Suggested playing levels for rackets

MikeHitsHard93

MikeHitsHard93

Hall of Fame
How many of you have tried playing with a racket that was suggested to be to advanced for you? How many of you have stuck with a racket that is recommended to the level beneath your skill? Which one did you have the most success with?
 
Q

qwertre

Rookie
I've always regarded the playing level labels as manufacturing BS, but that could just be me.
So far, I've played with
-Head ti something-- little kid racket that gave me great results
-Babolat Pure Drive Cortex
-Head Microgel Radical MP with CAPs
-Wilson K-Blade 98

I've been able to "handle" all of them well, even though they are vastly different levels.
 
PhxRacket

PhxRacket

Hall of Fame
MikeHitsHard93 said:
How many of you have tried playing with a racket that was suggested to be to advanced for you? How many of you have stuck with a racket that is recommended to the level beneath your skill? Which one did you have the most success with?
Click to expand...

I started with a Bancroft (1970s), moved to a Donnay Borg (1980s), played junior college tennis with a Prince Pro 110 (late 1980s), and now play with a Wilson BLX Blade 98. I do play around with my son's Juice 100 once in a while. I don't feel that any racket was below or above my playing level, I just raised (or lowered) my ability at different times.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
MikeHitsHard93 said:
How many of you have tried playing with a racket that was suggested to be to advanced for you? How many of you have stuck with a racket that is recommended to the level beneath your skill? Which one did you have the most success with?
Click to expand...

I am done playing racquets over my head. Why make things harder than they need to be? Tiny sweetspots and hefty swingweight are best left to the pros. Sure I COULD play fairly well with a 6.1 95, but what's the point when an 11oz. 320 sw with a 100-105" head makes tennis easier and more fun? I would rather battle my opponent than the racquet. That said...if u are happy using a players racquet and you are a 3.0 or 3.5, then by all means go for it.

Personally I think it's easier to use a racquet that's below your level than one above it. As long as the weight and power level is right, you will be fine. In our head, we all think we're better than we actually are and this also effects our racquet selection.
 
Last edited:
S

Slippery

New User
I hit my best serves with my rebel 95, rally and play harder hitting player better with my 4d300(which I use as my regular choice) and played some of my best matches with a microgel challenge mp with a little tape on it strung with syn. which I thought was to beginner of racket lol, so I watched some reviews and bought the rebel used it for awhile and found it a bit heavy so I bought the 300 and so the circle goes round and round. Tried a youtek rad mp the other night and hated it so at least I know that one is out of the question. Still searching. As for levels I guess whatever works. I read somewhere on here use the racket you play your best match with, not rally with, I think that's pretty good advice.
 
MikeHitsHard93

MikeHitsHard93

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
I am done playing racquets over my head. Why make things harder than they need to be? Tiny sweetspots and hefty swingweight are best left to the pros. Sure I COULD play fairly well with a 6.1 95, but what's the point when an 11oz. 320 sw with a 100-105" head makes tennis easier and more fun? I would rather battle my opponent than the racquet. That said...if u are happy using a players racquet and you are a 3.0 or 3.5, then by all means go for it.

Personally I think it's easier to use a racquet that's below your level than one above it. As long as the weight and power level is right, you will be fine. In our head, we all think we're better than we actually are and this also effects our racquet selection.
Click to expand...

I completely missed this post jack haha.

I agree completely with you. I have been the victim of thinking that I can play with prestiges and radicals and sixones, but I am mistaken and I have gone back down the path of tweeners like you. I need that boost in power and forgiveness.

How did that 500 Tour work out for you?
 
Bartelby

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Serves seem to work better with weightier racquets even if otherwise they're above one's pay grade.
 
Vlad_C

Vlad_C

Semi-Pro
I never found the manufacturer's suggested play levels to be of much practical use.

I think the real question should be, what type of player are you, and how do you hit?
What is your game - baseliner, serve & volley, etc.
How are your strokes? Do you hit with lots of topspin, or are you a flat hitter?

I think these are the criteria one should consider when choosing a racquet.

For example, if you're a baseliner who hits flat and hard, then you would probably select the same type of racquet, regardless of whether you currently play at the 3.5 level or at the 5.0 level.
 
robbo1970

robbo1970

Hall of Fame
qwertre said:
I've always regarded the playing level labels as manufacturing BS, but that could just be me.
Click to expand...

Some true words here IMO.

But it boils down to what racket suits your style of play. And having tried cheaper rackets, I have found that a better quality 'players' level racket does feel better to use than a comparitive weight/headsize but of cheaper construction/stringing.

The decision is more down to what weight and headsize you prefer that suits your style of play.

If you are an out and out baseliner, then a larger headed, medium to lighter weigh racket might be your thing, alternatively, if you play a SV type game, you may prefer a weightier, smaller headed control racket.

Its like the question "what racket is best for me?". The one than suits your game. I would always ignore the term 'players racket'. The right weight and headsize for you is the right racket, regardless of how it is defined.
 
D

Dasol

Rookie
JackB1 said:
I am done playing racquets over my head. Why make things harder than they need to be? Tiny sweetspots and hefty swingweight are best left to the pros. Sure I COULD play fairly well with a 6.1 95, but what's the point when an 11oz. 320 sw with a 100-105" head makes tennis easier and more fun? I would rather battle my opponent than the racquet. That said...if u are happy using a players racquet and you are a 3.0 or 3.5, then by all means go for it.

Personally I think it's easier to use a racquet that's below your level than one above it. As long as the weight and power level is right, you will be fine. In our head, we all think we're better than we actually are and this also effects our racquet selection.
Click to expand...

Sure, totally agree with this post. It is a lot easier to use a racquet which is below one's level and it gives one better results in game. Then, why does someone use a players' frame although it is definitely harder to use and gives worse results in game? Ironically, I think it is also because of "more fun"! The feel that a players frame's tiny sweet spot provides and a heavy ball that a heftier frame produces is, for me, more fun than anything else in playing tennis. Sure, I can have better results by using lighter tweeners, but tweeners IMHO do not provide the same feel that players frames inherently possess. The very reason why I am coming back to players frames is because of the "feel" that those racquets provide during matches, and if one is addicted to it, I think it is hard to give them away. :)
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
MikeHitsHard93 said:
I completely missed this post jack haha.

I agree completely with you. I have been the victim of thinking that I can play with prestiges and radicals and sixones, but I am mistaken and I have gone back down the path of tweeners like you. I need that boost in power and forgiveness.

How did that 500 Tour work out for you?
Click to expand...

The 500 Tour is a very nice racquet. Felt very solid with nice plow for an 11 oz stick. I am just loving my Blade 104 too much right now to get away from it, but the Bio 500 Tour is a great racquet I could happily use.
 
MikeHitsHard93

MikeHitsHard93

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
The 500 Tour is a very nice racquet. Felt very solid with nice plow for an 11 oz stick. I am just loving my Blade 104 too much right now to get away from it, but the Bio 500 Tour is a great racquet I could happily use.
Click to expand...

In one word, how would you describe it?
 
heninfan99

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
I've actually never seen a weekend warrior guy that's into tennis with a racquet that suited his level --me included. It's always too advanced. I think the ladies are more realistic on this front. :)
 
MikeHitsHard93

MikeHitsHard93

Hall of Fame
heninfan99 said:
I've actually never seen a weekend warrior guy that's into tennis with a racquet that suited his level --me included. It's always too advanced. I think the ladies are more realistic on this front. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah well I'm starting to get more realistic because I'm tired of fighting my rackets lol. I'm just not good enough even for a light players stick.
 
heninfan99

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
I hear yeah but we can't be wielding the Gamma Big Bubba either. :)
Though it would be fun to put a bunch of lead strips on a Big Bubba and win matches with it.

MikeHitsHard93 said:
Yeah well I'm starting to get more realistic because I'm tired of fighting my rackets lol. I'm just not good enough even for a light players stick.
Click to expand...
 
Fintft

Fintft

G.O.A.T.
JackB1 said:
I am done playing racquets over my head. Why make things harder than they need to be? Tiny sweetspots and hefty swingweight are best left to the pros. Sure I COULD play fairly well with a 6.1 95, but what's the point when an 11oz. 320 sw with a 100-105" head makes tennis easier and more fun? I would rather battle my opponent than the racquet. That said...if u are happy using a players racquet and you are a 3.0 or 3.5, then by all means go for it.

Personally I think it's easier to use a racquet that's below your level than one above it. As long as the weight and power level is right, you will be fine. In our head, we all think we're better than we actually are and this also effects our racquet selection.
Click to expand...

Myself, I'm the opposite.

a) I prefer the control of the above my level rackets (i.e. the 6.1 95 over the 11oz 320 sw 100-105").

And

b) I even feel like buying Roger's Wilson 90 BLX Tour to hit with more force!

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/reviews/61tblx/61tblxreview.html

The few FH's I've hit with it, they were the strongest.

Having said all of that, the only advanced racket I couldn't play at all, was Marat Safin's (Head Prestige?)- also maybe b/c I don't have his 2H BH and it was years ago, when I was bellow 3.0.
 
Sander001

Sander001

Hall of Fame
MikeHitsHard93 said:
How many of you have tried playing with a racket that was suggested to be to advanced for you? How many of you have stuck with a racket that is recommended to the level beneath your skill? Which one did you have the most success with?
Click to expand...
When I was a teen getting back into tennis, I wanted to swing like mad at every shot. I needed the most control oriented racquet I could get me hands on so even though I didn't have the skill, I opted for the Prestige Classic.
I took many losses for years before my capability rose to match a midsize racquet but in the end, it definitely paid off.
 
Timbo's hopeless slice

Timbo's hopeless slice

Hall of Fame
I used nothing but player's sticks for years.

Chris Edwards reviewed the Volkl x-7 310 the day before I ordered new x-10 mids, I read it just after losing a match by not getting enough depth on my defensive shots.

So, I ordered a 7 (310) instead, just on a whim, really.

now I have 3 of them, and can't imagine ever switching back.

So forgiving, so solid, so much spin, easy power with control..

conclusion? I have been fooling myself for a very long time.

(oh, I won the state 45s singles title last weekend, best I ever managed before was a runner up and a loss in the semis)

it's all individual preference, of course, but don't be afraid to try things..
 
Last edited:
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
Tim, I have definitely changed my opinion on easier more forgiving racquets. I am using the Blade 104 and am playing the best tennis I have in a while and can't even consider switching right now.
 
S

spinovic

Hall of Fame
I think 'tweeners can be used by beginners and advanced players alike.

When you start getting into the 95 in heads and less, then it gets tougher for guys like me. There are a few exceptions - like the BLX 6.1 95 which is more powerful than my Extreme Pro 2.0, IMO. And pretty forgiving for its size. I haven't played another 95 like it. The Radical Pro is one I could also play with. The Prestige Pro, which isn't quite as powerful was tougher for me. Those are all open patterns. I'm quite sure that the 18x20 versions of most of those racquets would be too tough for me at the present time.

Getting below 95, is something that I'm obviously not ready for based on a couple of demos.

But, 'tweeners work. You can use it now and learn to play, and they are still a viable option for advanced players.

Nothing wrong with any of the racquets. It is just a matter of finding what you prefer and what suits your game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Why are some rackets suggested for 4.5 players or above?
Replies
25
Views
4K
JoelDali
JoelDali
bumfluff
Suggested Demo Rackets
Replies
10
Views
876
Anton
Anton
D
Head microgel vs graphene
Replies
6
Views
1K
Crocodile
Crocodile
G
Difference Between Flxp Prestige and LM Prestige ??
Replies
6
Views
655
gusty_86
G
V
Good Beginner Racket
Replies
9
Views
1K
2kJosh
2kJosh
Top