Shocked, either got lucky or QC improved. Let us know how it plays!Specs of the 2023 Prestige Pro 16x19 frames that I ordered:
#1: 324.01g - 31.9 cm - 289 SW
#2: 321.81g - 31.9 cm - 287 SW
Shocked, either got lucky or QC improved. Let us know how it plays!Specs of the 2023 Prestige Pro 16x19 frames that I ordered:
#1: 324.01g - 31.9 cm - 289 SW
#2: 321.81g - 31.9 cm - 287 SW
Care to elaborate?demoed these sticks pro and the tour . Worst racket of the year by far . Cosmetic wise it is very nice . However that racket lacks
Put the videos up while elaborating. Would be good to see what’s holding you backdemoed these sticks pro and the tour . Worst racket of the year by far . Cosmetic wise it is very nice . However that racket lacks
looks like I missed a lot of info.Shocked, either got lucky or QC improved. Let us know how it plays!
demoed these sticks pro and the tour . Worst racket of the year by far . Cosmetic wise it is very nice . However that racket lacks
After playing testing both rackets for about 1 week . It is AverageIs it average or is the worst? Pick a lane
How did you rate the previous gen auxetic prestige pro and 360+ mp for reference on things with those sticks.After playing testing both rackets for about 1 week . It is Average
You don't recognize a Wilsonbro post yet? He says everything is terrible.Care to elaborate?
I love the Prestige Pro and feel very connect to the ball and my shots are all very consistent.I lost all connection and feel with ball due to the new technology. My shots are inconsistent. The racket doesn’t do anything great in any department very average . I am pretty sure some people will love the stick
I agree, it is quite an improvement feel-wise over the previous model which was also a good racquet but occasionally played too firm despite its RA rating. I also served much better with the 360+ Prestige MP compared to the Auxetic 1.0 PP, but with the new PP serving is a dream, I think the super soft and plush feel of the frame encourages you to belt it.I love the Prestige Pro and feel very connect to the ball and my shots are all very consistent.
Hence, i asked him to post the video. Prestige is not for everyone, although those rating it as “average” are usually the “average 4.5” on TW!I love the Prestige Pro and feel very connect to the ball and my shots are all very consistent.
I'm just your average 9.0 ntrp dawgHence, i asked him to post the video. Prestige is not for everyone, although those rating it as “average” are usually the “average 4.5” on TW!
Sounds a nice update in that regard then. I am guessing power and generally playability is very similar to the previous two generations you mention? I tried a MP-L frame throughout the week though unfortunately in the UK the courts are currently flooded, indoor courts too so no more play this weekend. I found the MP-L played ok, I wasn't blown away by the feel infact it felt a bit similar to the graphene touch prestige mid I used a few times which was supposed to be very similar to the prestige mid 360+I agree, it is quite an improvement feel-wise over the previous model which was also a good racquet but occasionally played too firm despite its RA rating. I also served much better with the 360+ Prestige MP compared to the Auxetic 1.0 PP, but with the new PP serving is a dream, I think the super soft and plush feel of the frame encourages you to belt it.
360+ Mid has loads of spin so I'd imagine the slightly bigger head and slightly more open 16x19 of the Tour would be fine.i wonder which one should be more spin friendly. Pro with a bigger more „responsive” headsize or tour with „more responsive” 16x19 pattern. And what about the forgiveness.
Tour (for the previous iteration). The launch angle on Tour has a very good range. Penetrating and low on attack/closed stance but high launch in open stance.i wonder which one should be more spin friendly. Pro with a bigger more „responsive” headsize or tour with „more responsive” 16x19 pattern. And what about the forgiveness.
I found the Auxetic 1.0 MP-L too firm for me. It is very low powered in stock form but still has good control. The 2.0 MP-L may be a better option given it is significantly softer. I think on this thread someone asked about the 1.0 MP-L v the Gravity MP. I think the new Auxetic GMP is a great racquet and a big improvement on the original GMP - in fact I have two and use them a lot.Sounds a nice update in that regard then. I am guessing power and generally playability is very similar to the previous two generations you mention? I tried a MP-L frame throughout the week though unfortunately in the UK the courts are currently flooded, indoor courts too so no more play this weekend. I found the MP-L played ok, I wasn't blown away by the feel infact it felt a bit similar to the graphene touch prestige mid I used a few times which was supposed to be very similar to the prestige mid 360+
I am wondering whether to try and put a little weight on my 360+ mp, the swingweight is pretty much where I want it but maybe looking for a touch more power. It's a very easy racket to use though and I don't think i would want this 20mm Beam size with 98 head and layup in a 16/19 pattern having hit with the MP-L I think I definitely prefer the 18/20 all day long. Just tempted to try an auxetic pro as hearing it offers a bit more putaway power but no doubt at the expense of a touch of comfort compared to the 360+ MP
I have played with the 1.0 MP-L since 2021 (modified to my personal specifications of 327-307-31) and think this mold and layup is an amazing frame and well suited to any club player player (including those playing senior ITF’s). In other words, all players from 3.5 to to 5.0 rating should be able to generate great shots and power playing with this amazing frame.I found the Auxetic 1.0 MP-L too firm for me. It is very low powered in stock form but still has good control. The 2.0 MP-L may be a better option given it is significantly softer. I think on this thread someone asked about the 1.0 MP-L v the Gravity MP. I think the new Auxetic GMP is a great racquet and a big improvement on the original GMP - in fact I have two and use them a lot.
On the 360+ Prestige MP I always put 1g at 3, 9 and 12 and I found it made the racquet smoother and gave it a touch more power. I have not played enough yet with the 2.0 PP to know enough about its full potential, but in my opinion in terms of plush feel and comfort it is a significant improvement over the 360+ and Auxetic 1.0 versions.
I agree with you that the MP-L 2021 is a good frame and has typical Prestige-like control which I liked a lot. I have an elbow joint issue so any racquet with around an RA of 65 is typically too much for me, so that is where my reservations about the frame are based, and while the frame was comfortable I did not find it plush and soft say like the new PP. The MP-L 2023 model has been reported to play much softer and that is consistent with its much lower RA so that might be a frame more consistent with my preferences.I have played with the 1.0 MP-L since 2021 (modified to my personal specifications of 327-307-31) and think this mold and layup is an amazing frame and well suited to any club player player (including those playing senior ITF’s). In other words, all players from 3.5 to to 5.0 rating should be able to generate great shots and power playing with this amazing frame.
That said, if you are a current or former academy, college or pro player, your personal preference may skew your opinion and reaction to a frame like the MP-L
Cheers
Racquetcraft
Hey bud, try 2.0. Definitely plusher layup, keeping the rest the same. A perfect tweak to an (already) excellent racket!I have played with the 1.0 MP-L since 2021 (modified to my personal specifications of 327-307-31) and think this mold and layup is an amazing frame and well suited to any club player player (including those playing senior ITF’s). In other words, all players from 3.5 to to 5.0 rating should be able to generate great shots and power playing with this amazing frame.
That said, if you are a current or former academy, college or pro player, your personal preference may skew your opinion and reaction to a frame like the MP-L
Cheers
Racquetcraft
I agree, I think I'm switching to it.Hey bud, try 2.0. Definitely plusher layup, keeping the rest the same. A perfect tweak to an (already) excellent racket!
finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Make sure you stock up on the grommets (if available) as I can see those will be a headache later with a limited release.finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Damn... So wish I could get that in Canada... Or the US.finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Falsehoods!finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Falsehoods!
A known Head insider said this doesn't exist, will never exist, isn't real, we are all morons, we can't read, the websites were lying, and generally we should all take a flying leap.....
How do you explain such sorcery and dark arts that allowed you these pictures?
Damn... So wish I could get that in Canada... Or the US.
beautiful frame. can't wait to hear how it plays given how in-demand its pro stock counterpart is. TGT345.2finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Never saw that, ok.no, no, he corrected himself and he got confirmation about the existence of this racket too. mistery solved
We will be keen to hear how it plays please!finally received my 16x19 Pro 2023. It looks gorgeous I am so tempted to play it today at a tournament
Tour is 95, Pro is 98If a Prestige Pro 16 x 19 version exists, why is the Tour still being offered?
In fact, why did this mold, which was Prestige IG S, replace the old Prestige IG Pro?
Yes, that's it, however, I just don't see any point in offering a racket with a 22 mm beam.Tour is 95, Pro is 98
#1 | 300.43g | 31.15 cm | 278.5 SW |
#2 | 302.16g | 31.20 cm | 281.5 SW |
#3 | 303.67g | 31.45 cm | 276.0 SW |
#4 | 304.60g | 31.50 cm | 278.5 SW |
#5 | 301.38g | 31.40 cm | 277.5 SW |
#6 | 306.52g | 31.60 cm | 282.5 SW |
Yes, that's it, however, I just don't see any point in offering a racket with a 22 mm beam.
It would be better if they offered the Prestige IG Pro mold with the 21 mm beam
the 16x19 Pro is 20mm wide, 98" head size, 320g and 31cm unstrung balance. like the 18x20 Pro. Very different from the Tour
Originally it was to distinguish the Pro from the MP and make them different styles of frames, they kept with the mold through the generations and now here we are.What I want to say is that to this day I still don't understand why Head no longer sells the old mold that was the Prestige IG Pro (95 16 x 19), 21 mm beam. In the Graphene era, Head used the mold that was the Prestige IG S in Prestige Pro, which today is the Tour version (95 16 x 19, 22 mm beam). I didn't see any sense in that.
The tour (old S mold) is more accessible than the IG pro mold imo. Easier power, more stable out of the box etc.What I want to say is that to this day I still don't understand why Head no longer sells the old mold that was the Prestige IG Pro (95 16 x 19), 21 mm beam. In the Graphene era, Head used the mold that was the Prestige IG S in Prestige Pro, which today is the Tour version (95 16 x 19, 22 mm beam). I didn't see any sense in that.
The 16x19 feels more like an 16x18 imo, the crosses are more spaced out besides the weird top cross.Make sure you stock up on the grommets (if available) as I can see those will be a headache later with a limited release.
Beautiful stick. However, I feel like 18x20 gives us a perfect launch angle, good power and spin. I am curious to hear about 16x19 but fee like it would be too erratic for me
Head made it a point to distinguish the IG Prestige S from the IG Prestige Pro mold. this is evinced by the internal codes they used: TK291 and TK293. the similarities are that they're true 95" and 16x19 string pattern frames, but I'm sure if they were put side by side and nits were picked we would find their differences. the IG Prestige S is a far cry from today's Tour in terms of layup though. I think the IG Prestige S code was TGK291.2 whereas we are --- or were --- on TGK291.7 with the Prestige Tour.
the original IG Prestige S was accessible while still feeling like a Prestige. in introducing the TK334 Head made Prestige accessible with a 99" headsize and 18x19 string pattern.
folks have remarked today's Prestige Tour plays a lot like a 6.1 95. it's easy to feel like up is down when even Radicals are said to feel like Blades when Blades were designed to compete with Radicals in the first place.
I would be curious about Head's decision to make a brand new racquet for Lorenzo Musetti who used the IG Prestige S. he famously uses an Extreme Tour painted as a Boom. given his age and exciting game he would have been an awesome face for the present and future of the Prestige silo