Head Prestige Pro 95 inch

Hi
I bought a Prestige Pro 95 inch head 315g weight. This is my move up from Radical 98 inch 295g added 8g with lead tape to make it 303g. I have strung Prestige with Luxilon ALU Power.

Today was my first session with it and i was not happy. I felt the recoil every time ball was hit. Often felt vibration even with dampner.

What do I need to keep in mind moving to 95 inch Prestige? Any suggestions?


I moved to 95 to improve my game with control but how do i go about it?

Godfather said:

Hi
I bought a Prestige Pro 95 inch head 315g weight. This is my move up from Radical 98 inch 295g added 8g with lead tape to make it 303g. I have strung Prestige with Luxilon ALU Power.

Today was my first session with it and i was not happy. I felt the recoil every time ball was hit. Often felt vibration even with dampner.

What do I need to keep in mind moving to 95 inch Prestige? Any suggestions?


I moved to 95 to improve my game with control but how do i go about it?

Click to expand...

Is it a 360+ (The red one)?

Either drop the tension, use a softer string, or hit cleaner, would be my guess, without knowing more about the racket, strings, or your level of play.

Godfather said:

Hi
I bought a Prestige Pro 95 inch head 315g weight. This is my move up from Radical 98 inch 295g added 8g with lead tape to make it 303g. I have strung Prestige with Luxilon ALU Power.

Today was my first session with it and i was not happy. I felt the recoil every time ball was hit. Often felt vibration even with dampner.

What do I need to keep in mind moving to 95 inch Prestige? Any suggestions?


I moved to 95 to improve my game with control but how do i go about it?

Click to expand...

This was my go to racquet for the past 2 years up until a few months ago. It has possibly one of the smallest sweet spots of any racquet I have ever used, and I tried tons of different string and tension set ups with little success. Obviously, if you can hit that sweet spot constantly then you are greatly rewarded but if you are off a bit on any given day it is extremely unforgiving. I have since moved on to the Gravity Pro and will never look back. The GP has a generous sweet spot and amazing feel. I still have my PP's and break them out every once in awhile but my daily driver are my GP's.

If your old Radical MPs are one of those Graphene iterations, you're in for a change of stiffeness that need a bit of getting used to...

That is, from high to low.

The Radical MPs are RA 65 to 68, versus 63-65 for the Prestige Pros (62-63 for the Pre-360s)

If you got the 360 PP, lower the tension and use slightly softer strings like Hyper G Soft etc.

OnyxZ28 said:

Either drop the tension, use a softer string, or hit cleaner, would be my guess, without knowing more about the racket, strings, or your level of play.

Click to expand...

TennisHound said:

Is it a 360+ (The red one)?

Click to expand...

It is
Head Graphene 360+ Prestige Pro
The strings I mentioned already are luxilon Alu Power.


I am wondering if I made a mistake but also questioning whether 95, albeit small sweet spot, will improve my game- if so in what sense?


I play 5 times a weeks for past 2 years.

PaulC said:

If your old Radical MPs are one of those Graphene iterations, you're in for a change of stiffeness that need a bit of getting used to...

That is, from high to low.

The Radical MPs are RA 65 to 68, versus 63-65 for the Prestige Pros (62-63 for the Pre-360s)

If you got the 360 PP, lower the tension and use slightly softer strings like Hyper G Soft etc.

Click to expand...

Explain a bit on the stiffness aspect of it, please.

jugheadfla said:

This was my go to racquet for the past 2 years up until a few months ago. It has possibly one of the smallest sweet spots of any racquet I have ever used, and I tried tons of different string and tension set ups with little success. Obviously, if you can hit that sweet spot constantly then you are greatly rewarded but if you are off a bit on any given day it is extremely unforgiving. I have since moved on to the Gravity Pro and will never look back. The GP has a generous sweet spot and amazing feel. I still have my PP's and break them out every once in awhile but my daily driver are my GP's.

Click to expand...

So I take it that you gave up on Head Graphene 360+ Prestige Pro for not having a larger sweet spot? I am concerned that you did that after 2 years.

Godfather said:

Hi
I bought a Prestige Pro 95 inch head 315g weight. This is my move up from Radical 98 inch 295g added 8g with lead tape to make it 303g. I have strung Prestige with Luxilon ALU Power.

Click to expand...

Hi, I also picked up a G360+ PP on clearance and have played a few times with it for fun. I’ve noticed a couple of things about it. It has a headlight balance and swings more easily than you would expect for a 315g frame, and I am often a little early to the ball. Especially if you put weight onto the head of your Radical, the different balance and swingweight might be throwing you off. It also does not have a very big sweet spot due to the relatively narrow head, but the feel is sublime when you catch it there. When used well, this frame can have a great blend of stability, control, feel, and power.

I’d recommend continuing to play with it for a while and see if your timing and contact point get dialed in. By my third session I was having a pretty good time with it. However, it will always be harder to use and less forgiving than the more typical 98 and 100” frames that are targeted towards most club players. If you want to maximize your match success and you are a rec-level player, this probably isn’t the frame to use.

time_fly said:

Hi, I also picked up a G360+ PP on clearance and have played a few times with it for fun. I’ve noticed a couple of things about it. It has a headlight balance and swings more easily than you would expect for a 315g frame, and I am often a little early to the ball. Especially if you put weight onto the head of your Radical, the different balance and swingweight might be throwing you off. It also does not have a very big sweet spot due to the relatively narrow head, but the feel is sublime when you catch it there. When used well, this frame can have a great blend of stability, control, feel, and power.

I’d recommend continuing to play with it for a while and see if your timing and contact point get dialed in. By my third session I was having a pretty good time with it. However, it will always be harder to use and less forgiving than the more typical 98 and 100” frames that are targeted towards most club players. If you want to maximize your match success and you are a rec-level player, this probably isn’t the frame to use.

Click to expand...

Well no one wants to play to lose. At least I dont know anyone.

I want maximize success but also move up in the game. What do you suggest?

Also my son has been playing tennis for 2 years. He is 11. He uses Pro staff 97 L with 4g added. I want him to slowly transition into 95 in a year or two so he can develop precision in his game...suggestions

I play at a local club with friends but we are all very competitive and tennis has become sort of matter of pride. Many of us are up against ball boys who have been hitting dor 20 plus years. Hunh! Do the put you in your place!

Godfather said:

It is
Head Graphene 360+ Prestige Pro
The strings I mentioned already are luxilon Alu Power.


I am wondering if I made a mistake but also questioning whether 95, albeit small sweet spot, will improve my game- if so in what sense?


I play 5 times a weeks for past 2 years.

Click to expand...

Alu Power at what tension? I have played with fully poly at 48 or 50 lbs and it worked well; or a hybrid at 52.
It will take a while if you are coming from a 100 sq inch racquet, but is very good once used to it!

Godfather said:

I play at a local club with friends but we are all very competitive and tennis has become sort of matter of pride. Many of us are up against ball boys who have been hitting dor 20 plus years. Hunh! Do the put you in your place!

Click to expand...

Believe it or not , 360+ Prestige Mid (93) has a noticeably much much bigger sweetspot than 360+ PP and also plays like a 95. Maybe get one as well because they are on clearance?

kailash said:

Alu Power at what tension? I have played with fully poly at 48 or 50 lbs and it worked well; or a hybrid at 52.
It will take a while if you are coming from a 100 sq inch racquet, but is very good once used to it!

Click to expand...

50
My last racket was 98sqInch

yessir said:

Believe it or not , 360+ Prestige Mid (93) has a noticeably much much bigger sweetspot than 360+ PP and also plays like a 95. Maybe get one as well because they are on clearance?

Click to expand...

93 is on my list but not available where i live.

I think part of the problem is you are correlating head size with precision. A smaller head size doesn’t necessarily mean more precise. If you are using the racquet as a training tool to hit the sweet spot then just buy one of those wooden spoon racquets. If you want to win matches use something more suited to your game. There’s a reason that there aren’t many 95 options. With all of that being said I use the touch prestige pro and the Xt prestige pro, I tried the 360+ version and did not like it. It was too muted and vague feeling.

Godfather said:

I play at a local club with friends but we are all very competitive and tennis has become sort of matter of pride. Many of us are up against ball boys who have been hitting dor 20 plus years. Hunh! Do the put you in your place!

Click to expand...

The Prestige Pro that you have should be perfect for indoors on a hard court. If you play outdoors (in the wind), and/or on a clay (har-tru, rubico) then it’s a different story.

Godfather said:

Explain a bit on the stiffness aspect of it, please.

Click to expand...

Sure thing...

For me *personally*, stiffer 66+ RA frames offer more power in general, and not needing to hit right on the sweet spot every shot for them to work, so it kinda feels like their sweet spot are bigger. (again, for me)

(**that is: assume you don't string it super tight or using super stiff strings**)

An example for comparison: Youtek / IG PPs are stiffer and offer way more power and thus easier to heavy-hit for me, compared to all the Graphene PP iterations.

-- Even 360+ which is stiffer than the previous Graphene iterations, is still no match.

The Graphene iterations of Radical Pros, however, are much stiffer and more powerful than their PP counterparts, thus have bigger sweet spots for me.

(then again, they are also slightly bigger in head size anyway)

TennisHound said:

The Prestige Pro that you have should be perfect for indoors on a hard court. If you play outdoors (in the wind), and/or on a clay (har-tru, rubico) then it’s a different story.

Click to expand...

I play outdoors. Hard and clay both.

JOSHL said:

I think part of the problem is you are correlating head size with precision. A smaller head size doesn’t necessarily mean more precise. If you are using the racquet as a training tool to hit the sweet spot then just buy one of those wooden spoon racquets. If you want to win matches use something more suited to your game. There’s a reason that there aren’t many 95 options. With all of that being said I use the touch prestige pro and the Xt prestige pro, I tried the 360+ version and did not like it. It was too muted and vague feeling.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying. This is probably one of THE reasons for this thread. I mean i have played with it twice now. Second day was much better. In fact i beat my opponent 6-3 and 6-0. Shots have started to come on the spot. Lets see how it fares tomorrow. BUT i am trying to figure out whats all the craze with MIDs! Playing with it to see if i can figure it out.

You hit the nail asking why are they not made that many anymore....why is that- may be there is some level of difficulty that comes with smaller Head sizes?

Interestingly my coach used to say oh I love 95s. They have the best sweet spots etc but I never saw him or anyone else in my club play with them.



Day 3
Shots were not sweet. Uncontrolled. May be its strung too tight. I have a strong feeling its done at 60. Whereas with MID and Luxilon it should be 52. No more.

Day 4
I have to say my serves today were much better today.

In 1999, I changed the Head Radical Tour 690 (107) to the Head Prestige Tour 600 (93). I must say that at first I was in a state of shock, but after a couple of years I came to my senses and got involved in the game with such a small racket and have been playing it for 22 years. So relax, buddy, it's going to be hard for the first couple of years.))

Prestige Maniac said:

In 1999, I changed the Head Radical Tour 690 (107) to the Head Prestige Tour 600 (93). I must say that at first I was in a state of shock, but after a couple of years I came to my senses and got involved in the game with such a small racket and have been playing it for 22 years. So relax, buddy, it's going to be hard for the first couple of years.))

Click to expand...

Ok well you gave me one more reason to hunt for 93 as its not available in the local market.

Godfather said:

Ok well you gave me one more reason to hunt for 93 as its not available in the local market.

Click to expand...

The Prestige Tour 600 is really a 89.x - suppose if you are going for. 93, what real difference will it make. Lol.
How different is a Prestige Tour 600 to a Prestige Classic 600?

When I did a little research on current midsizes, reading reviews on TW, looking at specs, etc, I got the impression that the last iteration of the Prestige Pro wasn't a very good racquet. Small sweetspot and hard to play with was the overall theme for this racquet.

Ended up picking up a couple 93p from Classifieds here. Not a sexy racquet but a really good midsize after a little customisation.

Kawasaki Kanagawa said:

When I did a little research on current midsizes, reading reviews on TW, looking at specs, etc, I got the impression that the last iteration of the Prestige Pro wasn't a very good racquet. Small sweetspot and hard to play with was the overall theme for this racquet.

Ended up picking up a couple 93p from Classifieds here. Not a sexy racquet but a really good midsize after a little customisation.

Click to expand...

Prestige 360+ Mid is so much better

esm said:

How different is a Prestige Tour 600 to a Prestige Classic 600?

Click to expand...

in my opinion, the head classic 600 is more stiffer, and it seemed to me that its feeling of the ball was worse. When I took head classic after head prestige tour, I felt uncomfortable. the racket is the same size, weight, etc., but the feeling of the ball is more stupid or something.

at the same time, the head prestige tour had a vibration damper built into the handle, but the feeling of the ball was better, oddly enough.

maybe other people have different impressions.

esm said:

The Prestige Tour 600 is really a 89.x - suppose if you are going for. 93, what real difference will it make. Lol.
How different is a Prestige Tour 600 to a Prestige Classic 600?

Click to expand...

The difference is the handles. The Prestige Tour has the suspension grip handle and the Prestige Classic has traditional pallets. I preferred the feel of the Prestige Classic. It was more direct with better feeldback for me

I use the Prestige Pro (PP), red, 360+, 95 sq in. I've been using it for 16 months. I've never tried the Prestige Mid, 93 sq in, but it's heavier, and I've heard it's harder to use than the 95 sq in. You can order the 93 sq in from Tennis Warehouse for $119. My first session with the PP was a demo and I was hitting the court in the exact spot I was aiming for. I thought it was a bit heavy, but thought it wasn't too heavy. I loved the stability, precision, control. I thought it had enough power for me. I returned the demo and bought one. After a few sessions, I didn't like the weight (too heavy) and the small head (for defense and volleying). I tried many other rackets, but always came back to my PP because it was better. I almost switched to the Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 100 v13. It has pretty much the same control, precision and stability, but is a little lighter and has a bigger head. I went back to the PP because it's a little better.

I've tried many strings (I always use poly/multi hybrid). The best string I like is Solinco Confidential 1.25mm in the main at 50 lbs and Head Velocity natural color 1.30mm in the cross at 54lbs. The Confidential has an amazing combo of power, feel, and control. It's actually a pretty stiff string and that's why there's a lot of control, but it feels soft and powerful. I'm not sure how Solinco accomplished that. And it's not too expensive. I am going to try some other strings soon, but I have a feeling I'm going to go back to Confidential. And I'm always using Confidential during league and ladder matches. I've never tried ALU Power, but I'm guessing that string is pretty soft, for a poly. Maybe go lower tension. And/or maybe try Luxilon Element in the cross. Element is really soft, maybe Luxilon's softest poly. Emma Raducanu uses ALU Power in the main and Element in the cross. When I used a stiffer string in the past on my PP the ball wouldn't go anywhere on non sweet spot hits and it felt harsh. Now I get some power on non sweet spot hits, enough to get it over the net.

One other racket I tried recently that I like a lot is the Wilson Clash 98. A lot of control, stability, feel, and enough power. The PP is better though.

I'm guessing your previous racket was the Head Graphene XT Radical MP. I believe that racket is stiffer than the PP. In my opinion, the graphene 360+ is stiff (graphene) in the right places and flexible (spiral fibers) in the right places to give great power, feel, stability, and comfort.

I tried some lead tape on my PP. First I put 2 grams in the handle. I was trying to make it more maneuverable. The added weight made my serve faster. The racket was slightly more whippy, but I lost a lot of stability and control. Then I added 2 grams to 2 and 10 o'clock and left the 2 grams in the handle. The stability and control was still very bad. I took all the lead tape off. I believe the racket is best without any mods. My PP is 307 grams without strings and mods.

From videos I've watched the PP has been called the most precision and control racket (Tennis Spin - referred to whole Prestige line), the most stable racket (Mike Komen - referred to PP), great control, stability, and pinpoint precision (TennisNerd - referred to whole Prestige line, but he prefers MP).

Prestige Maniac said:

in my opinion, the head classic 600 is more stiffer, and it seemed to me that its feeling of the ball was worse. When I took head classic after head prestige tour, I felt uncomfortable. the racket is the same size, weight, etc., but the feeling of the ball is more stupid or something.

at the same time, the head prestige tour had a vibration damper built into the handle, but the feeling of the ball was better, oddly enough.

maybe other people have different impressions.

Click to expand...

vsbabolat said:

The difference is the handles. The Prestige Tour has the suspension grip handle and the Prestige Classic has traditional pallets. I preferred the feel of the Prestige Classic. It was more direct with better feeldback for me

Click to expand...

thanks both - that's what I thought about the suspension grip too, just wanted to check with the experts. thanks.

Has anyone tried ALU Power and the ALU spin combo on PP?

Today I played after a few rainy days. Unfortunately i am loosing a lot of power in rallies and even netting a few balls. Serve wise 95 is going good for me. Luckily my partner was good enough player to cover my mistakes.

I'm having a similar experience with the same racquet. Switched from the 2018 vcore pro 97 330. Looking for something similar but just a little lighter because during the summer the 330 starts tiring me out if I have to play singles and doubles matches in the same day. Demoed the PP and liked it but haven't enjoyed my first 2 weeks since buying it. Currently strung with Völkl cyclone at 51 lbs. In stock it feels great for volleys and forehands, but my serve is too slow and my one handed backhand is terrible (strange for a 95). Added leather and around 3 g total at 9 and 11 to bring it to identical specs as my vcore pros (350 g), so hopefully I'll get a better comparison now. I suspect the PP also needs livelier strings line ALU power at a lower tension. Used to use 90 and 93 head sizes not that many years ago, but this 95 feels small or I've just been spoiled by the yonex 97

An other week with Prestige Pro 95”. I noticed I am getting so much used to it that even rackets which are lighter but with larger head seem somewhat awkward to play with. Slowly getting power into the shots. May be need more strengthening exercises for core and arms- plus I have to make extra effort on making sure I am hitting the top spin and finishing the drive properly in order to get some power balls over the net but inside the baseline. Nutshell its less forgiving in every which way but sort of trains you into hitting the ball perfectly every time. The only concern is its weight that will require me to keep my arm in good shape and do some core exercises to make sure I am not hitting easy returns. Also need to experiment with the strings. Right now its ALU Power and tension is higher then I would like on this racket. May be ALU Power rough to get some extra top spin out of it?
Any suggestions regarding strings.

BTW I do not use over grip.

Godfather said:

An other week with Prestige Pro 95”. I noticed I am getting so much used to it that even rackets which are lighter but with larger head seem somewhat awkward to play with. Slowly getting power into the shots. May be need more strengthening exercises for core and arms- plus I have to make extra effort on making sure I am hitting the top spin and finishing the drive properly in order to get some power balls over the net but inside the baseline. Nutshell its less forgiving in every which way but sort of trains you into hitting the ball perfectly every time. The only concern is its weight that will require me to keep my arm in good shape and do some core exercises to make sure I am not hitting easy returns. Also need to experiment with the strings. Right now its ALU Power and tension is higher then I would like on this racket. May be ALU Power rough to get some extra top spin out of it?
Any suggestions regarding strings.

BTW I do not use over grip.

Click to expand...

I will recommend giving Head Lynx Tour 17 a try.

I started using PP95 only recently. It's been only a week or so. My go to has been RF97. Honestly, I started using PP95 only out of curiosity and to experiment with something other than my RF97. So far I have tried Head Lynx Tour 17. I am surprised at how well it has worked. I was originally skeptical. You might want to give it a try. I am yet to experiment with more strings on it. With RF97, I either go hybrid with gut/poly (crazy expensive) or full poly (Alu rough).

Regarding getting used to this racquet, I can't really speak for transition from any other racquet to this. Since I haven't used much apart from RF97. During my beginner days, I used pure drive 110 extensively. Although I have never looked back after switching to RF97. I am strictly guessing now, it may be smaller headsize your shots are getting used to. For me switch from pure drive to rf97 improved precision. I am used to taking full swings and complete follow throughs, you know mostly following all the basics in every shot.

I highly recommend doing strength building/improvement exercises. It helped me tremendously. I don't use weights but use resistance bands to exercise at home. That got me feeling better when using these racquets and use them to their full potentials.

I do use an overgrip, the wilson pro overgrip on all of my racquets. That overgrip works better for my palm.

What tension did you string Head Lynx Tour 17g?

Long time RF97 user here: One of my students uses the Prestige Pro. You have to take really big cuts at the ball for it to be effective, especially in stock form. You also need to hit with lots of spin as the sweet spot is relatively small. It doesn't give you anything for free, you have to work for everything. Against better competition you have to have excellent movement and an aggressive attacking style of play. Even when modded you have to work.

I actually just switched to the old Head i Prestige MP, which is light years better than any Head frame made after perhaps the YouTek IG Prestige line. Those old Head sticks are phenomenal and make the majority of modern Head frames feel like tinny junk.

asifallasleep said:

Those old Head sticks are phenomenal and make the majority of modern Head frames feel like tinny junk.

Click to expand...

If their classic stuff was so phenomenal, why did HEAD stop selling them?

HitMoreBHs said:

If their classic stuff was so phenomenal, why did HEAD stop selling them?

Click to expand...

Cos' Head's recent "Focus Groups" feed them BAD INTEL ...

They assumed the "modern game" will need sub 11.5 oz strung frames, AND all of a sudden, either the new generation competition players (the targeted user groups) arms are now made of tofu, OR only richer elderlies (retired competition level players but now need lighter yet softer frames for their arm problems) who can afford these frames are interested in buying them in mass ...

(However, the sales figures proved otherwise where 3 consecutive generations of PP with lower than expected sales records. Recently they tried to adjust with the G360+ iteration to be closer to the Pre-Graphene PPs)

Like asifallasleep mentioned: the LAST PP 95 that was used by competition players WIDELY in all levels (high school-college-tour) in stock form was YT-IG PP.

@Godfather try string it at 42/40 before giving up on the frame. Should provide a more forgiving response and open up the sweet spot.

Has anyone tried Auxetic Prestige Tour? What's your review?

PaulC said:

Cos' Head's recent "Focus Groups" feed them BAD INTEL ...

They assumed the "modern game" will need sub 11.5 oz strung frames, AND all of a sudden, either the new generation competition players (the targeted user groups) arms are now made of tofu, OR only richer elderlies (retired competition level players but now need lighter yet softer frames for their arm problems) who can afford these frames are interested in buying them in mass ...

(However, the sales figures proved otherwise where 3 consecutive generations of PP with lower than expected sales records. Recently they tried to adjust with the G360+ iteration to be closer to the Pre-Graphene PPs)

Like asifallasleep mentioned: the LAST PP 95 that was used by competition players WIDELY in all levels (high school-college-tour) in stock form was YT-IG PP.

Click to expand...

This is what I used to think, too. However, I'm not so sure that is the case. Racquet manufacturers are a business first and foremost, which means the financial bottom line comes well ahead of issues such as tradition and sentimentalism ("this is how it should be and how we have always done it"), or pandering to the smaller, advanced player end or the consumer market ("this is what all players should aspire use"); or the vociferous gearheads that populate forums like TTW.

Racquet design will always be predominantly based on what will most likely generate the strongest sales in the biggest part of the consumer market. If the iPrestige MP is some sort of ultimate stick, HEAD would never have stopped selling it in some existing form, under some sort of new paint and technology disguise. Consumers would chase for them to the ends of the earth.

Tour pros will use whatever gives them the best, consistent competitive performance. Even they have moved away from 95sq in racquets. In a few short years, the 95s will go the way of the 85/89/90/93 sticks. If 95s worked so well in the modern game, they would still predominate on tour.

On just about every internet forum, on just about every hobby, there will always be a strong voice of die-hards who will opine for the greatness of classic equipment and label current gear as "cheap, (Chinese made) junk". Part of this perception is driven by the relative scarcity of classic equipment. However, the one sport where this has largely disappered is golf where launch monitors have eg: stopped the ego driven use of stiff, heavy shafts ("I'm a single handicapper, I can't use anything but stiff shafts"). When the objective numbers demonstrate gains of 15yds with no loss of accuracy using a more flexible, lighter shaft, one changes willingly. Unfortunately, we aren't there yet with tennis. Until then, subjective opinion and perception around the greatness of classic gear, not necessarily well suited to the modern game will continue.

HitMoreBHs said:

This is what I used to think, too. However, I'm not so sure that is the case. Racquet manufacturers are a business first and foremost, which means the financial bottom line comes well ahead of issues such as tradition and sentimentalism ("this is how it should be and how we have always done it"), or pandering to the smaller, advanced player end or the consumer market ("this is what all players should aspire use"); or the vociferous gearheads that populate forums like TTW.

Racquet design will always be predominantly based on what will most likely generate the strongest sales in the biggest part of the consumer market. If the iPrestige MP is some sort of ultimate stick, HEAD would never have stopped selling it in some existing form, under some sort of new paint and technology disguise. Consumers would chase for them to the ends of the earth.

Tour pros will use whatever gives them the best, consistent competitive performance. Even they have moved away from 95sq in racquets. In a few short years, the 95s will go the way of the 85/89/90/93 sticks. If 95s worked so well in the modern game, they would still predominate on tour.

On just about every internet forum, on just about every hobby, there will always be a strong voice of die-hards who will opine for the greatness of classic equipment and label current gear as "cheap, (Chinese made) junk". Part of this perception is driven by the relative scarcity of classic equipment. However, the one sport where this has largely disappered is golf where launch monitors have eg: stopped the ego driven use of stiff, heavy shafts ("I'm a single handicapper, I can't use anything but stiff shafts"). When the objective numbers demonstrate gains of 15yds with no loss of accuracy using a more flexible, lighter shaft, one changes willingly. Unfortunately, we aren't there yet with tennis. Until then, subjective opinion and perception around the greatness of classic gear, not necessarily well suited to the modern game will continue.

Click to expand...

Whatever works for you is the best. I shouldn't be using a 95 sqin because my skill level is not that high, but I like the Prestige Pro 95 sqin better than anything else. I don't understand how people use Babolats because they're so stiff, but some people like it, I guess. Everybody likes something different.

Most of the pros use pro stock versions of rackets that are much different. They also stick with rackets that came out a long time ago. They also customize a lot. I suspect college players, high level juniors also have pro stocks that are customized.

I haven't used the older Prestige models, but I think the new technologies and materials are fantastic! The problem with old rackets is that after you hit with them for a year a two, the stiffness goes away and it's too flexible. I don't think new Head rackets are junk. I think what's a better racket compared to others is a personal opinion that is different for everyone.

Yes, racquet companies are here to make money. That is best achieved by making your products as cheap as possible to make and sell them as high as possible. Standard stuff. With every generation of racquet “paint”, there is new tech to use as an advertising tool, and in reality that new tech is designed to be cheaper to produce while somewhat retaining some good properties that are needed for a tennis racquet.

Head could still make i.Prestige quality racquets but then the profit margin will be much lower, even if they sell the same amount or more. Higher quality products always cost more.

HitMoreBHs said:

This is what I used to think, too. However, I'm not so sure that is the case. Racquet manufacturers are a business first and foremost, which means the financial bottom line comes well ahead of issues such as tradition and sentimentalism ("this is how it should be and how we have always done it"), or pandering to the smaller, advanced player end or the consumer market ("this is what all players should aspire use"); or the vociferous gearheads that populate forums like TTW.

Racquet design will always be predominantly based on what will most likely generate the strongest sales in the biggest part of the consumer market. If the iPrestige MP is some sort of ultimate stick, HEAD would never have stopped selling it in some existing form, under some sort of new paint and technology disguise. Consumers would chase for them to the ends of the earth.

Tour pros will use whatever gives them the best, consistent competitive performance. Even they have moved away from 95sq in racquets. In a few short years, the 95s will go the way of the 85/89/90/93 sticks. If 95s worked so well in the modern game, they would still predominate on tour.

On just about every internet forum, on just about every hobby, there will always be a strong voice of die-hards who will opine for the greatness of classic equipment and label current gear as "cheap, (Chinese made) junk". Part of this perception is driven by the relative scarcity of classic equipment. However, the one sport where this has largely disappered is golf where launch monitors have eg: stopped the ego driven use of stiff, heavy shafts ("I'm a single handicapper, I can't use anything but stiff shafts"). When the objective numbers demonstrate gains of 15yds with no loss of accuracy using a more flexible, lighter shaft, one changes willingly. Unfortunately, we aren't there yet with tennis. Until then, subjective opinion and perception around the greatness of classic gear, not necessarily well suited to the modern game will continue.

Click to expand...

You are correct on some points and incorrect on others.

Current pros using a 95:
Novak Djokovic
Daniil Medvedev
Denis Shapovalov
Stan Wawrinka
Dan Evans
Andy Murray
Aslan Karatsev
Alexei Popyrin
Marcos Giron
Philip Kohlschreiber
Reilly Opelka
Roberto Bautista Agut
Leonardo Mayer
Thomaz Bellucci
Lukas Rosol
Dušan Lajović
Bruno Soares
Horia Tecau
Taylor Fritz
Koepfer
Ivashka
Diego Schwartzman
Garin
Hanfmann
Dusan Lajovic
Kyle Edmund

95's won't be disappearing anytime soon.

Now, raw materials are more scarce and more expensive vs the old days, and tennis is more popular, so yes, the manufacturers mass produce now with cheaper materials, in China, that is a fact. Old Head frames were Made in Austria, with quality more plentiful materials on a much smaller scale.

LordRaceR said:

Yes, racquet companies are here to make money. That is best achieved by making your products as cheap as possible to make and sell them as high as possible. Standard stuff. With every generation of racquet “paint”, there is new tech to use as an advertising tool, and in reality that new tech is designed to be cheaper to produce while somewhat retaining some good properties that are needed for a tennis racquet.

Head could still make i.Prestige quality racquets but then the profit margin will be much lower, even if they sell the same amount or more. Higher quality products always cost more.

Click to expand...

This guy knows what he's talking about!!!

asifallasleep said:

Now, raw materials are more scarce and more expensive vs the old days, and tennis is more popular, so yes, the manufacturers mass produce now with cheaper materials, in China, that is a fact. Old Head frames were Made in Austria, with quality more plentiful materials on a much smaller scale.

Click to expand...

This is common cynicism with no real evidence. I'm in my 5th decade and have owned and played with lots of MiA HEAD racquets. I used the PT600 as my main racquet for almost 25yrs. I can tell you that QC variance was no different in the MiA days. There is some irony that the iPrestige you regard so highly received more than it's share of criticism when it was released c.2001. It wasn't any different back then with the usual clamour of "Nothing like my Prestige Classic / Pro Tour", "cheaper materials evident", "pseudo-technology", "what was HEAD thinking" etc.

As I said, this sort of sentimentalism for classic gear (and criticism of modern equipment) abounds on just about every internet forum, on just about every hobby. Where objective performance data is recordable such as with golf, the sentimentalism disappears fast (no more opining for classic persimmon drivers, for example).

I'm not disagreeing that the iPrestige is a great racquet, which it is. Nor am I saying that it's a poor choice to use a 95 if it works for you. However, I will happily agree to disagree about the idea that classic gear is the best and current gear is junk.

HitMoreBHs said:

This is what I used to think, too. However, I'm not so sure that is the case. Racquet manufacturers are a business first and foremost, which means the financial bottom line comes well ahead of issues such as tradition and sentimentalism ("this is how it should be and how we have always done it"), or pandering to the smaller, advanced player end or the consumer market ("this is what all players should aspire use"); or the vociferous gearheads that populate forums like TTW.

On just about every internet forum, on just about every hobby, there will always be a strong voice of die-hards who will opine for the greatness of classic equipment and label current gear as "cheap, (Chinese made) junk". Part of this perception is driven by the relative scarcity of classic equipment. However, the one sport where this has largely disappered is golf where launch monitors have eg: stopped the ego driven use of stiff, heavy shafts ("I'm a single handicapper, I can't use anything but stiff shafts"). When the objective numbers demonstrate gains of 15yds with no loss of accuracy using a more flexible, lighter shaft, one changes willingly. Unfortunately, we aren't there yet with tennis. Until then, subjective opinion and perception around the greatness of classic gear, not necessarily well suited to the modern game will continue.

Click to expand...

The above folks have addressed many of your points, so I just deal with this one...

You got it backward. For a tennis frame, to make a frame lighter AND flex-ier does NOT make it more powerful and easier to use.

It is the OPPOSITE.

Example: IG PP is wayyyyyyy more poweful than the Graphene PP 95s until 360+, which Head CORRECTED it by adding back a bit of stiffness and weight and thus more power to it. The latest A PT 95 continues this corrected trend by adding back even more swingweight.

And hmhm... Head did it per reviewers like those from TW and on this board, and then sales figures on PP 95 improved back a bit. (at least no more unsold PP frames sales for $69-79 everywhere !)

TW forum posters may know way more than you realized, given many of them own or work in Pro shops, and some got MBAs and worked for major corps.

BTW, I am NOT against more comfortable flexes, but it should NOT come at the expense of power when the original design of the frame is a controlled-power one FOR COMPETITION LEVEL players. (at least since YT PP)

I have yet to hear a single competition-level user who uses 65-68 RA (95-98 size) frames hurt his arm after 10+ years. The 360+ also plays pretty comfortable with a 65 RA anyway, which proved the point.

PaulC said:

The above folks have addressed many of your points, so I just deal with this one...

You got it backward. For a tennis frame, to make a frame lighter AND flex-ier does NOT make it more powerful and easier to use.

It is the OPPOSITE.

Example: IG PP is wayyyyyyy more poweful than the Graphene PP 95s until 360+, which Head CORRECTED it by adding back a bit of stiffness and weight and thus more power to it. The latest A PT 95 continues this corrected trend by adding back even more swingweight.

And hmhm... Head did it per reviewers like those from TW and on this board, and then sales figures on PP 95 improved back a bit. (at least no more unsold PP frames sales for $69-79 everywhere !)

TW forum posters may know way more than you realized, given many of them own or work in Pro shops, and some got MBAs and worked for major corps.

BTW, I am NOT against more comfortable flexes, but it should NOT come at the expense of power when the original design of the frame is a controlled-power one FOR COMPETITION LEVEL players. (at least since YT PP)

I have yet to hear a single competition-level user who uses 65-68 RA (95-98 size) frames hurt his arm after 10+ years. The 360+ also plays pretty comfortable with a 65 RA anyway, which proved the point.

Click to expand...

My example of lighter and more flexible was in the case of golf shafts. I never said it applied to tennis. I never denigrated anyone's knowledge, so not sure why you felt the need to get defensive about the experience and qualifications of forum posters here.

The main point of my posts is simply to provide a counterpoint to the more typical "classic stuff if amazing, new stuff is junk" ideology that tends to predominate on boards such as TTW. I've played with so many younger partners over the years who lust after classic gear due to hanging out here. I say to them that in another 20 years, they'll either be one of the classic gear (though what this is does evolve forward) devoted, or be more pragmatically receptive to modern equipment (as I tend to be). There's no right or wrong. Pick what works for you.

HitMoreBHs said:

My example of lighter and more flexible was in the case of golf shafts. I never said it applied to tennis. I never denigrated anyone's knowledge, so not sure why you felt the need to get defensive about the experience and qualifications of forum posters here.

The main point of my posts is simply to provide a counterpoint to the more typical "classic stuff if amazing, new stuff is junk" ideology that tends to predominate on boards such as TTW. I've played with so many younger partners over the years who lust after classic gear due to hanging out here. I say to them that in another 20 years, they'll either be one of the classic gear (though what this is does evolve forward) devoted, or be more pragmatically receptive to modern equipment (as I tend to be). There's no right or wrong. Pick what works for you.

Click to expand...

Hey, its YOU who did NOT choose your words carefully, and make it sounds like all the previous posters on this thread know nothing about the racquet market and are merely "classics worshipers" ...

I doubt you have hit with all the iterations of PP 95 before you posted on this thread, like many of these posters did. Peoples were talking about why certain PP 95 was better than the other, and why they think so.

Did you talk about any of these?

These posters, many already spent $$ on all these newer iterations of PP, yours truly included, merely expressed our views on which PP 95 is better, which you may agree or disagree.

There is no need to stretch your points about "classics worshiping" on this thread , which is irrelevant anyway.