PurePrestige
Semi-Pro
They've started painting/inking them brown, apparently painting the power pads brown makes them better/last longer. Not sure but Nate Ferguson and P1 have started doing it.
There's no evidence whatsoever to support this, yet BreakPoint touts it as absolute fact. For a guy who claims not to care what racquet Federer uses, you sure put a lot of time in studying that very subject.
How could you possibly know that Federer has been using the K90 for four years or that he's currently using it at all?
Because Wilson clearly said the k90 is what fed is really using, as opposed to other sticks in which they say the choice of #3 novak Djokovic which is still a kblade tour, but not the retail version, probably a prototype. That was not the case with Fed, by the wording wilson used to say thathope this helps clarify what BP said.
Exactly!!! The only time in history any racquet company has ever said that about one of their sponsored pros (suspected of using a paintjob)!!Then I guess that settles it! Wilson says that Fed uses the retail frame, and there shouldn't be anymore doubts about this!![]()
Exactly!!! The only time in history any racquet company has ever said that about one of their sponsored pros (suspected of using a paintjob)!!
That's why no racquet company has ever made the same claim about Safin, Hewitt, Djokovic, Haas, Blake, Fish, Henman, Gonzales, Robredo, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Berdych, Davydenko, Tsonga, Mathieu, Canas, Kiefer, Monfils, Lopez, etc. - you name it. Nope, Federer and his retail K90 is the only one in which the racquet company has publicly stated the pro uses the retail version of the racquet.
BTW, instead of wasting all this time claiming what other pros do, why don't you tell us exactly what about the retail K90 that makes it unplayable for Federer? What, it's too damanding for him and he's not quite good enough to use it? :roll:
You can also take NASA's word that man has stepped on the moon even though you have no proof other than what others have said, right?Are you asking for my personal opinion, or do you want to start an argument over counter beliefs? You can take Wilson's word for it, but there isn't any further proof beyond what's been printed.
Are you comparing NASA's achievements to Wilson's marketing department? BTW, why are you always using absurd analogies to try to prove your opinions?You can also take NASA's word that man has stepped on the moon even though you have no proof other than what others have said, right?
Huh? I guess you're just not bright enough to "get" my analogies.Are you comparing NASA's achievements to Wilson's marketing department? BTW, why are you always using absurd analogies to try to prove your opinions?
Huh? I guess you're just not bright enough to "get" my analogies.
What does "achievement" have to do with it?
I'm comparing press releases from organizations without the so-called "proof" that you apparently require before you'll believe anything.
BTW, the sun dosen't really exist either since you've never been there, and thus, have no "proof" that it's actually there.
There's not enough time in your lifetime for you to figure it out.Is that even worth my time? With +17k posts, you're definitely the G.O.A.T. of something.
There's not enough time in your lifetime for you to figure it out.
It's sad that you spend so much time trying to "prove" that everything in this world actually exists.![]()
You can also take NASA's word that man has stepped on the moon even though you have no proof other than what others have said, right?
Well, we all know how much your "personal opinion" is worth, don't we? You've been espousing your personal opinion here ad nauseam for a long time that you think Federer has actually been using a "90 sq. in. racquet with the same composite as the PS 6.0 85" for years, and not a retail K90, and ever since he switched from the PS 6.0 85.Are you asking for my personal opinion, or do you want to start an argument over counter beliefs? You can take Wilson's word for it, but there isn't any further proof beyond what's been printed.
There's also no physical evidence that Federer would beat me in a tennis match, but logic would dictate that he would, right? I mean even without physical evidence, the probability of Federer winning is 100%, don't you think?It's not that your argument doesn't make sense. It's just that you're declaring without-a-doubt something with no physical evidence.
why is Wilson only NOW trying to develop a 90 sq. in. racquet with the same composite as the PS 6.0 85 for Sampras?
Why would Wilson bother to make another 90 sq. in. racquet unless it was to make a "PS 6.0 90" that is as close to the PS 6.0 85 as possible? You know, the racquet that Sampras used for all of his career and most of his junior years and why Sampras is the one testing the prototypes? They even copied the throat shape. Why would they not also copy the composition in their effort to make it play and feel as close to the PS 6.0 85 as possible? And if a "PS 6.0 90" was not their goal, then why did they use the same throat shape and why wouldn't Sampras just continue to use the K90? And as many people here claim, Mids are dead so why is Wilson putting out a 3rd Mid in their line-up when most other manufacturers barely even have one?That is only speculation. You are stating it as if it is fact. All we know is that Sampras was playing with a prototype 90 sq inch racquet. We don't know its composition or whether it is just an old model reintroduced with hype.
Why would Wilson bother to make another 90 sq. in. racquet unless it was to make a "PS 6.0 90" that is as close to the PS 6.0 85 as possible? You know, the racquet that Sampras used for all of his career and most of his junior years and why Sampras is the one testing the prototypes? They even copied the throat shape. Why would they not also copy the composition in their effort to make it play and feel as close to the PS 6.0 85 as possible? And if a "PS 6.0 90" was not their goal, then why did they use the same throat shape and why wouldn't Sampras just continue to use the K90? And as many people here claim, Mids are dead so why is Wilson putting out a 3rd Mid in their line-up when most other manufacturers barely even have one?
Yes, logic is your friend. Use it or lose it.
You've been espousing your personal opinion here ad nauseam for a long time that you think Federer has actually been using a "90 sq. in. racquet with the same composite as the PS 6.0 85" for years, and not a retail K90, and ever since he switched from the PS 6.0 85.
It's not that your argument doesn't make sense. It's just that you're declaring without-a-doubt something with no physical evidence.
Huh? That makes no sense at all.What else could they have done? Make a K90 with the real material that Fed uses and claim once again that now we can buy the Fed racquet? The only way they can come out with a 90 sq in using Fed's real composition is to make a different racquet. Since so few pros use a 90, and that too a Wilson, Sampras is the choice.
Actually, the fact that their racquet could be a PS90 shows that Pete would not accept the stock K90 as he can tell that the composition is not what Fed uses. Wilson could get him the real Fed racquet, but why not make a new model with the old composition to get some additional sales going?
It's not that your argument doesn't make sense. It's just that you're declaring without-a-doubt something with no physical evidence.
Here are YOUR very OWN words:Please don't lie or twist my words. That statement is 100% false.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1869302&postcount=99
Roger Federer uses a ProStaff Tour 90 mold with a ProStaff 6.0 85 composite. That in fact, is my opinion. If you want to warp my words around, or try to convice others (TW members and non-members) otherwise, then so be it. Knock yourself out. Have fun trying to force-feed/manipulate your opinions upon others.
Why isn't Federer capable of doing the same thing with a retail K90? Because he's actually using the PS 6.0 85 composite with a larger racket head, so it'd be impossible with the retail k90.Silly.
Some people would say he is 'NOT using the retail k90 as the base' for his frames, while suggesting that he actually uses the PS 6.0 85 composite (which is known to have incredible ball feel because of the 17mm beam thickness) for his frames instead.
So are you trying to tell me that Federer prefers to use the retail k90 with the older Wilson Buttcap? He's def. using a paintjob of the k90, but the racket underneath has been the same since 2002. If I were the number one in the world, I would ask for the ps85 composite put into the tour 90 mold.![]()
If anyone would know about that racket, I'm sure the best person to ask would be Roger Federer himself. Again, would Federer rather use a retail k90 or a composite of the ProStaff 6.0 85 original in the Tour 90 mold?![]()
Honestly though, would Roger Federer rather use a ProStaff 85 composite in the Tour 90 mold, or would he rather use the retail k90? Thank you.
Federer never designed the nCode 90, Wilson designed it to what they think the public would want - more stiffness and power from the addition of the HyperCarbon.That is exactly the point. If pros used stock frames (that they claim to use) most of the time with a little customization, we would all agree with BP that Fed uses the K90. But we know for a fact that the N90 was not Fed's racquet, and that many top pros don't use the frames that the manufacturer claims in the ads. Based on the single fact that Wilson said this time it is Fed's actual frame, BP claims the K90 is his frame. Now Fed comes out and says that he has been using his current stick since 2002. It is unlikely Wilson was using SiO2 bonded with carbon in 2002. Then BP turns around and says Wilson must be lying - this Karophite thing is not new at all and may not even be what Wilson says it is - it is just a marketing name. In this case, we are supposed to disbelieve Wilson, and also in the N90 case, but we must believe Wilson about the K90. It just does not all make sense together as a package.
Haha, nice try with all my quotes, but you still can't twist this around, can you?Here are YOUR very OWN words:
Haha, nice try with all my quotes, but you still can't twist this around, can you?:shock:
Those are my opinions, and unlike you, I don't claim them to be facts.
I may also claim that the moon is made of cheese, but does that mean it is actually true?
Well, we all know how much your "personal opinion" is worth, don't we? You've been espousing your personal opinion here ad nauseam for a long time that you think Federer has actually been using a "90 sq. in. racquet with the same composite as the PS 6.0 85" for years, and not a retail K90, and ever since he switched from the PS 6.0 85.
So let me ask you this - if this is true, why is Wilson only NOW trying to develop a 90 sq. in. racquet with the same composite as the PS 6.0 85 for Sampras? According to you, they've already had this racquet for many years. You don't have an answer, do you?
You see, what's even more important than opinion is logic. Perhaps you haven't learned about logic yet in your young life? Well, let me tell you that it comes in pretty handy. You should try using it sometime.
He doesn't want the HyperCarbon. Therefore, it was left out of the retail K90.
Federer has never mentioned HyperCarbon because it has never been in any of his racquets!The "therefore" makes sense only if the premise is correct!
How on earth does anybody know that Federer "doesn't want the Hypercarbon?" Does he even know what is Hypercarbon? Does he even recall the term?
:roll: And like I've said before:Exactly!!! And I've already reminded you how much your opinions are worth:
If you were actually being honest with us, you would admit that you apparently don't have a lot of supporters for your "logic." Certainly not in this thread, nor in the last thread that was deleted, nor in the rest. BTW, why is your post count so high? Is it because you have such great "logic" that no one understands it the first time? Is it because you constantly have to try to con people with the use of your fallacies, digressions, and twisted analogies?Are you asking for my personal opinion, or do you want to start an argument over counter beliefs? You can take Wilson's word for it, but there isn't any further proof beyond what's been printed.
It's because at the higher intelligence levels, people with lower intelligence have a hard time comprehending it. It's like how Federer is a "genius" on the tennis court, that's why so few lesser talented players are able to perform the same "genius" that Federer does.If you were actually being honest with us, you would admit that you apparently don't have a lot of supporters for your "logic." Certainly not in this thread, nor in the last thread that was deleted, nor in the rest. BTW, why is your post count so high? Is it because you have such great "logic" that no one understands it the first time? Is it because you constantly have to try to con people with the use of your fallacies, digressions, and twisted analogies?
That's pretty sad to say, but it's actually 100% true. :-? He baits people, but I guess that'll never change as long as he's still around.Looks like BP well on the way to having another thread deleted. Way to go!
As the saying goes:Looks like BP well on the way to having another thread deleted. Way to go!
That is exactly the point. If pros used stock frames (that they claim to use) most of the time with a little customization, we would all agree with BP that Fed uses the K90. But we know for a fact that the N90 was not Fed's racquet, and that many top pros don't use the frames that the manufacturer claims in the ads. Based on the single fact that Wilson said this time it is Fed's actual frame, BP claims the K90 is his frame. Now Fed comes out and says that he has been using his current stick since 2002. It is unlikely Wilson was using SiO2 bonded with carbon in 2002. Then BP turns around and says Wilson must be lying - this Karophite thing is not new at all and may not even be what Wilson says it is - it is just a marketing name. In this case, we are supposed to disbelieve Wilson, and also in the N90 case, but we must believe Wilson about the K90. It just does not all make sense together as a package.
As the saying goes:
"When you can't compete, ask the mods to delete". :-?
It's because at the higher intelligence levels, people with lower intelligence have a hard time comprehending it. It's like how Federer is a "genius" on the tennis court, that's why so few lesser talented players are able to perform the same "genius" that Federer does.
It was the same with Einstein. Can YOU comprehend or explain Einstein's Theory of Relativity?
Some (or maybe lots of) things are just way over your head.![]()
Wilson NEVER claimed that Federer used the retail version of the nCode 90, so therefore, it's not even an apples-to-apples comparison.makes perfect sense, but remember, you are not dealing with a "normal" person here.
Yes, I know, but can you comprehend and explain either one without looking it up first?It should really be called a law, because it has been verified so many times.
There are also two theories of relativity, special and general.
Yes, I know, but can you comprehend and explain either one without looking it up first?
Maybe Sampras was referring to the nCode 90 paintjob he was using before? Maybe he was just trying not to get into it with Arias since this was still supposed to be a secret prototype that's still under development? I'm sure Wilson has told Sampras not to talk about this new racquet.Post now in another thread. If the composition of Sampras' racquet is different from the Fed K90, why would he call it Fed's racquet? Yet another indication that Fed does not use the layup of the K90.
I just almost fell out of my chair laughing my head off.No, but AlpineCadet can
Wilson NEVER claimed that Federer used the retail version of the nCode 90, so therefore, it's not even an apples-to-apples comparison.
BTW, if someone in your town committed a murder, the next time a murder is committed in your town do you automatically convict this same person without bothering to look at the evidence? Isn't the new murder a completely separate case that has to be judged by the merits of its own evidence?
Maybe Sampras was referring to the nCode 90 paintjob he was using before? Maybe he was just trying not to get into it with Arias since this was still supposed to be a secret prototype that's still under development? I'm sure Wilson has told Sampras not to talk about this new racquet.
In any event, it's OBVIOUS that it's not "Fed's racquet" as the throat shape is completely different!
This proves NOTHING about the layup of Fed's K90!
I just almost fell out of my chair laughing my head off.![]()