Blade 100 V9 or Pure Strike 100 16x19

[Pekoms]

@Trip

Thank you! I play with more semi-wester/western and looking at images of the butcap yeah it's quite rectangular so I guess with an overgrip will feel even more oval because the bevels seems smaller.
The safer choice will be the strike, so I will see, despite the curiosity of this TF40

 

[tophersuwita]

@Pekoms - Regarding the TF40, it's been a while since I demoed one (I think the previous version to the current), and from what I remembered, it was a nice, solid-feeling stick. The one qualifier with Tecnifibre, more so than anything else, tends to be their more rectangular-shaped grip, which biases a bit more towards an eastern grip, versus a more semi-wester/western. If the former is you, then there's a high chance you'll like the TF40.

Versus the Pro Staff / Strike in particular, the TF40 will be a shade softer in flex and impact response; ie. not quite as thuddy, and a bit more pocketing/dwell. Also, unlike the PS97 or Strikes, the TF40 is foam filled, so it will have a bit more of a dampened, albeit still direct feel. Any/all of that can be a good or a bad thing, depending on taste. Overall, I would say, especially for those who know the TF40 will already kind of be in their wheelhouse, and who don't mind or maybe even prefer the more rectangular grip, it tends to garner largely positive feedback (factoring in those caveats). Before making a blind buy, though, I would try your best to see if you can get your hands on a demo, to at least see if the grip and general physics of the frame are agreeable enough.

And, as long as you're looking in the general vicinity of these frames, you might as well try a Head Radical Pro as well.

Playing with Strike 16x20 as my first Babolat which can gel with me, and with Strike VS as my close second favorite stick now, do you happen to have some insights why the 16x20 was rated low in TW review?

I seem to agree with most of the "score", except for Strike 16x20 and Speed MP. I feel the MP is very sluggish, I prefer Pure Drive if I need to choose.

 

[Trip]

Playing with Strike 16x20 as my first Babolat which can gel with me, and with Strike VS as my close second favorite stick now, do you happen to have some insights why the 16x20 was rated low in TW review?

I seem to agree with most of the "score", except for Strike 16x20 and Speed MP. I feel the MP is very sluggish, I prefer Pure Drive if I need to choose.

Hi Topher. I presume you're referencing this?

https://www.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/racquet_reviews/PS1620review.html

As far as I can see, an 81 is not necessarily a "poor" score, but on that note, I wouldn't place too much weight on TW's reviews anyways. First off, their reviews simply aren't as comprehensive or consistent as most of those put out by individual content creators (AC Tennis, etc.), but secondly and most importantly, as a retailer, they're never going to be ultimately too honest about how bad or good a product is, which corresponds with their numbers always kind of coming out in somewhat-bland flavors of "safe", never really below the upper 70's (or upper "7.x"), never much above the upper 80's (or upper "8.x"). So while an 81 certainly isn't an all-time, show-stopping score, I wouldn't place too much weight on it.

That said, let's answer the question regardless, as to why they may have rated the Strike 100 16x20 "low -ish" on Power and Stability. Basically, I would attribute it to a combination of factors, being:
1) on-spec, or perhaps slightly under-spec, swing weight of their test samples, which I'm guessing were in the 290-ish region, making for a hitting weight that is somewhat par for the course
2) the softer flex of the frame, causing longer dwell and extra "head flop" (derived from the extra flexing of the long neck members, coupled with the more firm hoop)
3) the lower-than-typical balance point (of 31cm unstrung), which, when coupled with a medium or lower swing weight, tends to produce less tip awareness, yet also higher-than-average recoil weight, and when you combine both of those, you tend to get a feeling of having to put in extra sustained "heaving effort", yet you don't get as much later-swing "payoff" as you do with frames whose balance points and/or swing weights are naturally higher (even versus the regular 100 16x19 in comparison)

So you combine all those three components, and it's easy to see, at least relatively speaking, why one might come away with such an impression, even though, all things considered, the Strikes (all of them, as they all have the same 21-23-21mm thickness profile up and down the mold) exhibit excellent torsional hoop stability and string bed stability on impact, especially when judging stability-to-weighting ratios. I can confirm it's significantly better than a good portion of the pleener frames out there.

Hope that helps a bit.

 

[heavyD]

Power is not an issue with the blade 100. It’s not a pure drive but it’s like a blade except a 100. If you have good technique, the power is easily there.

Low power 100 is more like a Gravity.

I have been using two V9 Blade 100's exclusively this spring/summer. Over the past 2 years I have gone through a bunch of the most popular 100 frames on the market in 21 PD, 23 PA, 23 VCORE 100, 22 Ezone 100, Aux Speed MP, Aux Extreme MP so I feel I have a pretty good handle on how these frames compare. On the power front I'm 100% positive the Blade 100 is lowest powered frame (considerably lower powered compared to PD and Extreme MP) but that's offset by affording easily the most control and I feel that's been better for my game and why for the first time in a while I have slowed down my chase for the holy grail racquet as it's the first time in years that I am down to one model and only two frames in my posession. I feel the Blade 100 is perfect for a longtime 98 user that wants a slightly more forgiving frame or a 100 user that's improved to the point they don't require as much free power but I don't think it's the best frame for someone that needs help to generate power as it's simply not as lively as some of the usual suspects in the 100 range. My recommendation for the average intermediate player that wants an all around racquet remains the Speed MP because in my experience it provides the most of everything (power, spin, comfort, control) without sacrificing much in any area. If you have never had any arm issues the 23 PA is right there though. I wouldn't say it's hard on the arm but it doesn't have the comfortable feel of the Speed. Some of the other frames offer less comfort (PD) or sacrifice too much control (VCORE 100, Extreme MP). Ezone 100 is also very good but while I didn't find it was hard on my arm it had the worst feel on off center shots so while it's not my favorite, it's got good pop, is easy to use and is also a good option to the Speed MP and PA 23 especially if you like Yonex. Unfortunately I can't comment on the PS as I've not lengthily hit with the new ones and didn't like the last gen at all so not in my wheelhouse.

After all that I must say I'm kind of lusting over the upcoming Aux. Extreme Pro and will definitely be adding that to my bag the day they hit retail shelves as the racquet journey continues.

 

[Trip]

I have been using two V9 Blade 100's exclusively this spring/summer. Over the past 2 years I have gone through a bunch of the most popular 100 frames on the market in 21 PD, 23 PA, 23 VCORE 100, 22 Ezone 100, Aux Speed MP, Aux Extreme MP so I feel I have a pretty good handle on how these frames compare. On the power front I'm 100% positive the Blade 100 is lowest powered frame (considerably lower powered compared to PD and Extreme MP) but that's offset by affording easily the most control and I feel that's been better for my game and why for the first time in a while I have slowed down my chase for the holy grail racquet as it's the first time in years that I am down to one model and only two frames in my posession. I feel the Blade 100 is perfect for a longtime 98 user that wants a slightly more forgiving frame or a 100 user that's improved to the point they don't require as much free power but I don't think it's the best frame for someone that needs help to generate power as it's simply not as lively as some of the usual suspects in the 100 range. My recommendation for the average intermediate player that wants an all around racquet remains the Speed MP because in my experience it provides the most of everything (power, spin, comfort, control) without sacrificing much in any area. If you have never had any arm issues the 23 PA is right there though. I wouldn't say it's hard on the arm but it doesn't have the comfortable feel of the Speed. Some of the other frames offer less comfort (PD) or sacrifice too much control (VCORE 100, Extreme MP). Ezone 100 is also very good but while I didn't find it was hard on my arm it had the worst feel on off center shots so while it's not my favorite, it's got good pop, is easy to use and is also a good option to the Speed MP and PA 23 especially if you like Yonex. Unfortunately I can't comment on the PS as I've not lengthily hit with the new ones and didn't like the last gen at all so not in my wheelhouse.

After all that I must say I'm kind of lusting over the upcoming Aux. Extreme Pro and will definitely be adding that to my bag the day they hit retail shelves as the racquet journey continues.

Outstanding overview, congrats on minimizing (something I'm working towards in parallel with finding "the one"), and a nice testament to where the Blade 100 v9 fits into the gamut of pleeners and tweeners.

 

[tophersuwita]

Hi Topher. I presume you're referencing this?

https://www.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/racquet_reviews/PS1620review.html

As far as I can see, an 81 is not necessarily a "poor" score, but on that note, I wouldn't place too much weight on TW's reviews anyways. First off, their reviews simply aren't as comprehensive or consistent as most of those put out by individual content creators (AC Tennis, etc.), but secondly and most importantly, as a retailer, they're never going to be ultimately too honest about how bad or good a product is, which corresponds with their numbers always kind of coming out in somewhat-bland flavors of "safe", never really below the upper 70's (or upper "7.x"), never much above the upper 80's (or upper "8.x"). So while an 81 certainly isn't an all-time, show-stopping score, I wouldn't place too much weight on it.

That said, let's answer the question regardless, as to why they may have rated the Strike 100 16x20 "low -ish" on Power and Stability. Basically, I would attribute it to a combination of factors, being:
1) on-spec, or perhaps slightly under-spec, swing weight of their test samples, which I'm guessing were in the 290-ish region, making for a hitting weight that is somewhat par for the course
2) the softer flex of the frame, causing longer dwell and extra "head flop" (derived from the extra flexing of the long neck members, coupled with the more firm hoop)
3) the lower-than-typical balance point (of 31cm unstrung), which, when coupled with a medium or lower swing weight, tends to produce less tip awareness, yet also higher-than-average recoil weight, and when you combine both of those, you tend to get a feeling of having to put in extra sustained "heaving effort", yet you don't get as much later-swing "payoff" as you do with frames whose balance points and/or swing weights are naturally higher (even versus the regular 100 16x19 in comparison)

So you combine all those three components, and it's easy to see, at least relatively speaking, why one might come away with such an impression, even though, all things considered, the Strikes (all of them, as they all have the same 21-23-21mm thickness profile up and down the mold) exhibit excellent torsional hoop stability and string bed stability on impact, especially when judging stability-to-weighting ratios. I can confirm it's significantly better than a good portion of the pleener frames out there.

Hope that helps a bit.

I agree with your assessment and the variety of SWs due to QC might be the culprit. I actually feel it has a balanced feel between compact/thuddy and whippy.