many pros use them. I guess theyr'e leaded up. But adding lead can't remedy a flimsy feeling frame.

The advancement in string is similar to the advent of graphite racquets. Polyester strings revolutionized the game. That was the last major technological achievement in strings. Graphite would be considered the last major technology in racquets. Keep in mind a lot of pros still use gut or a hybrid of gut and poly. It's really only here on the forums that you see guys messing around with new strings. Heck Courier said he uses a hybrid of nylon and Lux.

Also, certain things just can't be improved on like others. Computer processors can always be smaller, faster, cooler. Tennis racquets are regulated. It's not like you can add a motor, battery, etc to a racquet.

I don't think people want to use old racquets because they know pros use them. It's just a matter of personal preference. I use a PK 7g because it feels amazing to me. No doubt there are people who beg to differ. I went through a PS classic 6.1 phase and still love the stick. A lot of people don't like it because they feel it's too stiff. People on this board have tried a lot of racquets so they know what they like. A lot of us remember the racquets of the 90's and earlier and grew up playing with those. That's why we like them.

LPShanet · Feb 1, 2011

rajah84 said:
I've been reading here a lot about how graphite is superior to the new stuff and how most of the pros if not all use their older graphite rackets.

So i'm wondering, why is graphite is better than all the new materials? Or not?

Let's take two rackets. Both are exactly the same in weight, flex...why does the graphite racket perform or feel better to all you guys??? I'm guessing it comes down to that vague term "feel". Really, if it weighs the same and reacts the same at contact what's the difference?

I use differnte rackets...I don't play much...they are Dunlop revelation 200g (graphite?), Dunlop 200g (Muscle Weave??? whatever) and sometimes a Tour 90 (techno). I can't feel a differnce between the two dunlops. Sometimes I think the Muscle Weave even feels better than the revalation,but I hear from people telling me that's impossible???

Just curious...no big deal.

I think one reason many of the boards' respected posters didn't respond to this thread is that you're barking up the wrong tree here. Okay, prepare yourself for this....ready? The old racquets: graphite. The "new" racquets: graphite. The "new stuff" IS graphite. Racquet technology has changed very little, if at all, in the last 20-25 years. What has changed is marketing and profit margins. Also, consumer tastes. So graphite isn't better than all the new materials, it is the same as the new materials.

Dunlop Revelation: graphite. Dunlop 200g (muscle weave and any other): graphite. Tour 90: graphite. I'm guessing you're starting to sense a pattern here.

As for the pros, they don't switch because the most important thing to them is using the gear with which they've developed their strokes over thousands of hours of drilling, practice and match play. The last thing you need to do at that level is change a variable when there's nothing to be gained. Meanwhile, the companies want to sell you a new racquet, and because the old one generally doesn't wear out, they have to come up with a way to talk you into it. Thus, the "new stuff".

LPShanet · Feb 1, 2011

rajah84 said:
Off the top of your head can anyone rougly tell me the average stiffness of pro rackets, this might help explain things a little, or not I mean, do they generally use more flexablie frams? I noticed that most of the Babolats are on the stiff side, do the players using Babolats (not paint jobs) have their's made with more flex?

Thanks.

The stiffness of pro racquets varies quite a bit. There are pros using racquets with RA's in the 50's, and pros with RA's in the 70's. So an average (or a median) would be of statistical usefulness only. However, in general, since they are mostly using older frames, the average stiffness is probably lower than the average stiffness of what's being sold to club players.

No, the players using Babolats don't have theirs made with more flex, regardless of paint jobs or not, as Babolat doesn't offer pro room services to their racquets team. The ones using paint jobs are for the most part using older stock models. The ones using the Drive series frames are mostly using fairly stiff frames, and the ones using Storm/Control or similar are mostly using more flexible ones.

LPShanet · Feb 1, 2011

SirGounder said:
The advancement in string is similar to the advent of graphite racquets. Polyester strings revolutionized the game. That was the last major technological achievement in strings. Graphite would be considered the last major technology in racquets. Keep in mind a lot of pros still use gut or a hybrid of gut and poly. It's really only here on the forums that you see guys messing around with new strings. Heck Courier said he uses a hybrid of nylon and Lux.

Also, certain things just can't be improved on like others. Computer processors can always be smaller, faster, cooler. Tennis racquets are regulated. It's not like you can add a motor, battery, etc to a racquet.

I don't think people want to use old racquets because they know pros use them. It's just a matter of personal preference. I use a PK 7g because it feels amazing to me. No doubt there are people who beg to differ. I went through a PS classic 6.1 phase and still love the stick. A lot of people don't like it because they feel it's too stiff. People on this board have tried a lot of racquets so they know what they like. A lot of us remember the racquets of the 90's and earlier and grew up playing with those. That's why we like them.

If we're being totally accurate, polyester strings have been around for ages, and there are a number of other types that have been developed since they were. However, when they first came out, polyester strings were quite unpopular, as the feel wasn't very user-friendly, and they didn't offer much power. Essentially, it was thought of as a bad technology and not very useful for over a decade, so companies didn't make much effort to market them.

Then, on the example of a few clay court tour stalwarts, some players discovered that they could essentially swing as hard as they wanted, and these dead strings would still allow the ball to drop in, so they slowly built a following on tour. In the beginning, some of these early adopters were players from poorer countries who actually started out using the poly because it was cheap and didn't break easily and they couldn't afford to use gut like the top tour players did. Once they hit the elite level, they were already used to it, and had discovered its benefits. Gradually, word spread on the tour, and many of the big hitters started using it, leading to its popularity among consumers (the majority of whom it's not best suited for). The irony is that now, the string companies have taken to developing new poly strings that play as much as possible like the non-poly strings people were already using, so that the average player can use them without experiencing more drawbacks than benefits.

raging · Feb 1, 2011

LPShanet said:
If we're being totally accurate, polyester strings have been around for ages, and there are a number of other types that have been developed since they were. However, when they first came out, polyester strings were quite unpopular, as the feel wasn't very user-friendly, and they didn't offer much power. Essentially, it was thought of as a bad technology and not very useful for over a decade, so companies didn't make much effort to market them.

Then, on the example of a few clay court tour stalwarts, some players discovered that they could essentially swing as hard as they wanted, and these dead strings would still allow the ball to drop in, so they slowly built a following on tour. In the beginning, some of these early adopters were players from poorer countries who actually started out using the poly because it was cheap and didn't break easily and they couldn't afford to use gut like the top tour players did. Once they hit the elite level, they were already used to it, and had discovered its benefits. Gradually, word spread on the tour, and many of the big hitters started using it, leading to its popularity among consumers (the majority of whom it's not best suited for). The irony is that now, the string companies have taken to developing new poly strings that play as much as possible like the non-poly strings people were already using, so that the average player can use them without experiencing more drawbacks than benefits.

the second paragraph describes perfectly how poly strings evolved and how graphite rackets and string technology developed sometimes in different directions...the rackets sometimes have got more flexible and the strings stiffer and vice-versa. Any discussion of what the pros are using has probably very little relevance to the average player.
In fact it probably only serves to confuse...

gloumar · Mar 18, 2011

rajah84 said:
Something else to think about.
Don't tell me it's down to marketing here, where the manufacturing giants basically creating an industry on ********...that I don't want to believe!

Ouuuhh baby baby it's a wild world
tinrinrintintinrinrintintin...

I would like to know if there were such a frenesy of new commercial launches in the past 80s or 90s ?
I think the rythm had been raising up, but I may be wrong. Old chaps, what do you think ?

I guess that if they woudn't create a new line every year, they wouldn't sell any new racquet because people could truely believe their old gear is still at top (which is actually the case).
Not very good for business ! Better to creat the need.

LPShanet, thanks for sharing such knowledge

Lsmkenpo · Mar 18, 2011

bluetrain4 said:
Most rackets are still graphite and graphite composites, nothing has changed. They're made from exactly the same materials.

Exactly, all that really changes is the marketing gimmicks.

Like D3o and basalt, I guarantee there is a minuscule amount of actually D3o or basalt fibers in these frames, they are still essentially 99.75% graphite.

All they really change is the layup and stiffness of the new model racquets, than market it as if the new token fibers made the difference.

scotus · Mar 18, 2011

I like the 80:20 combo of graphite and kevlar. Kevlar does a good job absorbing some shock.

2handsbothsides · Mar 18, 2011

scotus said:
I like the 80:20 combo of graphite and kevlar. Kevlar does a good job absorbing some shock.

Absolutely agree with you on this. Played with Wilson 6.1's for many years and they were solid and vibration free. The braided fiber layup also contributed to excellent feel for such a solid racket. Only wish someone would build a 100 inch head size extended length racquet in 80% graphite, 20% kevlar with a RA stiffness of 63 or 64. No other technology needed.

2Hare · Mar 18, 2011

From what I understand, the graphite in older rackets actually are less consistent and create more shocks. so that's why you used to see all kinds of weird technology that helps to dampen the racket. advances in materials have help to get rid of the funky racket technologies, so rackets these days actually look more normal than ever, except for a few techs like O port. the quality control may not be as good as before though.

Player these days are getting more spins, control, and power out of their racket and strings. So I think the new materials are indeed better. just people who are used to old material tends to stick to old materials, that's just how people are. Sampras switched to Pure Storm Tour from his legendary St.Vincent 85, he doesn't seem to complain, in fact he loves it. He said it was a superstitious thing. What does that tell you?

Keifers · Mar 19, 2011

scotus said:
I like the 80:20 combo of graphite and kevlar. Kevlar does a good job absorbing some shock.

+1. Ime it's one of the all-time best compositions in tennis -- a blend that gives just the right amounts of power, solid yet crisp feel and comfort. Makes the more modern formulations feel tinny and hollow, toy-like. Hit with one and you'll feel the difference -- it's unmistakeable.

2Hare · Mar 19, 2011

Keifers said:
+1. Ime it's one of the all-time best compositions in tennis -- a blend that gives just the right amounts of power, solid yet crisp feel and comfort. Makes the more modern formulations feel tinny and hollow, toy-like. Hit with one and you'll feel the difference -- it's unmistakeable.

The question is can you go full poly with it without killing your arm? that composition is great for full gut/multi, but too harsh for the poly power games IMO. That crisp feel turn into raw shockwave when you go poly.

scotus · Mar 19, 2011

2Hare said:
The question is can you go full poly with it without killing your arm? that composition is great for full gut/multi, but too harsh for the poly power games IMO. That crisp feel turn into raw shockwave when you go poly.

Actually, Kevlar is a great shock absorber.

Now, if you are talking about kevlar string (when high tension is applied), then that's a different story.

2Hare · Mar 20, 2011

scotus said:
Actually, Kevlar is a great shock absorber.

Now, if you are talking about kevlar string (when high tension is applied), then that's a different story.

I have PS85(china) and PS 6.1 95. both of them felt raw, unrefined, unlike the feel of modern rackets. I can see how some people may like this. They felt great with soft strings like gut. But with full poly strung in them at around 55, especially PS85, the rackets felt really harsh on the arm. I really don't see power players playing full poly in these rackets for a long time.

Macro80 · Mar 20, 2011

Graphite and Kevlar are perhaps the best partnership since Batman and Robin.

Keifers · Mar 20, 2011

Macro80 said:
Graphite and Kevlar are perhaps the best partnership since Batman and Robin.

Agree. Second to graphite/Kevlar would be the graphite/Twaron composition that Head used in many of its racquets.

Keifers · Mar 20, 2011

2Hare said:
The question is can you go full poly with it without killing your arm? that composition is great for full gut/multi, but too harsh for the poly power games IMO. That crisp feel turn into raw shockwave when you go poly.

That's a question but I wouldn't say it's the question. I would ask, why you would mess up a frame with superior feel by putting in it strings with very little feel?

Let's say, though, you want to use full poly. Lower the tension at least 10% and you'll be in the right ballpark for graphite/Kevlar frames. Maybe even lower if your arm is sensitive to poly's harsh feel.

2Hare said:
I have PS85(china) and PS 6.1 95. both of them felt raw, unrefined, unlike the feel of modern rackets. I can see how some people may like this. They felt great with soft strings like gut. But with full poly strung in them at around 55, especially PS85, the rackets felt really harsh on the arm. I really don't see power players playing full poly in these rackets for a long time.

Again, you're confusing the raw, unrefined feel of poly (especially full poly) with the feel of the graphite/Kevlar frame.

Full poly at 55 in a PS85 is too high -- you're just asking for trouble.

2Hare · Mar 20, 2011

Keifers said:
That's a question but I wouldn't say it's the question. I would ask, why you would mess up a frame with superior feel by putting in it strings with very little feel?

Let's say, though, you want to use full poly. Lower the tension at least 10% and you'll be in the right ballpark for graphite/Kevlar frames. Maybe even lower if your arm is sensitive to poly's harsh feel.

Again, you're confusing the raw, unrefined feel of poly (especially full poly) with the feel of the graphite/Kevlar frame.

Full poly at 55 in a PS85 is too high -- you're just asking for trouble.

well, people use poly to get its amazing spins. Sampras and agassi hit balls at 1800rpm, while Fed hits at 2500 rpm, and Nadal at 3200+. that said, if i'm a capable 45 year old+ hitting fast flat shots and slices, I would probably think like you. I can see how I would like this classic feel. But I can't see modern players taking big brushes at their balls liking these rackets. They just don't work as well with poly, I don't know why exactly, just doesn't feel right.

Keifers · Mar 21, 2011

2Hare said:
well, people use poly to get its amazing spins. Sampras and agassi hit balls at 1800rpm, while Fed hits at 2500 rpm, and Nadal at 3200+. that said, if i'm a capable 45 year old+ hitting fast flat shots and slices, I would probably think like you. I can see how I would like this classic feel. But I can't see modern players taking big brushes at their balls liking these rackets. They just don't work as well with poly, I don't know why exactly, just doesn't feel right.

Well, it's nice to know, my young friend, the circumstances under which you think you would probably think like me.

Of course, the vast majority of modern players have never ever tried graphite/Kevlar sticks strung with full poly at an appropriate tension, so we're just conjecturing, no? Who knows, they might find the combination adds new and desirable dimensions to their games. The additional feel may even give them the confidence to approach the net and volley once in a while.

Devilito · Mar 21, 2011

2Hare said:
I have PS85(china) and PS 6.1 95. both of them felt raw, unrefined, unlike the feel of modern rackets. I can see how some people may like this. They felt great with soft strings like gut. But with full poly strung in them at around 55, especially PS85, the rackets felt really harsh on the arm. I really don't see power players playing full poly in these rackets for a long time.

because fully poly at 55 on a PS85 borders on psychotic

I personally string full poly on my KPS88 at 40lbs and Federer is somewhere around 42-45 for hybrid. And that’s on a 90sq” frame. So for you to string a PS85 at 55 and wondering why it plays like dog ****, now you know

Full poly can work on a PS85 no problem. String accordingly

2Hare · Mar 22, 2011

Keifers said:
Well, it's nice to know, my young friend, the circumstances under which you think you would probably think like me.

Of course, the vast majority of modern players have never ever tried graphite/Kevlar sticks strung with full poly at an appropriate tension, so we're just conjecturing, no? Who knows, they might find the combination adds new and desirable dimensions to their games. The additional feel may even give them the confidence to approach the net and volley once in a while.

So what tension would you recommend for poly in PS85 or PS 6.1 si? It almost killed my arm last time I put poly in them. Currently have gut in PS85, they seem to be made for each other.

2Hare · Mar 22, 2011

Devilito said:
because fully poly at 55 on a PS85 borders on psychotic I personally string full poly on my KPS88 at 40lbs and Federer is somewhere around 42-45 for hybrid. And that’s on a 90sq” frame. So for you to string a PS85 at 55 and wondering why it plays like dog ****, now you know Full poly can work on a PS85 no problem. String accordingly

I've played with the same tension and full Alu with N90 before, never have a single problem. It had more plow, great spins, and comfort, and had a great pj( and without that annoying signature of Fed). So I doubt that the string tension is the problem, I'm pretty sure it's the racket and it's raw shockwaves.

Keifers · Mar 22, 2011

2Hare said:
So what tension would you recommend for poly in PS85 or PS 6.1 si? It almost killed my arm last time I put poly in them. Currently have gut in PS85, they seem to be made for each other.

The gut you have in your PS85 -- what brand, gauge and tension?

What poly do you want to use?

2Hare · Mar 22, 2011

Keifers said:
The gut you have in your PS85 -- what brand, gauge and tension?

What poly do you want to use?

VS Team 17 @58/56. Probably Alu Power. I don't really use this stick now I'll restrung it with poly when it breaks.

louis netman · Jul 11, 2012

Keifers said:
Well, it's nice to know, my young friend, the circumstances under which you think you would probably think like me.

Of course, the vast majority of modern players have never ever tried graphite/Kevlar sticks strung with full poly at an appropriate tension, so we're just conjecturing, no? Who knows, they might find the combination adds new and desirable dimensions to their games. The additional feel may even give them the confidence to approach the net and volley once in a while.

What they don't know may hurt them (keep them from adding variety)...

Advances in technology allow manufacturers to create exacting specifications using cheaper materials, hence increasing the bottom line, creating even more $$ for R&D to come up with EVEN CHEAPER alternatives. Basalt is one example which is essentially volcanic rock. Costly ultra high modulus graphite which was once living matter millions of years ago will simply transmit more ball “feel” than any man-made substance, or even a natural substance like volcanic rock—which may contain traces of molten “once-living” material (we may even refer to it as very low-grade graphite), just like gut (lamb or cow intestine) will have more feel than ANY synthetic string, period. Leather grips also give more feel than rubber-based ones...

As we move into the future the demand for ball feel may dwindle as young players are being weaned on frames with lower proportions of UHM graphite. They’re spanking the crap out of the ball & winning matches and it’s all good. They really don’t know what they’re missing and may not even care. It’s the players who know what a high concentration UHM graphite stick feels like who are discontented with modern offerings—especially the ones who also played wood frames strung with gut ;-)

Rabbit · Jul 12, 2012

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yep, it's all about bottom line. The progress that has been made in materials is done to:

Use less material: less material = less $'s cost
Use less resin, resin is what breaks down and allows a frame to fatigue/break. Unfortunately, IMO, it also makes the racquet feel less "tinny": longer frame life means less replacement costs which = more $'s profit
Make the material stronger to reduce warranty claims = more $'s profit

One has to remember that graphite racquets are relatively new technology, being the prime choice for only about 30 years. The construction of graphite was done to mimic wood for the first 5 years or so. Manufacturers were probably a little reticent to advance the build too much for fear someone in the controlling body of tennis would stop the change in the game. The changes have been gradual enough that nothing was done.

Now, I'm not saying this is a conspiracy, but it definitely has lead to a change in the nature of the game and the way it's played. And, the powers that be in tennis, also new to money, have shown themselves more than willing to sell out the sport for money.

BreakPoint · Jul 12, 2012

louis netman said:
What they don't know may hurt them (keep them from adding variety)...

Advances in technology allow manufacturers to create exacting specifications using cheaper materials, hence increasing the bottom line, creating even more $$ for R&D to come up with EVEN CHEAPER alternatives. Basalt is one example which essentially volcanic rock. Costly ultra high modulus graphite which was once living matter millions of years ago will simply transmit more ball “feel” than any man-made substance, or even a natural substance like volcanic rock—which may contain traces of molten “once-living” material (we may even refer to it as very low-grade graphite), just like gut (lamb or cow intestine) will have more feel that ANY synthetic string, period. Leather grips also give more feel than rubber-based ones...

As we move into the future the demand for ball feel may dwindle as young players are being weaned on frames with lower proportions of UHM graphite. They’re spanking the crap out of the ball & winning matches and it’s all good. They really don’t know what they’re missing and may not even care. It’s the players who know what a high concentration UHM graphite stick feels like who are discontented with modern offerings—especially the ones who also played wood frames strung with gut ;-)

Awesome post!

I totally agree with everything you said.

The "modern" racquets cannot hold a candle to the old racquets from 25-35 years ago in terms of feel. Not even close. Most of the new racquets feel like hitting with tin cans to me.

pkshooter · Jul 12, 2012

just to shake things up i'd like everyone on this thread to know
-i'm fifteen
-play a modern baseline power game
-love playing with poly for that hard string bed
-don't like babalots because of the hollowness
-and i love playing with my woody spaulding

Graphite VS. Technology

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 21996

Guest

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Deleted member 21996

Guest

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Banned

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Banned

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Banned

Professional

Rookie

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Legend

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Rookie

Legend

Legend

Semi-Pro

Legend

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Legend

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Similar threads