Clash

#51
The frame is constructed in such a way that it flexes at certain points and remains stiffer at other points. Apparently the frame responds in different ways depending on the amount of force applied to the frame when it impacts with the tennis ball.

What I'm curious about is whether the frame will crack in the same place when it is abused. If it does, that will provide more information regarding the racquet's layup.
Has anyone cracked one yet? Seems to be some worry about the bend on it
 
#53
Based upon experience, it seems that tennis elbow and shoulder pains are caused more by switching of equipment such as racquets and strings. TE has been around forever including the wood racquet era.

My friends who suffer seem to be the same guys who switch racquets from stiff to flexible or vice versa. The same is true of strings. I could definitely be wrong but it seems to me that one’s technique is learned to adapt to their chosen technology. I play a super heavy 13.5 oz racquet that is at least 20 points headlight and very flexible. I have very flat swings. I have extreme difficulty using lightweight stiff frames. It’s just not my cup of tea to swing that easy or to swing with a ton of spin to try to offset my power.

The only time I ever had elbow pain was when I switched to using the Head Microgel Radical OS. It had to be due to it being so lightweight. It was strung with synthetic gut too.

In summary, low flex is the most oversold thing recently. It’s nothing but a diet fad.
I just finished my Heavy Training Racquet Project with filling a flexy Wilson racquet(57 RA) with foam and silicone till it weighed in at 13.1.....started at 9.2....I play with big top on both sides and am still able to create that head speed despite the weight....I played with a Dunlop 200 200g in the 80's and put it down for 30 years because of occupational factors(chef)...it was a cudgel...easily over 12...So I am happy to hear there are others with 13 plus racquets out there and not crying about the weight...but the wood era pros were regularily playing with 13-15 oz stix......Very soft Wilson frame with an RA of 57 and I love it....regular frame is a Donnay...The Clash does sound intriguing and will have to have a bash....see if they found the grail....
 
Last edited:
#54
The frame is constructed in such a way that it flexes at certain points and remains stiffer at other points. Apparently the frame responds in different ways depending on the amount of force applied to the frame when it impacts with the tennis ball..
What I was thinking was see at the bottom of the yoke, the upside down triangle in the centre of the racq, at the bottom of that triangle, you can see that they scoop out the raised ridge that provides torsional strength for the rest of the yoke. What I am thinking that where that raised ridge ends - is where it will flex more, that is at the top of the grip, just above your hand I guess 8 or 9 inches up
 
#55
What I was thinking was see at the bottom of the yoke, the upside down triangle in the centre of the racq, at the bottom of that triangle, you can see that they scoop out the raised ridge that provides torsional strength for the rest of the yoke. What I am thinking that where that raised ridge ends - is where it will flex more, that is at the top of the grip, just above your hand I guess 8 or 9 inches up
That all makes sense.

The big unknown is how durable the layup will be especially for heavy hitters using stiff string beds. If he racquet takes a pounding surely there will be fatigue at that point, then the inevitable micro-cracks, and then BANG !!!!
 
#56
The big unknown is how durable the layup will be especially for heavy hitters using stiff string beds. ...fatigue at that point
I think that this racq absolutely offers the option for the first time to TE sufferers of a flexy racq with which a player can choose, or may be able to fit stiffer strings. That is a big deal if it works out like that.

Fatigue is usually catastrophic in tennis racqs. Bit like carbon bikes. Framed shots, regular hitting, stiffer strings, - the greater give in this frame should mitigate against fatigue but not prevent catastrophic collapse - a crack and the collapse.
 
#58
@kailash good question. Im wondering too, and it shows that these all reviews is very subjective and depends who are testing. It will be fine if at least one tester participate in testing Tour version and normal to compare sticks. These results from TW review and users reviews especially regarding normal version are very different. After reading users reviews I thought that Tour version is better. Now I don't know wich will be better for me
 
#59
I just saw the TW reviews. How can the Tour version has around 10 points low in control & touch/feel (79 vs 88 and 77 vs 87)?
The tour version definitely has less control to me. The racquet itself with it's thick beam and large headsize already has plenty of power. When you add in the extra weight, the power level increases and therefore, control will suffer. It’s not like they reduced the headsize and beam thickness for the tour version. They kept everything the same and added more weight. Take a look at the PA and the PA Tour for example. The PA Tour has much more power and also less control.
 
#60
@kailash good question. Im wondering too, and it shows that these all reviews is very subjective and depends who are testing. It will be fine if at least one tester participate in testing Tour version and normal to compare sticks. These results from TW review and users reviews especially regarding normal version are very different. After reading users reviews I thought that Tour version is better. Now I don't know wich will be better for me
I agree. Tested by different play testers and the scores are very subjective.
 
#61
The tour version definitely has less control to me. The racquet itself with it's thick beam and large headsize already has plenty of power. When you add in the extra weight, the power level increases and therefore, control will suffer. It’s not like they reduced the headsize and beam thickness for the tour version. They kept everything the same and added more weight. Take a look at the PA and the PA Tour for example. The PA Tour has much more power and also less control.
That's interesting! Not sure just adding some weight will change the control that much. You tried them with same strings, tension?
 

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
#62
Power increases with swingweight so you are correct on that ground alone, but they take into account how easy it is to generate power by selecting different playtesters on the reviews.

For an excellent player, moving from the standard to the tour will indeed create extra power.

The tour version definitely has less control to me. The racquet itself with it's thick beam and large headsize already has plenty of power. When you add in the extra weight, the power level increases and therefore, control will suffer. It’s not like they reduced the headsize and beam thickness for the tour version. They kept everything the same and added more weight. Take a look at the PA and the PA Tour for example. The PA Tour has much more power and also less control.
 
#65
Power increases with swingweight so you are correct on that ground alone, but they take into account how easy it is to generate power by selecting different playtesters on the reviews.

For an excellent player, moving from the standard to the tour will indeed create extra power.
Increasing SW DOES NOT increase the Power of a given racquet. (It actually reduces the amount of energy that is lost when the racquet and the tennis ball collide.) And one must also consider how changing the mass of the tennis racquet effects Racquet Head Speed.

The Tour Version by virtue of its additional mass will lose less energy during the collision. But the net effect on the outgoing ball will depend on the RHS. I

Please refer to "Technical Tennis" by Rod Cross and Crawford Lindsey for detailed explanations.
 
#66
I found myself laughing about this stiffness...
In the 80s and 90s almost all frames had lower RA than this frame...
Nothing beats an PowerFlex or Graphite Pro 90 from the Prince...
Ahahaha



Enviado do meu iPhone usando o Tapatalk
 
#67
Been playing Wilson racquets primarily since wooden racquets in the 10’s. The new Wilson frames, other than the 6.1 re-issue, PS97(still requires weight for most) and RF97 are a complete joke when it comes to a players frame. The 2017 6.1 disappeared about as quickly as it came out leaving many scrambling to get enough frames to use them. Even the Blade 18x20 and Ultra tour in 18x20 are so light that one has to take on a complete science project to play with the frame. They have good frames for beginners and kids and it’s unfortunate for the 4.0+ player. Not much to choose from. That’s one reason we see ATP and WTA players using old frames and having them painted like new frames. Pitiful.
How about make a few players frames with decent weight so you don’t require the consumer to take on a science project to get them to play well?
 
Last edited:
#68
Been playing Wilson racquets primarily since wooden racquets in the 10’s. The new Wilson frames, other than the 6.1 re-issue, PS97(still requires weight for most) and RF97 are a complete joke when it comes to a players frame. The 2017 6.1 disappeared about as quickly as it came out leaving many scrambling to get enough frames to use them. Even the Blade 18x20 and Ultra tour in 18x20 are so light that one has to take on a complete science project to play with the frame. They have good frames for beginners and kids and it’s unfortunate for the 4.0+ player. Not much to choose from. That’s one reason we see ATP and WTA players using old frames and having them painted like new frames. Pitiful.
How about make a few players frames with decent weight so you don’t require the consumer to take on a science project to get them to play well?
I think the practical problem comes from several facts:

Most adults, especially the women, do not add lead to their frames and just play with whatever they get. On the other hand, many will reject a frame outright if they find it is heavy when they swing it. They are the largest market, at least in the US.

Advanced juniors, college players, and pros may actually prefer lighter frames which they can lead up as per their needs. They also may not appreciate a stock higher weight.
 
#69
I think the practical problem comes from several facts:

Most adults, especially the women, do not add lead to their frames and just play with whatever they get. On the other hand, many will reject a frame outright if they find it is heavy when they swing it. They are the largest market, at least in the US.

Advanced juniors, college players, and pros may actually prefer lighter frames which they can lead up as per their needs. They also may not appreciate a stock higher weight.

True, but 4.0+ men are basically left with a science project to find what works. We aren’t all racquet techs that can dial something in immediately and finding someone to do that effectively is not reality in many parts of the country. Have been tweaking on racquets with lead for a long time and it’s still a pain to find what works for certain players. Get 6-8 guys in your club that have you working on their frames with weight..you follow? They are better off starting with heavier frames and making suttle adjustments.
RF97 and 6.1 old and new are great frames without having to add lead. Adding weight to those frames is a minimal adjustment. Player accustomed to a 12+ ounce racquet starting with a frame that weighs 10.2 is in for a nightmare to find what works and duplicating it from frame to frame is fun as well.
Have a significant number of players that have considered the Blade 18x20 and Ultra Tour 18x20 but look at them and say, “that’s too light”. They don’t care to pay over $200 dollars for something they have to immediately start working on. Professional players have racquet techs at their disposal. The 3.5 and below women’s market buy a frame and keep it forever. The 3.5 ladies that come out to drills have the same frames they always have had and occasionally ask “do I need new strings”. They don’t exactly buy a large number of frames after the intital purchase. 4.0+ guys will have 2,4,6..8 frames of what they use.
The best selling Wilson frame recently was the Pro Staff 97. Not sure what it is now but supposedly the Federer frame is one the best selling of all time as well.
Guess it is just frustrating that the only frames they are producing over 11.5 ounces strung are the Pro Staff 97 and RF97.
Pro shops are always ending up with stacks of light frames they have to put on the sale rack to get rid of while the players frames go quickly and finding frames with 41/2 grips becomes increasing difficult.
 
Last edited:
Top