Yes Ive found it is excellent on topspin serves and flat ones. I have 4 string savers at the 5th cross. For some reason it helps me with American Twist second serves and carving low slice backhands, Sampras used to do that and Fed with the old 90, I thought it was just silly then I tried it 5 years ago and liked it.
Interesting in a full bed of poly.
Yeah that's what I originally did with my YTPrestige MP and Pros and I like the effect... i can choose to hit something higher in the frame and get more bite/spin when I want it.Fed has a string saver on each of 10 center mains:
Note, this will increase tension.
I used Gut poly on my Prestiges and on my Fischer M Comp... I have a canopener serve that really swings wide that I like to hit sometimes and it helps for that as well. Funny thing is I havent gotten the canopener to work on this aAngell but I suspect I need to flare the butt a bit more... I use my pinky to help bring the stick around and since Im a violinist too my pinky is quite strong... it is like bow technique.
Well I am tall and i often toss too low. Ive been reworking my toss for the past 6 months to be higher (with a smoother more repeatable motion too) and ive seen good results. I still jump on 1sts but those are flatter or more traditional topspin. My 2nd is a twist and that gives a lot of clearance. What i like us the easy pace and spin i get with this stick. The contact has a satifying "thuk" to it too.
Glad to hear your enjoying the TC95. I am intrigued by this racquet but haven't got my ideal specs down to order one. I use a Dunlop Aerogel 4D 200 and I am looking for a little easier spin production, bigger sweet spot, more maneuverability and a more consistent(no hot spots) stringbed. I love the Aerogel 4D 200's feel on sweet spot, stability and plow through but want the aforementioned attributes in my next frame. What specs would you recommend for the TC95?
Yes contact Paul he knows more about frames than anyone on this site and its practical knowledge. That said a tc95 seems to make the most sense so you can get an 18x20 frame otherwise I'd suggest the TC 97 which has a similar RA to the Dunlop 200. Balance + weight the 320g/310 option with a C grip shape to resemble Dunlop seems good with room to tweek if it isnt. RA is trickier... the Ra 70 is really like 64 strung so id suggest that unless you know you like sub 60Ra frames... the ra63 is really more like a ra57 or 58.
The Redondo is about the same as the dunlop 200 95 but it isnt going to give him the more power and forgiveness he's looking for also the 57 RA is quite different than the 62 RA of the Dunlop, most cannot tell the difference between the 64 RA of the TC95 and the 62 of a TC97 and $d 200 Dunlop. Most consider the PKR is a relatively demanding stick like the 4d 200 so thats a lateral move.
Definitely "C"... B shape is super similar to my Head IG Prestige MP
Those H22's are quite rare but there are some Angell players who have extensive experience with pro stock... of course mr. Angell himself would be able to answer your question since he's dealt with pro players making their prostock frames... maybe @DNShade can answer your question too, he has extensive prostock experience.
Thanks... and yes that PCT is in a much lower powerclass like my Pacific X feel pro 95 is. Great frames but nothing on tap. TheDunlop 200's except the muscle weave 200G all have some power (the MW is like the PCT and XFP95). The next class of power up from the 4d200 would be the TC95 and 97. Paul did great job ofcreating sticks that are between the old dunlop 200 and 300 series... all the pinpoint accuracy an maneuverability of the best 200's with the spin and extra power of the 300 but more solid than anything in the Dunlop biomimetic line. I hear the Tc97 is reminiscent of the old James Blake prostock which was never made available for the public... It has differences of course (the cap-like grommets of course) and Im certain it has a slightly different layup but with engineering slightly different molds can achieve similar performance characteristics. The Tc95's speed and maneuverability is very good, better than any of the 200's Ive tried and more solid. Im starting to dial in the extra power and I LOVE all the free points on serve (that hiss of the ball) does unnerve opponents... especially the net guy in doubles.
Others will chime in here but I'd say the TC95 will feel instantly familiar to any PS95 player though the TC95 is far more solid and without the flex in the hoop (a good thing as that is the PS95's flaw). The 97inch Wilson so called pro staffs are different animal. The RF97 is a big club (with some tweener characteristics) and the TC95 and TC97 are more maneuverable. The TC97 is more prestige-like in feel apparently than the TC95. What you get with the Angell's is more room with specs and customization. My TC95 has a leather grip and weighs in at 357g strung and overgripped and it is a serving machine. During a doubles match some poor soul tried to SABR me on my second serves with his PS95. No dice, 0/5 attempts and they lost that set at 6-2.
Thanks, BHBH
Thank you. Maybe I'll give Paul a ring. Can you speak on the power and stability of your personal TC95 compared to that of the RF97A, which I used for a short period of time? I ventured into pro stocks and opted for the H22 and Yonex 95D because their stability exceeded that of the RF97A while still being more maneuverable. Sadly, neither of the racquets I use and love are very accessible.
i havent played with the RF97a yet... i kinda avoid anything that could get me accused of being a federer fanboy... wawrinka fanboy is another thing all together though we share some similar and someehat rare strokes... i get the feeling we both grew up watching edberg, becker and guga.
This is exactly what I also like about Angell. They have my records of what I like, use and repeat orders are matched to my previous frames. The less variables I have with my equipment, the better I am getting; it is tremendously satisfactory.
I cannot speak of the TC95, but the TC97s I have are the best racquets I have had for volleys, this is mainly because the weight and balance of my racquets are truly perfect for me and allows me to move the racquets around and slice the volleys, very comfortable. I just need to improve my volley techniques
Long answer to a simple question
:
I forget who did it but it really is 57-58 strung.
Long answer to a simple question
I do not have a lot of experience with varying types of frames, so I cannot speak to this being foam-filled and its relation to volleying. That being said, both of my forehand and backhand volleys have improved during the last three months considerably. Most of this is due to improvements in technique I think, but coincidentally the timeframe corresponds to when I started using Angell frames. The most improvement however came in with my swinging volleys; I had never been able to hit one before effectively, now it is one of my favorite shots, I just swing and voila!
At the same time I switched to Angell frames, I also switched to using full nat. gut, I think this is related. Touch volleys have been a bit difficult for me, although there is improvement there as well, I am very sensitive to string tension. If my racquets are strung below 50#, my touch volley are not good, the best for me is around 57-59#. I am not sure how much of that is racquet related. The racquet makes it very easy for me to sense and feel what works and what doesn't, I can immediately tell, for example, if I am tensing my arm or hitting in a relaxed mode, and the results are there to view.
Half-volleys have been relatively easy for me, but since I got the Angell's I am finding that I can hit them with greater pace and with more topspin. I think this attributable to the level of control the racquet offers me. If I am at the baseline, I can really swing it and be accurate with positioning and depth, if I am close to the net, all I have to do is a light touch block and control the depth only with racquet head angle.
As I mentioned somewhere previously, the frames I have take the racquet out of the equation for my bad shots and play. They feel as a natural extension to me, they never feel as the culprit to me making mistakes. So, in essence what remains fixing is my footwork, techniques and shot selection, no more racquet to blame. In contrast, when I was using the RF97A, although it was a great frame (none of my frames matched one another though), my OHBHs suffered quite a bit, I was late to most shots, and similarly my FH/BH volleys were always a little out rhythm. I knew I just did not have the right racquet, but out of everything I demo'd, the RF97A was the best overall. It was frustrating to deal with at times. I never feel I am late to any shot due to the racquet now, I really cannot blame the current frames for anything. Starting from 3.0 level to now knocking on the door of 4.0 level (need 4-6 more months), the Angell frames will support me through my progression and I won't need anything different I think. And, if I do, I'll have new Angells made for my new needs
First, thank you, and second, I think you are right, it was the solidity and stability of the RF97A. Although I don't miss those at all with the TC97, hadn't occurred to me until you mentioned.
I'll still offer my perspective on the string patterns:
Oh my friend is gonna love that news (might mean trouble for meFirst, thank you, and second, I think you are right, it was the solidity and stability of the RF97A. Although I don't miss those at all with the TC97, hadn't occurred to me until you mentioned.
Although you are more than equipped to make your own judgements
During my brief play with the Wilson PS97S I noticed the following differences vs. the RF97A excluding weight:
Now with the TC97, I really have better than good slice serves, my flat serves are better than with the RF97, BH slices are equally great to the 97S, block serve returns are there too, as well as short, high-angle topspins from mid-court. The only thing I think I am still missing is the slice serve returns, and when we add the superb volley control, I think the TC family of 16x19 offer more versatility compared to either Wilsons.
- My volleys with the 97S were more precise and had much more backspin to them
- My slice serve returns were easier to execute, particularly on the BH side with the 97S
- Flat blocks of serves were much better with the RF97, I had more depth with them
- Drop shots from the service line were again easier with the 97S, but I could do drop shots from the baseline more accurately with the RF97
- My flat serves with the RF97 were fantastic, vs. slice serves were a little bit better with the 97S
- My light touch topspin FHs were great with the RF97 vs. just could not do it with the 97S. These are the shots you execute inside the baseline to create wide angle, for some reason, I could not get enough spin with the 97S for them stay within the opponent's service box, I'd hit them out or had no pace so they were ineffective.
- My topspin FH/BH were really heavy with the RF97, whereas BH slices with the 97S from the baseline wouldn't even come off the ground, skipping all the way to the back wall, which were awesome
). He's a lefty and I often hit my right handers version of a McEnroe can opener to his BH (its a high kicking american twist) way out wide in the deuce court. This forces him to hit a high slice on a jumping ball. When he's on it creates a problem for me as it is a skidding slice I have to dig out with my very topspin oriented BH. As long as Im getting good action though he either puts it into the net, shanks it or it flats enough that he is utterly expecting my S&V off it to be a BH winner volley. He needs good maneuverability to handle that second serve from me. BTW his slice is wicked... he used to warm up female touring pros who needed practice hitting against wicked lefty slicers. We have good matches... he's a disrupter... Im a conductor.
Ha! Why would it be a secret?
I currently have it strung with full bed of signum pro firestorm at 54/52lbs. Its a 63ra frame
I'm just joking. Thanks a lot. I'm about to buy a reel of poly strings so I'm accumulating data at the moment. I like Signum Pro Poly Plasma but I might try something different this time.
One can never be sure around here
, Great I have tried SPPP too a couple of times in full bed and as a cross and liked it but you really need to try firestorm. It is IMO a level better than any of Signums offerings. I know
It plays great on my TC95, I use the 17ga though because of the denser 18x20 pattern.
Ive only hit with the RF a little and they are very different sticks. tc95 is more of a scalpel with more accuracy, plusher, muted and maneuverable. RF has more power and is very stable stock. There really is no stock tc95 so its hard to compare but both have plow at 12.6 oz., the tc95 has a bigger sweetspot imho. The RF is partially foam filled and braided graphite n kevlar but way stiffer. Think of the RF as a Mack truck and the TC 95 as an Aston Martin. Both are solid but in different ways. In most ways the tc95 resembles earlier pro staffs more in the way it plays than the rf97 does... The RF is more of a novel players tweener combo, the TC95 is kind of an updated classic players mid plus... plush but incredible spin production and serving. Both are server sticks.
DB its still a plush ride... my Pacific X feel pro 95 is more raw and less street...corners better but Im pretty sure I can play with the TC95 for another 5-10 years if I want. I hit with the Pacific for 3 shots and was amazed at how much more work it takes just to get the ball over the net. Its taking some adjustments from me but I like being able to take my time... TC95 is giving me a nudge towards a smoother game whereas the X Feel Pro 95 is kinda like being Errol Flynn on the court. Being able to crack winners from any position is nice... Im in my mid 40's and play people slightly younger or older and I move really well for such a geezer but I think it is smart to not rely on my movement for everything... especially when my game really is big and versatile off both wings. The pacific was always go go go... The Tc95 feels more court boss and less like being the roadrunner.
I agree to a point. For me timing is so important with my extreme one handed backhand and big return game... that takes getting used to the weight and the way a frame has to be prepped and swung. That said I like zero power from my strings in this Angell frame. Whereas, my old Pacific x feel pro 95 had no power so I chose two somewhat lively co-polys YPTP and Scorpion... I cant use those in the TC95. Also I dont want to up the tension... so perhaps Ill just stick to 16 gage strings and no more 17's.
If you want 17 gauge and low power + max control…
