Discussion in 'Racquets' started by TimothyO, Dec 30, 2010.
Great. Pick up a couple and join the club!
They probably just realized their initial pricepoint was too high. The Becker line usually doesn't compete directly with the Volkl line, so I don't think it has anything to do with the upcoming Organix release.
If you go into TW's racquet power maps, the London has almost identical readings as the Pure Drive, Prince White or Radical Pro. All considered very powerful racquets. One of the TW reviewer's stated in his review that the racquet felt "Pure Drive like". Sure, it's not as powerful as some oversize, beginners racquets...but for a player's stick, it's more powerful than usual. But that's what's nice about it. You don't have to wear yourself out swinging hard all the time. But you do need to watch your technique when swinging hard and flattening em out. But pretending it's not a nicely powered stick is just inaccurate.
Don't get worried!
I sent an email and was told that the London, as we all know, is selling big-time. They want to take advantage of that so they lowered the MAP to sell more aggressively. It helps to be seen, and a lot of recreational players are not familiar with BB/Volkl.
I'd love to, but I'm in Europe and they don't sell that stick over here. I'm deciding whether or not it would be worthwhile to buy a couple from the US, but the shipping and customs charges are pretty high.
I wouldn't want to suggest any. I haven't hit the Gamma Professional, but a good syn. gut or a low-powered multi at mid tension should do the trick, just don't forget to lower your cross strings 2-4 lbs., per Volkl/BB recommendations. I hit 16 gauge strings in a 16x19 pattern to keep it as dense as possible, but I hit a "flat roll," so there again, I don't know that my advice will benefit you. Hope this helps, nonetheless.[/QUOTE]
Where do you find the Volkl/BB string information?
I didn't. The first I heard of it was Maverick's recommendation. He was told by, if I'm not mistaken, a prominent Volkl representative many years ago. As best I understand the situation, this has been the recommended, standard procedure for several years with Volkl rackets, and now BB frames. Exactly what design/performance characteristics these frames possess that would justify this cross-string drop, I don't know, but you see a lot of veteran Volkl users with this setup, so it's common knowledge in certain circles. I'll try to find something a little more concrete for you if I have time, unless Maverick reads this first, which is likely.
I would love to know this as well. I did some research and couldn't find anything to validate that new Becker racquets should have cross tensions less than the mains. I would call or email Becker, but they don't even have a website
I didn't. The first I heard of it was Maverick's recommendation. He was told by, if I'm not mistaken, a prominent Volkl representative many years ago. As best I understand the situation, this has been the recommended, standard procedure for several years with Volkl rackets, and now BB frames. Exactly what design/performance characteristics these frames possess that would justify this cross-string drop, I don't know, but you see a lot of veteran Volkl users with this setup, so it's common knowledge in certain circles. I'll try to find something a little more concrete for you if I have time, unless Maverick reads this first, which is likely.[/QUOT
OK, I was just wondering why they do that. I am getting ready to string 1 up with gut for the mains and head rip for the crosses. If four less on the crosses is the correct way to string it I will do it.
I did a simple google search and found this post in a stringforum.net thread from 2007:
We have used this technique of lowering the cross tension on Volkl racquets for some time. Because of the oblong shape of the Volkl frames, much like the Isometric shape of the Yonex sticks, the mains are longer than the cross strings. If you use the Swingway method of measuring the mains and crosses to get a specific SBS, then this works very well in opening the sweetspot in Volkl racquets, just like in the Yonex frames (recommended). It's not a requirement but just a technique that works for some players.
USTA; USPTA; USRSA-MRT
Yonex RDS002 Tour w/Genesis Xplosion 57/54lbs
Tennis begins with LOVE and means NOTHING!
As you can see this has been going on for awhile. I've always hit Dunlops before coming to the London, and I've heard this recommendation for these sticks as well--due to the oblong head shape--perhaps even more pronounced in Dunlops. I hope this helps, and maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can come in and fill in the details of why and how this is the case.
It was like that BITD, i.e., 1.5 kilo differential recommendation in the T-9 30, but the need became more magnified with the use of DC/DNX nano carbon at 3/9. There maybe a possibility that the differential be less in the Organix Line because there is now DNX in all four poles.
Funny you should mention this? I wonder why Volkl decided to do the BB line then? Is it the same business model as the toyota/lexus, honda/acura, Gap/Old Navy?
If so, I wonder if BB is the lexus or toyota?
BB is the Lexus
LOL. Glad to know also finally I get to drive with a luxury stick. But the new Organix line does look very lush. I really like the reference "bullseye," PJ they put as a reference to where the sweetspot is. I want to try to put some sort of yellow tape on my london to try as well. Just afraid I'll concentrate more on that spot then on the ball.
Got it . . . I think. So at this point the reduction is to compensate for the stiffness in the technology in those areas where the crosses attach and can be influenced. I definitely experienced more of a need for a cross reduction in the BB 11, which was less forgiving off center.
Exactly where is the DC in the London? I thought it was throughout the frame. But I'll admit, I'm totally ignorant of layups, fibers, epoxy resins, etc., and how that all works to create a frame.
The DC is only on the sides and above the grip. If it were throughout the frame, it would be crazy stiff.
Boris' concept was that the BB Line is Mercedes AMG and Volkl is the regular Mercedes Line.
The racquet is swinging rather quickly behind your body and then whips thru contact. How the heck are u going to even see those dots on the frame? Besides aren't u supposed to have your eyes on the ball?
I am not sure those "aiming dots" are anything more than a marketing gimmick? Maybe on volleys?
Now that I look at the stick, it's kinda like, duh, but I've honestly never known for sure what was DC and what was not, what was Aerogel and what was not, what was Karophite and what was not, etc. But that knowledge helps me a lot and explains, most likely, why I didn't like the lead at 3&9, as it made the hoop a little stiffer than I wanted for this frame, which has a very unique flex at impact. Who would want to diminish that "feel" and dwell? If one chooses to mod this frame, 5&7, the bridge, and maybe the pallet are the most optimal locations, imo. And now I know why.
There is something to be said about changing the intrinsic design of a frame with lead tape, especially when a completely different element is introduced into the lay-up, because it then becomes part of the design parameters. The judicious use of nano carbon in Volkl sticks as opposed to using copious amounts of lead tape on a traditional graphite frame is the same reason why US Fifth Gen fighters are unmatched: you can do a lot more with a lot less; so it's faster, stronger, and more maneuverable.
Thanks for the advice on the strings. I am relatively new to the idea of stringing at different tensions and with different strings in the crosses and mains.
If stringing at different tensions, should you use the same strings or possibly use two different kinds?
I have battled tennis elbow and the arm is feeling pretty good right now. Any suggestions on some arm friendly string or strings to try with the london?
A) Regardless of what string(s) you use, drop the cross string tension. If you use different strings, you need to compensate for their characteristics.
B) The London plays well with strings that aren't that quick, and with arm problems, look at multis, perhaps NXT Tour or Gripper, and of course, gut.
I noticed with Jack's set up that he has a 4lb difference in the tension. Would that be a recommended drop to try (57 and 53)?
Depends on your machine type and stringer's ability. If the friction that is created as you pull the crosses through the mains, plus overcome the loss of tension as the string rounds the corners of the grommets, then 3-4 lbs works well. If you cannot overcome those factors, then less than 3 lbs would be more appropriate.
I've mentioned several times now that I've settled in on 2g @ 5&7 and 1g @ 3&9. I'll probably take the gram off at 3&9 and add it to 5&7 as well, or possibly to the bridge. I pretty well have the hoop dialed in to my liking, and I could play this stick with just these mods, no question about it.
However, I've always used lead on the pallet near the top of the grip at 6.5" from the butt cap. I hit one stick the other night with the hoop mods mentioned above with an additional 4g on the sides of the pallet (vertical) starting at the bottom of the grip. I didn't like the lead in this location as it has always given me the sense that the head and pallet are "disconnected" somehow. What I did like was how lead on the pallet made the stick "feel" brick-wall stable and removed that ever so slight flutter on off center shots. My plan is to remove the lead at the bottom of the pallet and use 3-4g wrapped around the pallet at 6.5" from the butt cap. A "depolarized" setup better suits my playing and swing style and type of shot, so I'm pleased to discover how positively responsive the London is to additional weight at its "center." What do you think?
I have no experience putting lead at the top of the pallets. All of my players or my sticks that have lead in the grips are either on the pallets or in the butt. Also,whenever I weight a frame, lead is always put inside the "V" of the throat, so perhaps, you are accomplishing what we do with tape only at the top of the pallet, rather than above and below. I prefer to distribute the lead, which is cleaner as well.
I love to put lead on the grips as well. I guess it makes the racquet more head light. I remember my high school coach, long ago, got really mad at me for not putting my racquet up enough or volley late, up at the net. Despite doing many many hours of drills, it didn't really help that much. He finally put some lead inside my grip and it seems like it fixed my problem.
I heard the general rule about lead is the following:
12 o'clock: Encourages more swing speed and/or topspin with the least weight needed at the expense of stability (off centered shots may be more wobbly)
3 and 9': makes the racquet more stable
6 and/or throat: Adds weight to racquet w/o affects headlight/head heavy too much.
Grip: Makes racquet more headlight.
Just to be clear, I put it ON the pallet, just a little higher, but I get your point. I'm gonna put 6-7 grams total on this frame, and I'm still in tweak mode. I may even spread the 3grams on the hoop out a bit---1g just above the DC @10/12, 1g @3&9, and 1g @5&7--just below the DC. And I'll try spreading the 3-4g remaining throughout the throat and several spots on the pallet. I don't like feeling all the weight in one area either. Maybe that's where I've always gone wrong.
I like 9" of 1/4" lead tape where the becker logo is at the bottom of the "y"
then just cover it up with the rubber band so it hides it....
it produces a nice stable headlight balance and a solid feel.
This stick is sensitive to modifications. So I tried spreading out the weight a bit: 1g at bottom of the pallet, 1g middle of the pallet, and 1g at top of pallet (all wrapped around the pallet itself). Then I put 1g inside the throat (just above the DC material) and kept my 2g at 5&7 and 1g at 3&9.
Just by feel, I would guess that the stiffness went up 4-5 pts. It felt like the racquet lost its signature flexibility and dwell and took on a whole new set of characteristics, almost like a stiff tweener.
Considering that the DC material stiffens the frame, and considering that I literally put lead on every section of the racquet that did not have this DC material, it makes sense that the added weight would stiffen the whole frame. That's the only thing I can figure is going on.
So I took all of these mods off and put 3g around the pallet 6.5" from the butt cap--in addition to my 2g at 5&7 and 1g at 3&9. This setup gave the racquet a lot of its flex back, but it felt a little clumsy.
I've yet to find a better setup than the simple 2g at 5&7 and 1g at 3&9 in the hoop--that's it--no additions to the pallet. This setup maintains the signature feel/flex, dwell, stability, and maneuverability. For my game, the stick performs better with less. And while I love to tinker with lead on my racquets, this London seems almost allergic to my normal mods. Maybe it'll break my addiction.
I just noticed all the specs for the new Organix 10 295 are almost identical to the London...I mean REALLY CLOSE. Wonder what differentiates them and why they made the 2 sticks so similar? I am glad Volkl made the Organix a little heavier than the PB10L. The Org295 might not need as much lead.
98 sq. in
Strung Weight: 11.1oz
Balance: 4 pts HL
Beam Width: 20
98 sq. in
Strung Weight: 11oz
Balance: 3 pts HL
Beam Width: 20
If i had to guess, I'd say the Organix would have less pop. I'm wondering how they're going to spec the Ogranix 9 to differentiate them from these two sticks wight, balance and swingweight wise (since the 9's are always stiffer).
The feedback that I received was that the X10 295 has more pop than the London, which makes sense with all of the DNX they used at all four poles. The London is not a high powered frame. The only possibility of that read is if you have a terrible or inappropriate string job.
I'll have an X6/8/10 on Tue, and the Melbourne by Thur. I'll give feedback ASAP.
I think you're probably right. The PB10L wasn't high powered, so the organic 295 will probably be the same. More control oriented than the London.
The Organix Thread, post #'s 105&119, provide the feedback that I would expect from a Volkl upgrade. One should expect that in a relative comparison to a BB frame that the Volkl will usually be a little quicker off the string bed, and depending upon swing speed, a little more powerful--maybe. I've come to realize, and I could be wrong, that BB and Volkl have two different types of players in mind when they create their rackets--at least their performance sticks. The high-performance Becker sticks have unmatched dwell, while the high-performance Volkls have unmatched precision, in my experience. I guess these lines get blurred when I consider that for my game personally, dwell translates into precision and control on the court. I'm sure exceptions exist, but BB and Volkl sticks don't seem to be one and the same, although they share important attributes with one another.
I played another match with my new Londons yesterday. It's the best stick I've ever hit, plain and simple. I won one set with my stick with just 3g in the hoop, and won the second, more easily, with my stick with 3g in the hoop and 3g on the pallet at 6.5-7" from the butt. Now that my hybrid string bed is loosening/opening a bit, I'm getting even more dwell and feel. My regular playing partner told me yesterday that more so than ever, with the this new London, he knows that if he gives a short reply, the point's over. Serves, groundstrokes, bh slice, volleys have never been better. For the right player, this stick's a weapon, and secretly so, it appears.
Yeah,..I'll be curious to here about the Melbourne,...specifically as it compares to the BB11,..
OK third straight weekend with my LONDON playing doubles only. my vs gut broke in 2 spots on the mains. 5 matches so really disappointed as that was quick even for me(hard hitter with nasty kick serve) still no launchers/ great control till the end even. Agree again this has "some" nice power for a light mid weight/flexible frame. Going to do 55m 52c -to keep it arm friendly per tmavs great advice.
The Melbourne and the BB 11 are completely two different frames. Firstly, the BB 11 was a cannon compared to any previous BB/Volkl 10-Line frame. The BB 11's better comparison is to the London, the BB 11's upgrade. The Melbourne is a better balanced Legend, and without any Titanium Lite, which makes it easier on the arm and enhances the dwell time. My guys tell me that if they didn't play with the PB 10 Mid, that they would play with the Melbourne, before the X10. It is more precise and more demanding.
Ooooops,..didnt see the Melbourne was in already!!!!....Specs look pretty appealing,...(I like that its 18x20!!)...but i'm in the wrong thread to be goin on about that!!...:lol:
I guess I was wrong then in my post above (#585) about the differences between Volkl/BB. I know that Volkl is quicker, has different ball quality and feel. I guess besides the obvious layup differences, I'm as confused as anyone else as to the differences, although I have my clear preference.
Hey, don't sweat it! It wouldn't be the first time this thread got a little sidetracked
The lines have finally diverged totally, and have become what was the original design concept for the two lines. DNX is very different than DC, so the company can now drive the spec monkey ****s, bananas, and also, shut the tech deniers the frak up.
DC resists bending; DNX resists torque. BB DC sticks is like having super light lead tape where you need it, 1:30/2/3/4/5/5:30 & 7:30/8/9/10/10:30; Volkl Organix sticks is like having super light lead tape and a wider beam with a contradictory soft feel, all in the same places to minimize power loss, at 3/6/9/12.
And yes, the Organix line is crisper then the DC line, just as the PB line was.
TennisMav: Would you suggest that the Organix 295 is more arm friendly than the London then? Now I am curious about the 295 now.
Thanks man! That puts it together for me.
About 3 years ago, I had a brief hit with a C-10 Pro and DNX 9 for about 20 min. I liked the feel of the C-10 Pro, but couldn't "control" the DNX 9 and found it a little "harsh" for my tastes. I hit the PB 10 MP for 10 min. and thought it played a little "harsh" as well, but I don't know what poly my friend was hitting. I also sensed that it didn't suit my playing style so well, much like my 300Tour. Nonetheless, you could sense the direction Volkl was trying to go with their technology: DNX, PB, and now Organix (soft, stable, and more powerful). According to reports thus far, Volkl has combined the best of all previous generations in this Organix. I won't tinker with it, though; I'm happy with the London.
I demoed and bought a BB 11 MP a few years ago, and I liked the feel better than Volkl. In the sweetspot, I thought it had a comfortably "raw" and responsive feel, lots of feedback, but I couldn't control it. The progression to the London provides more forgiveness off center, more dwell, and much better maneuverability and control--with a more distinct feel with the DC, moving away from the stiffer DNX.
I wonder if this will create clear preferences among players between Volkl and BB? I would say it has for me.
If it is, it might be by an insignificant amount. I can't image anyone thinking the London is not "arm friendly". I have a sensitive elbow and the London is the first racquet that I could use with poly mains. I have also stopped using my elbow band completely with no ill effects.
Bottom line is that they will both be very arm frienedly racquets for sure.
Definitely worth a demo. I would be in such a bad situation if I had decide between the two.
The DNX 9 was harsh, but juniors and competitive female players with fast swings liked it. When leaded properly, I felt that it was a very controllable frame and the harshness disappeared. The PB 10 MP is very crisp. The dwell time isn't especially long, but it is crazy precise. If I played age group tourneys against slower pace than what I am accustomed, I would use it instead of my PB 10 Mid. This way, I wouldn't miss, and would win by attrition, as opposed to using the Mid to pressure my opponent, which is difficult to do off of slower balls, because it forces me to have aggressive footwork to generate pace with control, and doing that for three sets, is tough.
The BB 11 was designed to be powerful and cushioned, to answer the complaints that Volkl felt great, but lacked power. When it came out, a lot of players switched from Head and Wilson. The London is less cushioned than the BB 11, but far more controllable with access to far more spin. It combines the best of the BB 11 and the BB 11 Light.
Due to the nature of the DC, it will always be more problematic to use lead tape, as it will change the design characteristics of the frame. DNX will allow for more mods.
I am getting the X6/8/10 tomorrow, but not the X10 Light--I don't work with anyone who would chose the lighter version over the 325. I can tell you that the player reports which I have received give it a huge thumbs-up. It is crisper and more precise than the London, with less dwell time but with similar access to spin. A totally different feel to that of the London.
Did you ditch the London for the Dunlop Biomimetic 200 Lite?
Just curious why the BB Melbourne would be considered more demanding ? Due to the tighter string pattern? Swing weight, static weight, and head size would make me think the opposite.
Tighter string pattern in conjunction with the recessed cross string grommet holes. Hit outside the pocket and you will feel the 18 mains. The Melbourne is also less powerful, so the player has to pick-up the slack.
Bottom Line: There are many players who choose to play with the top of the line frames whose skill level does not allow them to utilize all of the frame's attributes. They have to live with that fact, because if they don't get better, the stick isn't going to turn into a magic wand.
Separate names with a comma.