Most stupid racquet ''technology''
- Thread starter season25
- Start date
tennis_pr0
Semi-Pro
I'm not too sure I buy into any of the "technology" stuff. I mean, I never noticed a difference coming from the youtek prestige to the ig youtek prestige. I think most of it is just more marketing.
I agree. They are all bull... But they can get away saying that a new material is ''better'' than the previous. But saying things like aeroskin is less air drag just makes me wanna cry.
That one stood out more than anything else
BHiC
Rookie
Just offhand, what makes you think that Dunlop Aeroskin was stupid?
To answer your question, I have always thought the Head Flexpoint technology was probably one of the worst.
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
The fact that Dunlop is saying it reduces air drag
ChicagoJack
Hall of Fame
Any frame over 70ra is stupid technology IMO. Super stiff frames offer almost no measurable increase in ACOR for impacts near or below center, and are of fractional import (a fraction of 1 MPH for a 100 MPH serve) for impacts closer to the tip. A jump from 60 RA to 75 RA will not get you 1% more ball velocity. Swingweight and racquet head speed are by far much bigger factors. So.. what you get with a very stiff frame is very little reward for a big risk to arm safety. Not a good trade off at all in my book. If you want 1% more power, the best way to do that is swing the racquet 1% faster.
-Jack
-Jack
Last edited:
They are useful for senior citizens who just want to push the ball with a slight tap
I thought the Biofibre technology from Dunlop was worse...plant fibres extracted and put into the frame? No way plant fibres are stronger than steel and lighter than carbon. Aren't plant fibres mostly carbon to begin with?
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
All the crap that Wilson has put out since Federer's emergence. nCode, kFactor, BLX - volcanic crap.
Babolat's cortex crap - If you want that technology, you don't need to buy a new frame, just need to put on a dampener or a rubberband.
Babolat Aero and Dunlop bio-skin crap - That's like putting an aerodynamic body kit on a Geo Metro. Most of us don't swing fast enough to see the (alleged) benefits.
Head Flexpoint - Yeah alright, you know it came from a Prince engineer but got scrapped by admins in the beginning stages.
Just to name a few...
Babolat's cortex crap - If you want that technology, you don't need to buy a new frame, just need to put on a dampener or a rubberband.
Babolat Aero and Dunlop bio-skin crap - That's like putting an aerodynamic body kit on a Geo Metro. Most of us don't swing fast enough to see the (alleged) benefits.
Head Flexpoint - Yeah alright, you know it came from a Prince engineer but got scrapped by admins in the beginning stages.
Just to name a few...
Plant fibers are the cell walls of plants and are made of cellulose and lignin. They are also the "fiber" which enables you to take a good cr*p.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Seem to recall the TW playtesters mentioning how the Dunlop felt faster thru the air probably due to the aeroskin tech. Someone can apparently feel it...
Or somebody was paid a lot of money to "feel" it.
ChicagoJack
Hall of Fame
Yeah, I kinda get what you are saying here. But again, this would imply that stiff racquets offer considerably more power. This is a common misconception, and it's simply not the case. The biggest con game of all is happening right here with this issue of racquet power, right under our noses.
Super stiff frames offer almost no measurable increase in ACOR for impacts near or below center, and are of fractional import (a fraction of 1 MPH for a 100 MPH serve) for impacts closer to the tip. A jump from 60 RA to 75 RA will not get you even 1% more ball velocity. Swingweight and racquet head speed are by far much bigger factors. If you want 1% more power, the best way to do that is swing the racquet 1% faster.
And it's those very same senior citizens who need to stay away from the increased risk of arm trouble associated with stiff frames. TE most frequently develops in players over 40.
-Jack
Last edited:
The Meat
Hall of Fame
Mythbusters did something relevant where they tested the dimple effect on a car's efficiency. It's supposed to be more aerodynamically efficient, but only mi/gallon not tennis.
cluckcluck
Hall of Fame
Surprised nobody mentioned Babolat's "Smart Grip". Dummest idea ever, hand down (no pun intended).
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Yes, it would be too extreme to say because Wilson's PWS is one of the few "technologies" that actually work. This is proven by all the people who add lead tape at 3 and 9 on their frames to increase stability. PWS just already does this for you. I find Wilson frames with PWS more stable on volleys as a result.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
But I've leaded up the 3 and 9 o'clock too. Must be why I hit earth-shattering volleys. :twisted:
Just kidding, my volleys are garbage...
Rafaboy
Semi-Pro
Agreed! peformance starts in the mind. Anything that improves the mental edge is a highly functional technology.
Let us explore that. Some people say that the PWS is hollow inside and so weightage effect is negligible. What do you think?
I have even dipped my fingers into the orange d30 material in my pro shop and tried to imagine it getting harder the more I pressed on it. It may indeed work, but needs to be in sufficient amounts to make a difference, and I am not sure how much of it is there in the frame. Does anybody know?
Stiffness + large head size makes it easier for senior citizens.
Same for Federer for his BHs
ChicagoJack
Hall of Fame
Oh, okay, so now it's stiff and large heads are much more powerful ... okay, let's go there. How much easier exactly?
In 1997, in a comparative test done by Tennis magazine, [1] Mark Philippoussis, the six-foot-five, 217-pound Australian renowned for his powerful serve, averaged 124 mph when serving with his own composite racket. With a classic wooden racket, (where the stiffness ratings average in the low 30's, and a 72 sq inch head) he averaged 122 mph.
I continue to reiterate that racquet power is a mostly a matter of swing speed and swingweight. Scud is able to hit nearly his top speed with a flexy racquet in the 30s, and a 72 inch head, because the swingweights of most of the woodies is north of 360, and he can stil swing it pretty fast. The other factors matter slightly, but only in terms of fractions of MPHs.
Those other factors, that's were the all the marketing myths and junk technology exist. The marketing myths exist to sell us stuff like the HEAD Ti. S6, which should only be used to escape from a snow storm, and should never be anywhere near a tennis court, especially not in the hands of a senior citizen with fragile tendons.
Link [1] Mark Philippoussis Serve Test, Wood Vs Graphite
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1899876,00.html
-Jack
Last edited:
ChicagoJack....
Are you sure we can still relegate Phillipousis to "senior citizens" status?
Or does "senior citizen" usually mean an out of shape, normal sized, 62+ year old injured and decrepit old fart?
First of all, stiff rackets only work for those who can swing it fast to hit it hard.
Second, large head size doesn't hit harder, it ALLOWS a blind person to hit near the sweetspot so his off center hits can go harder than his normal mishits with a small racket.
Are you sure we can still relegate Phillipousis to "senior citizens" status?
Or does "senior citizen" usually mean an out of shape, normal sized, 62+ year old injured and decrepit old fart?
First of all, stiff rackets only work for those who can swing it fast to hit it hard.
Second, large head size doesn't hit harder, it ALLOWS a blind person to hit near the sweetspot so his off center hits can go harder than his normal mishits with a small racket.
anirut
Legend
Let me add a little more to the stiff + large head mix ...
There's "thick beam", too, that allows easy play. IMO, the thick beam is probably more important than stiffness with regards to "power".
For old farts (and I'm getting there too), a LIGHT racket is important so they can play. Now, to design a light racket - that's a racket with LESS construction material - to withstand impact, it had to be stiff.
An easy way to make it stiff without adding more material (and thus weight) is to give it a (very) thick beam, and this results in power too.
There's "thick beam", too, that allows easy play. IMO, the thick beam is probably more important than stiffness with regards to "power".
For old farts (and I'm getting there too), a LIGHT racket is important so they can play. Now, to design a light racket - that's a racket with LESS construction material - to withstand impact, it had to be stiff.
An easy way to make it stiff without adding more material (and thus weight) is to give it a (very) thick beam, and this results in power too.
Nothing beats the inane idiocy of TaylorMade's "driver DNA" for its Rocketballz (spelling IS correct) irons.
I Heart Thomas Muster
Semi-Pro
I doubted Cortex did a damn thing BEFORE I saw the Cortex plastic piece pop out of a PDR. It's basically just a piece of plastic glued to the outside of the frame which is ever so slightly indented.
Perhaps the amount of material needed to make the PWS stand proud from the frame is the extra weight. So hollow or not, there might still be something extra. I'm gonna saw thru my Pro Staff and see for real... lol
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Even if it was hollow, just the extra graphite to form the PWS is still added weight. A short strip of lead tape doesn't weigh all that much either, but still makes a difference when put in the right places.
ChicagoJack
Hall of Fame
Imo the perimeter weighting system is simply a case of form taking the lead over function. Weight at 3:00 and 9:00 certainly has a valid purpose, but seems like that could be added internally just as easily.
Wilson just choose the more cosmetically enhanced route to achieve a higher twistweight. I think " perimeter weighting system" creates an appealing phrase, and adds a visual construct for the kind of vague concept of "more stability when you miss the sweetspot out close to 3-9"
Wilson just choose the more cosmetically enhanced route to achieve a higher twistweight. I think " perimeter weighting system" creates an appealing phrase, and adds a visual construct for the kind of vague concept of "more stability when you miss the sweetspot out close to 3-9"
Last edited:
matchmaker
Hall of Fame
I am with you on this one. The most powerful racquet I have happens to be a midsize racquet with a flex of 51! Oh, did I mention it has about 360 swingweight. Took pretty well care of my tennis elbow and allowed me to hit more winners than ever, and with control.
I see no reason why stiffer frames are ever more popular. No reason to go over 65 RA. It is only good to creat more injuries.
Al Czervik
Hall of Fame
This thread is awesome. They are all so ridiculous. Microgel, Basalt, Liquidmetal, O Ports, Cortex. They all give you more power AND control.
I feel like everything began to decline around the time of the Wilson Profile. Babolat was the death blow to good racquets.
I shouldn't derail this thread into gimmick racquets, but I had this Dunlop Max something where you could add metal balls snapped in at three and nine. It was sort of like PWS. I also had the Puma Becker Super with the screw that you could change the length of the racquet. That thing was money.
I feel like everything began to decline around the time of the Wilson Profile. Babolat was the death blow to good racquets.
I shouldn't derail this thread into gimmick racquets, but I had this Dunlop Max something where you could add metal balls snapped in at three and nine. It was sort of like PWS. I also had the Puma Becker Super with the screw that you could change the length of the racquet. That thing was money.
Overdrive
Legend
Surprised nobody mentioned Babolat's "Smart Grip". Dummest idea ever, hand down (no pun intended).
Oh my goodness, I forgot about the Babolat Y series..
I almost switched to Babolat during December...
Good thing I found a line of racquets that won't destory my arm or shoulder...
What an ugly racquet.. It looks worse than the Powerbridge series of racquets...
Overdrive
Legend
I also had the Puma Becker Super with the screw that you could change the length of the racquet. That thing was money.
It is money. Just got one from a thrift store. Nice nice racquet.
kike_valerin
Professional
Prince Power Ring
Maybe prince was thinking that this technology will have success, they take the technology from her racquetball brand (Ektelon) will work on tennis...
Prince Triple Threat Ring
Maybe prince was thinking that this technology will have success, they take the technology from her racquetball brand (Ektelon) will work on tennis...
Prince Triple Threat Ring
martini1
Hall of Fame
I actually think the smart grip feels pretty good for my 2hbh, although I have only held it in a store.
Youtek (3D0)? would be awesome if that stuff actually works. I feel bad for the marketing VP in tennis racket companies who have to come up with new BS every 2 years and have to claim it is better!
All they did was changing the stiffness, balance, SW, string pattern, and weight back and forth to create a "new feel".
Youtek (3D0)? would be awesome if that stuff actually works. I feel bad for the marketing VP in tennis racket companies who have to come up with new BS every 2 years and have to claim it is better!
All they did was changing the stiffness, balance, SW, string pattern, and weight back and forth to create a "new feel".
