18x19 pattern Club - Djokovic, Medvedev, Agassi and...

[DariaGT]

Djokovic counters and absorbs plenty with that plush setup and is likely softest No1 stick since McEnroe?
yet most tennis enthusiasts would play best with a Wilson nTour Two nCode 95 16 x 20 or Cx200
than an exact Djokovic unit day 2-3 times a week.

Almost same flex, feel, yet lighter, more power, spin, cheaper, forgiving of inconsistent mechanics and lack of stamina

 

[ClaudTT]

We need more 18x19 frames

If Babolat doesn't make the pattern is not good enough... for the population of the world.
Head has not jumped into the bandwagon either... and they only custom 1819 for the No 1...
Novak and Daniil use 1819 rackets THEY only get....

What is so good about the 1819 pattern if only pros can play with it ???

 

[WYK]

If Babolat doesn't make the pattern is not good enough... for the population of the world.
Head has not jumped into the bandwagon either... and they only custom 1819 for the No 1...
Novak and Daniil use 1819 rackets THEY only get....

What is so good about the 1819 pattern if only pros can play with it ???

Head makes an 18X19 Prestige, and have been for years.

 

[galapagos]

Head makes an 18X19 Prestige, and have been for years.

But whenever they release it they treat it a bit like „ahhh whatever, lets make a frame with 18x19 lol, Who cares” especially if they have a mega-booster endorser Djokovic.
I remember their frame prestige s (something) was really great but a hidden gem as well. I think it was early graphene model.
Anyway - head is making it another way with keeping the string pattern but increasing headsizes (speed pro, gravity pro, even newest prestige is now 98”)

 

[ClaudTT]

Head makes an 18X19 Prestige, and have been for years.

..anybody playing it here ??

 

[ClaudTT]

But whenever they release it they treat it a bit like „ahhh whatever, lets make a frame with 18x19 lol, Who cares” especially if they have a mega-booster endorser Djokovic.
I remember their frame prestige s (something) was really great but a hidden gem as well. I think it was early graphene model.
Anyway - head is making it another way with keeping the string pattern but increasing headsizes (speed pro, gravity pro, even newest prestige is now 98”)

The performance of the Prestige 99sqin 1819 frame is not even close to the 1619 Radical 98sqin...
Therefore, they only have the extraterrestrial with 360 SW playing a 95sqin ... custom made and tuned by Roman Prokes in NY.
Conclusion: they don't know how to make a model for the rest of us...

 

[Trip]

..anybody playing it here ??

Yes, occasionally. I have three G360+ Prestige Tours. Well-balanced stick, albeit head-heavier, higher twist weight and medium-high stock swing weight make it better for a 2-handed backhand, and I play mostly a OHBH, but nevertheless, it's still a great stick for the right player.

The performance of the Prestige 99sqin 1819 frame is not even close to the 1619 Radical 98sqin...

I'd beg to differ. I have both sticks, and at least as of G360+, the Prestige Tour, and it's 15+ twist weight spread across 18 mains, runs circles around the Rad MP and Pro for lateral stability, overall string bed consistency, stock plow-through and counterpunch returns. I wouldn't expect anything to change with the Auxetic versions, either.

In summary, an 18x19 can still be relevant for the right player, and the current selection (Prestige Tour, TFight 305) do have their place, even if you, or I, or anyone, might not personally be compatible with one. I would hope you'd be able to see that, from a general perspective at least.

 

[ClaudTT]

Yes, occasionally. I have three G360+ Prestige Tours. Well-balanced stick, albeit head-heavier, higher twist weight and medium-high stock swing weight make it better for a 2-handed backhand, and I play mostly a OHBH, but nevertheless, it's still a great stick for the right player.

I'd beg to differ. I have both sticks, and at least as of G360+, the Prestige Tour, and it's 15+ twist weight spread across 18 mains, runs circles around the Rad MP and Pro for lateral stability, overall string bed consistency, stock plow-through and counterpunch returns. I wouldn't expect anything to change with the Auxetic versions, either.

In summary, an 18x19 can still be relevant for the right player, and the current selection (Prestige Tour, TFight 305) do have their place, even if you, or I, or anyone, might not personally be compatible with one. I would hope you'd be able to see that, from a general perspective at least.

Personally I lean tours smaller heads 95-97 sqin max. But even at 99 the Prestige 1819 string bed is quite dead on off center shots... even worse that 95 and not even close to Radical at 98.
So, not for me for sure. Right now I have 1620 set ups on 97&98 sqin that really perform.
Am going to test extensively TF ISO 305... and will see that well liked 1819 as it compares to the rest. As an engineer, I keep my judgement open...

 

[Trip]

But even at 99 the Prestige 1819 string bed is quite dead on off center shots... even worse that 95 and not even close to Radical at 98.

I would say incorrect. A direct precursor of off-center string bed response is Power Potential over the entire face of the string bed. Comparing the G360+ Tour / Auxetic MP to the G360+ and Auxetic Rad MP/Pro shows almost identical power potential gradient between 12 and 6, and actually more stability in the Prestige as you move towards 9 and 3, as per the TWU PP measurements below, and my own observations from playing both frames (click to enlarge):

So quite to the contrary, the 18x19 Prestige is extremely stable, and again, a perfectly viable option as a steady, reliable baseliner's all-court stick if there ever was one.

That is to take nothing away from preferring 16x20 97's or 98's, which have their own merits, but off-center stability is not exclusively one of them.

 

[ClaudTT]

That data seems to correlate with your observation, other independent reviews are not saying the same as these Maps for these frames.
So I would assume that this is conclusive for you and you are playing with frames based on these maps, right ?
Not me, I made that mistake before.

 

[Trip]

As for why I play my chosen frames, I don't play them because of these maps, or any other metrics, just for the sake of them, but, like most players, for how the racquet actually plays in-hand, and the 18x19 Prestige is a great frame in that regard. It just so happens that the metrics concerning stability and consistency also support my and others' observations on the frame being a stable, consistent stick. That said, if you've found reviews and/or data to indicate otherwise, I'd be interested to see links to them, so I can learn more. I always try to stay open-minded.

Going a layer deeper, as for which Prestige is my favorite, with a OHBH, I like the more head-light 16x19 model better (the G360+ S / Auxetic MP-L), but it doesn't reduce the appeal of the Tour/MP for those who like more mass in the head and/or have a 2HBH.

As for your personal tastes, those are fine, too. We each have our leanings. But pushing them out to be universal I think can be a slippery slope.

 

[ClaudTT]

As for why I play my chosen frames, I don't play them because of these maps, or any other metrics, just for the sake of them, but, like most players, for how the racquet actually plays in-hand, and the 18x19 Prestige is a great frame in that regard. It just so happens that the metrics concerning stability and consistency also support my and others' observations on the frame being a stable, consistent stick. That said, if you've found reviews and/or data to indicate otherwise, I'd be interested to see links to them, so I can learn more. I always try to stay open-minded.

Going a layer deeper, as for which Prestige is my favorite, with a OHBH, I like the more head-light 16x19 model better (the G360+ S / Auxetic MP-L), but it doesn't reduce the appeal of the Tour/MP for those who like more mass in the head and/or have a 2HBH.

As for your personal tastes, those are fine, too. We each have our leanings. But pushing them out to be universal I think can be a slippery slope.

I do not doubt that you have tested these frames and found a correlation with these maps, totally possible that they could match the many other parameters that the rackets have, that influence the efficiency that these maps are not showing.
They may be guidance they may not. If you look at how the test is done as described in the TW University and understand frame-string dynamics you can understand why different people have different 'opinions', but in reality the frames acts differently to what this power maps data suggest.
We have not even added various string types with frame interaction that greatly affect efficiency more than most parameters as any player could have experienced.
It is the big and the main reason why we have so many different options (thanks free market economy) that accommodate the variances, not power maps.
Tests and several other variants mentioned above make my choice of frame to play.

 

[DariaGT]

18x19 95-98 inches = Djokomeds counter-punch, passive aggressive attacking
18x20 95-98 = StefAgutEvanHecka all court game and accurate attacking
16x20 98 = RazRuneFils Aggressive attacking, power tennis all court game

18x20 98-100 = ZevRubs all court game with power finishes

16x19 100 = Sinner Aggressive attacking, power tennis
16x19 100 = Nadal variety with passive aggression

Seems 95-100 will be where it stays focused with a bias in the 98-100 with 16x20-18x20 respectively.

 

[galapagos]

Djokomeds counter-punch, passive aggressive attacking

this is me ! xd

 

[DariaGT]

I found the limitation is the string as Polys need changing often and since not pros who can
pull out a fresh strung racquet ever ball change I found the following for my needs

18x20 allows me more play time with 90-95 1.15-1.25mm
16x20 95 suits 1.30mm and 16x18 95 suits 1.35mm