Ask the Co-Designers of the RF 97 Autograph Questions!

[StringingIrvine]

Hi,
Just thought of another question:
Some older generation rackets (iprestiges, older volkl, etc) had a sort of rubber/elastic /matte paint. The coating on these rackets did not age well, they got all gummy, flaky, etc.

What steps have Wilson done to ensure that the paint is in fact going to last and not deteriorate over time? Was this a concern as this paint was different vs the traditional rackets?

 

[Wilson Official]

Hi,
Just thought of another question:
Some older generation rackets (iprestiges, older volkl, etc) had a sort of rubber/elastic /matte paint. The coating on these rackets did not age well, they got all gummy, flaky, etc.

What steps have Wilson done to ensure that the paint is in fact going to last and not deteriorate over time? Was this a concern as this paint was different vs the traditional rackets?

This paint is not the same paint as on the racquets you listed. It's been specifically engineered and tested to give a soft (but not rubbery) feel yet perform well on tennis racquets. I think one you hold one in your hand you will see how it's a very nice and unique finish and unlike the finish of the racquets you mentioned.
- Peter

 

[Wilson Official]

We actually refer to the finish as "Black Velvet" and I think that's a much more accurate description than 'elastic' (I'm guilty of using that term myself!) as elastic gives the impression the finish is rubbery which it's not. It's a smooth, soft, matte finish.

- Peter

 

[movdqa]

Hi,
Just thought of another question:
Some older generation rackets (iprestiges, older volkl, etc) had a sort of rubber/elastic /matte paint. The coating on these rackets did not age well, they got all gummy, flaky, etc.

What steps have Wilson done to ensure that the paint is in fact going to last and not deteriorate over time? Was this a concern as this paint was different vs the traditional rackets?

The PK Redondos had this finish and I don't think that it was popular.

They sold a ton of them but not because of the finish.

 

[Wilson Official]

Hi,
Just thought of another question:
Some older generation rackets (iprestiges, older volkl, etc) had a sort of rubber/elastic /matte paint. The coating on these rackets did not age well, they got all gummy, flaky, etc.

What steps have Wilson done to ensure that the paint is in fact going to last and not deteriorate over time? Was this a concern as this paint was different vs the traditional rackets?

it's hard to describe a tactile finish on the internet ...... but Sept 1st you guys will be able to feel it for yourself.... fall in love with it, and buy a dozen racquets each!

- Peter

 

[SpinToWin]

This was just a discussion directly about the new 97S model which is 19.5mm (as was the 2014 model) but simply has a more 'boxy' shape . The RF97 frame is unchanged.
Apologies for any confusion

- Peter

Any idea on how that influences on court performance?

Aside from GOAT shanks that is

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Any idea on how that influences on court performance?

Aside from GOAT shanks that is

+20% in power, precision, and feel on shanks.

 

[djNEiGht]

+20% in power, precision, and feel on shanks.

as well as shank winners

 

[djNEiGht]

duplicate post

 

[BreakPoint]

Peter,

I just have to say that this new design for the RF97A is absolutely awesome! Like Federer, I really love minimalistic designs. Less is more in my book.

If Jony Ive of Apple designed a tennis racquet, it would probably look like the new RF97A.

Congratulations on the new design! (If it were only on a PS 90, I'd buy lots of them. )

 

[borgpro]

The PK Redondos had this finish and I don't think that it was popular.

They sold a ton of them but not because of the finish.

Thought about these as well, always thought the gummy paint on them was very strange..

 

[TW Staff]

Attention Talk Tennis members- check out the other Wilson sticky on the racquet forum for the surprise that was mentioned in the first post.

Thanks,
Brittany, TW

 

[Startzel]

Actually the 97S is 310g unstrung and it's a 18x17 sting pattern so it's very much close to the spec you are after. I actually just got off the court playing with it (new version). Love it. It's now my go-to racquet.... although the RF97 is always in my bag and I probably play with it 40% of the time.

- Peter

Is there any chance we will get the 16x15 pattern back in the future?

Or do I need to stock up now?

 

[Wilson Official]

Is there any chance we will get the 16x15 pattern back in the future?

Or do I need to stock up now?

The PS97S has never been a 16x15 string pattern - it's always been 18x17.
The PS95S from 2+ years ago was a 16x15 but it was replaced by the PS97S.
- Peter

 

[dak95_00]

@Wilson Official

Nathan,

Arkansas huh? Who's better? You or my young Hollywood friend, Imraan?
(I'm hoping you might've played there when he did.)

 

[KitC]

Like others here, I am just disappointed the PS97 is not getting this new stealth paint job. At least, I'll be saving some money.

 

[borgpro]

The PS97S has never been a 16x15 string pattern - it's always been 18x17.
The PS95S from 2+ years ago was a 16x15 but it was replaced by the PS97S.
- Peter

Peter how would you describe the string pattern (97s) plays, compared to the RF97? I recall it was a bit imprecise and bit too lively the one occasion I tried it; to little control.

 

[nadalito92]

Like others here, I am just disappointed the PS97 is not getting this new stealth paint job. At least, I'll be saving some money.

I still dream that it is not too late and Wilson gets enough feedback to change their minds. I know I'll watch the TW reviews and they'll be al llike "I like this update and blah blah" and I know it's just the paint, but the itch of getting the new shiny one is going to be hard to figth back. How ever, getting a pair of used PS97 for the same or less of a single new PS97 should be enough to calm me down.

 

[veecee]

@Wilson Official Any chance of releasing the 97S mold in 16x19 pattern and a more traditional headlight balance?

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Peter how would you describe the string pattern (97s) plays, compared to the RF97? I recall it was a bit imprecise and bit too lively the one occasion I tried it; to little control.

I tried both, now of course I haven't tried the new true box beamed 97S yet, but I can comment on the string pattern.

It really depends on what you're accustomed to. If you are used to these "spin" string patterns, then it should be no problem. But I am used to the traditional open pattern, and this Spin Effect pattern, as minimal as it was at 18x17, it was very erratic for me from the baseline. Especially on shots where a full stroke is not possible (such as returns/retrievals/half volleys)

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

@Wilson Official Any chance of releasing the 97S mold in 16x19 pattern and a more traditional headlight balance?

If you're going to answer that @Wilson Official , can you also send the message up the your chain of commands that...

PLEASE bring back the PS90 in this black paint.

 

[borgpro]

I tried both, now of course I haven't tried the new true box beamed 97S yet, but I can comment on the string pattern.

It really depends on what you're accustomed to. If you are used to these "spin" string patterns, then it should be no problem. But I am used to the traditional open pattern, and this Spin Effect pattern, as minimal as it was at 18x17, it was very erratic for me from the baseline. Especially on shots where a full stroke is not possible (such as returns/retrievals/half volleys)

Thanks a lot
I am also used to traditional patterns..

 

[big ted]

hi nathan - peter :
thanks for coming in here. my question is about the black prototype(s) federer was using in tournaments during parts of 2013, 2014, etc... i assume they were different than the final version or the same? what was different about them and what different things did he try ( string patterns, head size, weights, etc..?) did he consider playing with a blade or prostaff 95? was he looking to duplicate a larger version of his 90 racquet? was he looking for a specific type of game improvement (stability, more spin, serve, etc)? alot of ppl say his serve has improved with that racquet. was the racquet he used at wimbledon 2014 the final version or what was different about it? feel free to answer any or all questions, ha thanks!

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Thanks a lot
I am also used to traditional patterns..

You may find something in these spin patterns, but I certainly didn't.

 

[mk3alex10]

Peter,

I believe you mentioned you've been hitting the prototype 97S. What have you noticed regarding plow/power due to the balance point change. Also, is it noticeably more manueverable? I play with the current 97S and would love some added manueverability but don't want to end up with a racquet that deals dead in the upper hoop like the 95S (my previous racquet).

Thanks

 

[Sander001]

@Wilson Official with the spin patterns taking off, are there any plans to make an RF97 18x16?

 

[borgpro]

A box beam like the 97s, but with 16x19 pattern, and a static weight of 330.....

 

[frinton]

So in all transparency here, I played with the 2014 PS97S for a while, but the last few months it's been with a prototype for the updated 2016 one. The final production one is slightly different than the prototype I have so I can't give you an exact answer as I myself am waiting to switch to the final production 2016 frame!!!!! I'm really excited! But just from an aesthetic point of view I personally like the more box beam frame shape. I think it works well for this thinner 19.5mm Pro Staff. I did have most of my PS97S's customized with some weight in the handle ... most recently about 10g.

- Peter

Peter & Nathan, I have followed this thread and found it very interesting! Thanks a lot for your insights.
Just wanted to know: the 97s is then really an update/new frame. Is this because Grigor was not happy with the frame he had settled on and that was then released as the 97s and so he had continued to experiment with different prototypes?
And how would you compare working on further developing rackets with Grigor to the process with Roger?
If I can add to the "silly-wish-list"... A PS85 in the new all black would be cool too, next to a 90 of course ;-)


"Why should I be unpleasant when I can just as well be nice?"

 

[bjn74]

Peter,

You mention the 97s as a replacement for the 6.1 95s. The near even balance of the 97s (and subsequent swing weight) turned me off the racquet. Does the 4 points change ( I think that's right?) in balance make the new 97s coming-out in Sep feel more like a replacement for the 6.1 95s? I'm excited to try it as I loved the feel of the 97s but not the balance/swing weight.

Thanks!

Ben

 

[anubis]

I currently play the RF97 but also have the 97s (which I bought last year at the US Open!). I love both of them for different reasons. However, I had to stick a metric ton of silicone in the handle of the 97s to make it playable. 0 points HL even balance is a terrible setup for anyone who is a 4.0 or beyond. Headlight racquets are just standard fare and you can't expect a tennis player who is serious with competing to use an even balance racquet. It has to be headlight. it has to be. There are likely 0 professionals on the current ATP tour in the top 100 who use even balance racquets. They're all likely using minimum 6 points HL. doubles pros like Nestor, Paes and the Bryan Bros. likely use 8 points HL or greater, because that is easier to use for volleys.

I appreciate @Wilson for recognizing that 0 points EV is a terrible decision. Racquet junkies like myself have no issue adding lead and steel nails to the handle of a racquet to make it more head light. But the average Joe probably buys the racquet thinking Dimitrov uses this exact same frame and is completely stymied as to why he or she can't do anything with it. It needs to be headlight. Wilson, you need to make it headlight. I know the new iteration of it is more headlight, but not enough. If I buy a new one with the new paintjob, you can bet I'm still going to put 6 to 10 grams of silicone in the handle.

Thanks for listening

 

[Wilson Official]

I currently play the RF97 but also have the 97s (which I bought last year at the US Open!). I love both of them for different reasons. However, I had to stick a metric ton of silicone in the handle of the 97s to make it playable. 0 points HL even balance is a terrible setup for anyone who is a 4.0 or beyond. Headlight racquets are just standard fare and you can't expect a tennis player who is serious with competing to use an even balance racquet. It has to be headlight. it has to be. There are likely 0 professionals on the current ATP tour in the top 100 who use even balance racquets. They're all likely using minimum 6 points HL. doubles pros like Nestor, Paes and the Bryan Bros. likely use 8 points HL or greater, because that is easier to use for volleys.

I appreciate @Wilson for recognizing that 0 points EV is a terrible decision. Racquet junkies like myself have no issue adding lead and steel nails to the handle of a racquet to make it more head light. But the average Joe probably buys the racquet thinking Dimitrov uses this exact same frame and is completely stymied as to why he or she can't do anything with it. It needs to be headlight. Wilson, you need to make it headlight. I know the new iteration of it is more headlight, but not enough. If I buy a new one with the new paintjob, you can bet I'm still going to put 6 to 10 grams of silicone in the handle.

Thanks for listening

The current 97S is 3pt HL (unstrung). The new one will be 6pt HL (unstrung). That's the same as the Blade 98 for instance.
- Peter

 

[nadalito92]

I currently play the RF97 but also have the 97s (which I bought last year at the US Open!). I love both of them for different reasons. However, I had to stick a metric ton of silicone in the handle of the 97s to make it playable. 0 points HL even balance is a terrible setup for anyone who is a 4.0 or beyond. Headlight racquets are just standard fare and you can't expect a tennis player who is serious with competing to use an even balance racquet. It has to be headlight. it has to be. There are likely 0 professionals on the current ATP tour in the top 100 who use even balance racquets. They're all likely using minimum 6 points HL. doubles pros like Nestor, Paes and the Bryan Bros. likely use 8 points HL or greater, because that is easier to use for volleys.

I appreciate @Wilson for recognizing that 0 points EV is a terrible decision. Racquet junkies like myself have no issue adding lead and steel nails to the handle of a racquet to make it more head light. But the average Joe probably buys the racquet thinking Dimitrov uses this exact same frame and is completely stymied as to why he or she can't do anything with it. It needs to be headlight. Wilson, you need to make it headlight. I know the new iteration of it is more headlight, but not enough. If I buy a new one with the new paintjob, you can bet I'm still going to put 6 to 10 grams of silicone in the handle.

Thanks for listening

I surely hope they haven't started the production en masse for all models because they still have a month to make it right and paint the 97 like it should be, same as the RFA97 but lighter. One can dream.

 

[Wilson Official]

Peter,

I believe you mentioned you've been hitting the prototype 97S. What have you noticed regarding plow/power due to the balance point change. Also, is it noticeably more manueverable? I play with the current 97S and would love some added manueverability but don't want to end up with a racquet that deals dead in the upper hoop like the 95S (my previous racquet).

Thanks

I can't give you too much relevant info here as the prototype was not a final one so the balance was closer to 3pt HL and not 6pt HL like the final retail version is. I'm actually looking forward to trying the new 97S final production version. I will let you know any updates once I've had a change to hit with it.

- Peter

 

[anubis]

The current 97S is 3pt HL (unstrung). The new one will be 6pt HL (unstrung). That's the same as the Blade 98 for instance.
- Peter

Thanks for responding @TW Staff measures a select percentage of frames and posts those specs as an average across the sample. They say 0 points EB, and Mine from the US Open was also 0 points EB. You might think that you're trying to make it 3 points HL, but I think the evidence suggests otherwise.

You are now saying that the new batch will be 6 points HL. I hope that it truly is, because if TW gets a sample and averages it out to 3 points HL, then myself as a racquet customizer and most others in my field will all generally agree that 3 points HL or less is more or less even balance. If you "think" the new batch will be 6 points HL and is really averaging 3 points HL, then your hard work really got you nowhere, unfortunately.

All I can respectfully say is that I hope your Chinese manufacturing sites are adhering to strict quality control If they're all 3 point HL or worse, then we're in the same boat. Just with a different paint job

Either way, since I am a racquet customizer, I will still be able to play the new frame the way I want it to. But I am not concerned with nerds such as myself. I am concerned for the general masses who do not know how, nor care to customize frames. "Off the shelf" must be considered the norm, not the exception. 6 points HL Off the shelf is awesome! 3 points HL is not, and no one who buys it as 3 points HL will think it's any better than the original

Thank you for participating in this forum, we all appreciate your time, effort and knowledge! those of us who offer constructive criticism do not mean it in any menacing or disrespectful way. We are all passionate about the sport, have been "around the block" a few times and want everyone who plays this sport to enjoy it to the maximum!

 

[macattack]

TW lists the balance as 0 pts or even balance STRUNG. Peter is saying it's 3 pts HL UNSTRUNG. So it's the same thing, FYI.

Thanks for responding @TW Staff measures a select percentage of frames and posts those specs as an average across the sample. They say 0 points EB, and Mine from the US Open was also 0 points EB. You might think that you're trying to make it 3 points HL, but I think the evidence suggests otherwise.

You are now saying that the new batch will be 6 points HL. I hope that it truly is, because if TW gets a sample and averages it out to 3 points HL, then myself as a racquet customizer and most others in my field will all generally agree that 3 points HL or less is more or less even balance. If you "think" the new batch will be 6 points HL and is really averaging 3 points HL, then your hard work really got you nowhere, unfortunately.

All I can respectfully say is that I hope your Chinese manufacturing sites are adhering to strict quality control If they're all 3 point HL or worse, then we're in the same boat. Just with a different paint job

Either way, since I am a racquet customizer, I will still be able to play the new frame the way I want it to. But I am not concerned with nerds such as myself. I am concerned for the general masses who do not know how, nor care to customize frames. "Off the shelf" must be considered the norm, not the exception. 6 points HL Off the shelf is awesome! 3 points HL is not, and no one who buys it as 3 points HL will think it's any better than the original

Thank you for participating in this forum, we all appreciate your time, effort and knowledge! those of us who offer constructive criticism do not mean it in any menacing or disrespectful way. We are all passionate about the sport, have been "around the block" a few times and want everyone who plays this sport to enjoy it to the maximum!

 

[Wilson Official]

TW lists the balance as 0 pts or even balance STRUNG. Peter is saying it's 3 pts HL UNSTRUNG. So it's the same thing, FYI.

Yes exactly. Specs on racquet are always listed as unstrung. Thanks.
Strings can vary in weight depending on type and gauge of string so it's less accurate to consider strung balance unless all racquets are strung with identical strings. I've seen string weights range from well under 15g to over 20g .

- Peter

 

[BreakPoint]

I currently play the RF97 but also have the 97s (which I bought last year at the US Open!). I love both of them for different reasons. However, I had to stick a metric ton of silicone in the handle of the 97s to make it playable. 0 points HL even balance is a terrible setup for anyone who is a 4.0 or beyond. Headlight racquets are just standard fare and you can't expect a tennis player who is serious with competing to use an even balance racquet. It has to be headlight. it has to be. There are likely 0 professionals on the current ATP tour in the top 100 who use even balance racquets. They're all likely using minimum 6 points HL. doubles pros like Nestor, Paes and the Bryan Bros. likely use 8 points HL or greater, because that is easier to use for volleys.

I appreciate @Wilson for recognizing that 0 points EV is a terrible decision. Racquet junkies like myself have no issue adding lead and steel nails to the handle of a racquet to make it more head light. But the average Joe probably buys the racquet thinking Dimitrov uses this exact same frame and is completely stymied as to why he or she can't do anything with it. It needs to be headlight. Wilson, you need to make it headlight. I know the new iteration of it is more headlight, but not enough. If I buy a new one with the new paintjob, you can bet I'm still going to put 6 to 10 grams of silicone in the handle.

Thanks for listening

But didn't Sampras (a S&Ver) use a racquet that was nearly evenly balanced?

http://www.racquetresearch.com/complete_idiot.htm

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/even-balance-for-serve-and-volley.449293/

 

[tribesmen]

97S is not hard to swing at all, on the contrary easily than RF97. It is a light stick and should be close to even balance. 6HL unstrung for the new one is the right direction and if the feel stays the same as previous 97S we will have a winer here.

 

[darklore009]

We should tell Wilson to make a Wilson PF (PeterFig) 97 autograph with his original racket design with his dog inside the throat.

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

97S is not hard to swing at all, on the contrary easily than RF97. It is a light stick and should be close to even balance. 6HL unstrung for the new one is the right direction and if the feel stays the same as previous 97S we will have a winer here.

It's not hard to swing, but the balance makes it a very awkward Pro Staff to swing.

 

[darklore009]

Just curious why Wilson went with a HH with the PS97s. Prostaff is known for their HL balance and their box beam construction, but the current one isnt hitting what the Prostaff expection should be.

 

[macattack]

Just curious why Wilson went with a HH with the PS97s. Prostaff is known for their HL balance and their box beam construction, but the current one isnt hitting what the Prostaff expection should be.

The current (original) PS97S is not head heavy. It is 3 pts HL unstrung and about even balance strung. The new one will be 6 pts HL unstrung and about 3 pts HL strung, depending on what strings you use. Granted neither are as HL as the PS85 or other PS iterations that I can recall, so I get your point there, for sure.

 

[Frost5541]

But didn't Sampras (a S&Ver) use a racquet that was nearly evenly balanced?

http://www.racquetresearch.com/complete_idiot.htm

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/even-balance-for-serve-and-volley.449293/

no! he used a 8 points STRUNG racquet.

 

[heninfan99]

The non-glossy paint feels rubberized...I like it but what is it?

 

[ThirdEye]

Just curious why Wilson went with a HH with the PS97s. Prostaff is known for their HL balance and their box beam construction, but the current one isnt hitting what the Prostaff expection should be.

Because Dimitrov liked it that way. He adds weight to the handle anyway, so it becomes much more HL.

 

[Irvin]

Many of Wilson's racket (like this one) skip 7&9 Head and throat. I really don't have a big issue with that but occasionally some of the frames (like the 90 series) tie off mains at 6 throat this causes a double blocked hole at 7 throat. When you tie off at 8 throat the strings on the outside of the frame are staggered, then if you're not careful you have zig-zagging strings on the outside of the frame. This leads to my question why does Wilson prefer 7&9 throat skips holes as opposed to having he mains skip 8 throat?

The question above pertains to a 16 main on an 18 main why skip 8&10 rather than 9 throat?

@Wilson Official, simple question about the design of rackets why wont you address it?

 

[moon shot]

@Wilson Official, simple question about the design of rackets why wont you address it?

I would guess because it is about the 90 and other discontinued frames, not the 97

 

[movdqa]

I would guess because it is about the 90 and other discontinued frames, not the 97

Basically a moot point as they aren't going to be making any more anyways.

 

[Geoff]

Many of Wilson's racket (like this one) skip 7&9 Head and throat. I really don't have a big issue with that but occasionally some of the frames (like the 90 series) tie off mains at 6 throat this causes a double blocked hole at 7 throat. When you tie off at 8 throat the strings on the outside of the frame are staggered, then if you're not careful you have zig-zagging strings on the outside of the frame. This leads to my question why does Wilson prefer 7&9 throat skips holes as opposed to having he mains skip 8 throat?

The question above pertains to a 16 main on an 18 main why skip 8&10 rather than 9 throat?

Hello @Irvin
I find enlarging the hole for tieing off the mains in question resolves the issue quite easily for me. I was glad to see the RF97 and PS97 made it possible to tie off on 8T. When I played with the Wilson 90 frames I always changed the tie off holes with no adverse effects.

 

[Irvin]

Hello @Irvin
I find enlarging the hole for trying off the mains in question resolves the issue quite easily for me. I was glad to see the RF97 and PS97 made it possible to tie off on 8T. When I played with the Wilson 90 frames I always changed the tie off holes with no adverse effects.

I prefer to use the manufacturer's recommended tie off location no matter what they may be. I think enlarging holes creates problems but I won't go there.

Let's look at what happens when you skip grommets 7&9T in a racket (and the mains end in the throat) to look a little deeper into my issue. I know that many Wilson rackets have fins that hold the stings on the outside of the frame either above or below the grommet holes. Did you ever wonder why?

Let's assume those fins were not there, and you tie off at 8T. If the string you're tying off goes under the 8th main in grommet 8T it will hole the string on the outside of the frame from 6T to 8T higher than the string going fro the string going from 10T to 8T. Stringing the racket then will probably result in the loop between the bottom two crosses will be in a zig zag. To me that looks unprofessional so I do my best to avoid that.

My question is specifically directed toward the racket design which I thought this thread was directed toward. I'm not looking for work arounds to string a racket. I would like to hear from @Wilson Official to see if they have any rhyme or reason to the actual design instead of what color the racket is. Sorry if appear to be obtuse @Wilson Official, I don't mean to be, but I feel like I'm being ignored becaue my question won'e sell rackets. That is what this thread is about isn't it, selling rackets?

EDIT: I think every manufacturer should should consult qualified stringers as well as racket designers to ensure their rackets meet all aspects of a good design. I would be willing to offer my services free.