HELP! Wilson Amplifeel 6.1 95 vs BLX, one year later

[DonDiego]

Ok six one lovers: it's been (almost) one year since the release of the new six one 95 from Wilson. So I figured enough people have used it to comment on how it differs from the 2010 BLX model.

I've been using the two frames for the past two months, and just can't decide which one I like most. Please help me figure out the pros and cons. Here's what I noticed about the new one (Amplifeel, 16x18):

-It has a bit narrower head, and slightly better control.
-The static and swingweight are the same, but feels different. It feels lighter than the BLX when you hold it in your hand, but not that much when playing.
-Wilson put less weight in the throat of this racquet. That explains the impression of lower swingweight, but it also makes for a less solid (stable) stick than the BLX. Especially at net on hard passing shots, and when returning heavy serves.
-It has a bit less spin potential than the BLX, but amazing control. That is by far it's best attribute.
-Power is pretty much the same with both racquets -- a lot.

Have you had the same experience? If you played with both, which one do you prefer?

 

[jersey34tennis]

the i prefer the new open pattern 6.1 to the previous blx one. i felt it far more maneuverable and didn't find any stability issues whatsoever. i found it to have power rivaling the k factor open pattern version and overall i'm a fan. the 18x20 version i didn't like as much . for some reason i preferred the previos blx version. it seemed a bit more crisp

 

[Torres]

I've been using the two frames for the past two months, and just can't decide which one I like most. Please help me figure out the pros and cons. Here's what I noticed about the new one (Amplifeel, 16x18):

-It has a bit narrower head, and slightly better control.
-The static and swingweight are the same, but feels different. It feels lighter than the BLX when you hold it in your hand, but not that much when playing.
-Wilson put less weight in the throat of this racquet. That explains the impression of lower swingweight, but it also makes for a less solid (stable) stick than the BLX. Especially at net on hard passing shots, and when returning heavy serves.
-It has a bit less spin potential than the BLX, but amazing control. That is by far it's best attribute.
-Power is pretty much the same with both racquets -- a lot.

I think you're getting a bit confused. The mold, head shape, drill patterns, specs, spin, control, power etc between the 2010 and the 2012 6.1 95s are exactly the same

What you're probably noticing are differences in factory specs, which Wilson are notorious for. I've owned probably eight or nine 2010/2012 6.1 95s, and there can be massive differences between the same 'model' of racquet. I've seen 7g weight differences between the same model, 3-4 point balance differences, and that's even before we even get into different distributions of mass.

That said, the 2010 and 2012 models do 'feel' different in terms of construction and feedback. The 2012 feels more 'direct' in terms of feedback, the 2010, more 'diffuse', though neither feel uncomfortable. As to which one you prefer, its just a matter of personal preference.

 

[DonDiego]

Thank Torres. But don't you feel any difference in terms of solidness or stability? I feel the BLX has an edge over the Amplifeel. I reached this conclusion after practicing A LOT my volleys recently, with a coach that was throwing me rockets at the net.

 

[Torres]

There are differences in solidity and stability but there can be differences between the two racquets of the same year, so I'd be reluctant to say that 2012 feels more solid than 2010 or vice versa.

 

[DonDiego]

There are differences in solidity and stability but there can be differences between the two racquets of the same year, so I'd be reluctant to say that 2012 feels more solid than 2010 or vice versa.

Got it. So far I've used three different BLX sticks and they all felt solid. I've used two Amplifeel frames and they both felt unstable at times. It can be Wilson QC but I'm skeptical. Let's see what others have to say.

 

[Torres]

Got it. So far I've used three different BLX sticks and they all felt solid. I've used two Amplifeel frames and they both felt unstable at times. It can be Wilson QC but I'm skeptical. Let's see what others have to say.

Well, I have two 2012 95s and one them (361g with OG) is as solid if not more solid, than any of the 2010 95s I have. I have another 2012 which is more head heavy, more handle light, but again rock solid in the hoop though it feels more cumbersome to swing even though its 6g lighter.

I used to have a 2010 95 which felt like a tree log (360g), and currently two 2010 95s which handle beautifully and are fast feeling, and even at 354g and 355g feel lighter and infinitely easier to swing than my BLX Juice Pro at 346g. Neither are ultimately as solid and stable as other 95s I've owned, but I chose a faster feeling head over ultimate mass.

 

[DonDiego]

Well, I have two 2012 95s and one them (361g with OG) is as solid if not more solid, than any of the 2010 95s I have. I have another 2012 which is more head heavy, more handle light, but again rock solid in the hoop though it feels more cumbersome to swing even though its 6g lighter.

I used to have a 2010 95 which felt like a tree log (360g), and currently two 2010 95s which handle beautifully and are fast feeling, and even at 354g and 355g feel lighter and infinitely easier to swing than my BLX Juice Pro at 346g. Neither are ultimately as solid and stable as other 95s I've owned, but I chose a faster feeling head over ultimate mass.

Do you feel like you could switch between the 2012 and 2010 frame (with same weight or close to) anytime during a match, and not even noticing it? (Except maybe for the different feel of the ball)

 

[Torres]

Do you feel like you could switch between the 2012 and 2010 frame (with same weight or close to) anytime during a match, and not even noticing it? (Except maybe for the different feel of the ball)

In an ideal world, you wouldn't want to swtich between different generaton frames during match, but if you did, of course you would notice it because they're constructed differently with the 2012 having more 'direct' feedback through the handle. The feel is different.

But assuming that the frames are perfectly matched in every way including strings and distribution of mass, it shouldn't be a detriment or certainly not a difference you couldn't adjust to. Personally, I prefer the 2010 6.1s but as I mentioned earlier, its just personal preference, probably influenced by the fact that I've playing with them for the best part of 3 years.

I think finding a 6.1 that matches the specs that you want is more important than whether its a 2010 or 2012 model.

 

[babar]

I used the BLX 6.1 for about two years. I loved everything about it except that I had trouble getting it around as well on serve due to the weight. The new 2012 6.1, on paper, seems to be exactly what I would want. When I tried it, over a few months, I felt I could swing it easier than the 2010, but I did not feel it to be less stable, just more maneuverable and thus, easier for me to swing on serve. I would totally have bought it, but the demo bug got me hooked on the new Yonex frames and I fell for the new EZone Xi 98. Alas, I still feel like I should get a 2012 BLX 6.1.

 

[DonDiego]

I used the BLX 6.1 for about two years. I loved everything about it except that I had trouble getting it around as well on serve due to the weight. The new 2012 6.1, on paper, seems to be exactly what I would want. When I tried it, over a few months, I felt I could swing it easier than the 2010, but I did not feel it to be less stable, just more maneuverable and thus, easier for me to swing on serve. I would totally have bought it, but the demo bug got me hooked on the new Yonex frames and I fell for the new EZone Xi 98. Alas, I still feel like I should get a 2012 BLX 6.1.

It's weird cause if you look at the specs of each racquet on TW University (http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/racquetspecs2.cgi), the 2012 is actually heavier, and has a heavier swingweight. That is also what I got when measuring them at home. And that's the feeling I get when I play with them. I always felt the 2010 was more maneuverable. That's why I still prefer it, by a slight margin.

 

[tlm]

I am demoing the team version and think it plays very good. Even though it is pretty light it still plays pretty solid, and with the terrible inconsistencies in wilson QC you can weight it to the specs you want.

 

[DonDiego]

I am demoing the team version and think it plays very good. Even though it is pretty light it still plays pretty solid, and with the terrible inconsistencies in wilson QC you can weight it to the specs you want.

Yes, the TEAM is an incredible racquet -- if you like light racquets. I'm not sure you can make it a heavy racquet (and benefit from heavy racquets attributes) just by adding lead tape. But if your goal is to make it around 325 strung, it should work well.

It is more flexible than the six one, and with Amplifeel the comfort is second to none. I only tried the 18x20 (in Canada), and didn't like the string pattern for spin. But maneuverability, control, even stability... a very good racquet. Probably Wilson's best update in 2012.

 

[tlm]

Yes, the TEAM is an incredible racquet -- if you like light racquets. I'm not sure you can make it a heavy racquet (and benefit from heavy racquets attributes) just by adding lead tape. But if your goal is to make it around 325 strung, it should work well.

It is more flexible than the six one, and with Amplifeel the comfort is second to none. I only tried the 18x20 (in Canada), and didn't like the string pattern for spin. But maneuverability, control, even stability... a very good racquet. Probably Wilson's best update in 2012.

Ya I will just add a little weight, I have found that with the lighter versions like this team racket there is much better control than the regular version. You lose plow through and some stability, but I love the excellent control that the lighter racket has. Then between strings, tension and a little weight added I can fine tune it.

 

[Sean4016]

I play the 2012 version and like many have said it drives me absolutely crazy the spec differences between the racquets. I recently ordered one more and now it has a slightly different paint job as the ones from last year. Has anyone else seen this? I will post a pic if I get the chance.

 

[barry]

I think it is in the Amplifeel. I have used the BLX 95, New BLX 95, and both of the new blades with Amplifeel. The Ampifeel models seem stiffer and lack feel. Could be the fiber strips in the handle, but I switched back to the older version. Seemed to have more touch and feel. I know Ampifeel was designed to reduce vibrations, but for me it lacks feel and seems stiff.

Also purchased an 16x19 blade and it felt the same way. For some strange reason came out of my hand several times during a match. I never lose a racket during play, plus had a sore forearm. Something different for sure!

Best 6.1 ever was the Red one, still have a few of them.

 

[DonDiego]

I guess I'm lucky. I've got three BLX 2010 and they all weight 348 with a OG and a dampener. The 2012 I have weights 356.

It really helps to put a 18 gauge string in these racquets. For example, you can lower the weight as much as 7-8 grams just by switching from a 16 gauge poly to a 18 gauge multi (RIP control being the lightest). You also gain more headlightness and maneuverability.

 

[corners]

It's weird cause if you look at the specs of each racquet on TW University (http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/racquetspecs2.cgi), the 2012 is actually heavier, and has a heavier swingweight. That is also what I got when measuring them at home. And that's the feeling I get when I play with them. I always felt the 2010 was more maneuverable. That's why I still prefer it, by a slight margin.

TWU only tests one frame of each model. If you look around at the specs listed by various online retailers you'll see a massive variation with both the 2010 and 2012 models. I don't survey the specs of many frames like this but I have looked carefully at a couple. The K, BLX and 2012 versions of the 6.1 all have/had huge QC issues. For each of these iterations I've seen swingweights listed in the low 320s and the high 330s. When you're talking about two sticks, one with 322 swingweight and another with 338 swingweight, in my opinion they are not even the same model. I don't know why this continues to be a problem for Wilson, but if I was a 6.1 95 player I wouldn't buy these things unless I a) knew the specs I preferred, and b) asked TW or another retailer to pull two or more frames with those specs from inventory.

 

[MAXXply]

I took delivery of mine this week. Unfortunately it weighs 350gms strung, without my obligatory overgrip. :-(

 

[tlm]

The 2012 team edition is much better than prior 95 team versions. Anyone looking for a easy to swing spin friendly racket with excellent control should give it a try.

 

[DonDiego]

Bumping this thread!

I played with the BLX (2010) for the past year, and liked it a lot. But just bought the new one (on sale for 129$, how could I miss that?), and can't wait to play with it and compare it to the previous model, one year later.

Anyone else want to weigh in? If you played with both (or just the new one), which one do you prefer?

 

[borgpro]

Do you think there will be a new line already at the start of 2014?

 

[DonDiego]

Do you think there will be a new line already at the start of 2014?

Maybe, but I prefer paying 129$ for the 2012 model than forking 200$ for the new one to come.

 

[fuzz nation]

It's weird cause if you look at the specs of each racquet on TW University (http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/racquetspecs2.cgi), the 2012 is actually heavier, and has a heavier swingweight. That is also what I got when measuring them at home. And that's the feeling I get when I play with them. I always felt the 2010 was more maneuverable. That's why I still prefer it, by a slight margin.

Aside from the different weights of different strings, I think it's important to get the balances of different frames that I use dialed in so that the racquets have similar maneuvering behavior. From the sounds of things, you might not have the same HL balance in your 2012 frame that you get with the other one.

Whether my racquets weigh 12.0 oz. or 13.4 oz., they all have more familiar handling for me when the balances are "right". That could mean that the heavier racquet may require one or two extra points of HL balance, but the right balance gives me better maneuverability in a heavier frame.

Fortunately you already have both racquets; you don't really have to choose!
Just don't be afraid to try a little mild tuning to make it easier to swap out one for the other.

 

[BLX_Andy]

Thank Torres. But don't you feel any difference in terms of solidness or stability? I feel the BLX has an edge over the Amplifeel. I reached this conclusion after practicing A LOT my volleys recently, with a coach that was throwing me rockets at the net.

Don't they both have BLX technology? The 2012 Amplifeel iteration also has the BLX logo on it.

 

[bt johnson]

TWU only tests one frame of each model. If you look around at the specs listed by various online retailers you'll see a massive variation with both the 2010 and 2012 models. I don't survey the specs of many frames like this but I have looked carefully at a couple. The K, BLX and 2012 versions of the 6.1 all have/had huge QC issues. For each of these iterations I've seen swingweights listed in the low 320s and the high 330s. When you're talking about two sticks, one with 322 swingweight and another with 338 swingweight, in my opinion they are not even the same model. I don't know why this continues to be a problem for Wilson, but if I was a 6.1 95 player I wouldn't buy these things unless I a) knew the specs I preferred, and b) asked TW or another retailer to pull two or more frames with those specs from inventory.

My 2012 6.1 95s 18x20 have swingweights of 335 and 352, Wilson won't even respond. I prefer my 2010 6.1 95s much better. The 2012 18x20 all have sillicone in the handles. Anyway I recently switched to Tecnifibre and the club where I teach (1200) people won't be getting Wilson frames through me anymore

 

[Fintft]

I used the BLX 6.1 for about two years. I loved everything about it except that I had trouble getting it around as well on serve due to the weight. The new 2012 6.1, on paper, seems to be exactly what I would want. When I tried it, over a few months, I felt I could swing it easier than the 2010, but I did not feel it to be less stable, just more maneuverable and thus, easier for me to swing on serve. I would totally have bought it, but the demo bug got me hooked on the new Yonex frames and I fell for the new EZone Xi 98. Alas, I still feel like I should get a 2012 BLX 6.1.

You are right: to me and to what vendors like TW listed the 2012 6.1 95 Amplifeel have a lower swing weight, but the same weight as the 2010 6.1 95 BLX.

 

[Fintft]

I think you're getting a bit confused. The mold, head shape, drill patterns, specs, spin, control, power etc between the 2010 and the 2012 6.1 95s are exactly the same

What you're probably noticing are differences in factory specs, which Wilson are notorious for. I've owned probably eight or nine 2010/2012 6.1 95s, and there can be massive differences between the same 'model' of racquet. I've seen 7g weight differences between the same model, 3-4 point balance differences, and that's even before we even get into different distributions of mass.

That said, the 2010 and 2012 models do 'feel' different in terms of construction and feedback. The 2012 feels more 'direct' in terms of feedback, the 2010, more 'diffuse', though neither feel uncomfortable. As to which one you prefer, its just a matter of personal preference.

I own 4 BLXes 2010 model and 3 Amplifeels 2012 models and the later seem to me (I had weighted them at some point) to have a lower swing weight, being more HL (but of the same weight as the 2010). I'm using the Amplifeels 2012 now.

Dunno, maybe the quality control is better to the ones I got, b/c that's how they are supposed to be according to the specifications listed by TW and what's written on the frames.

 

[MikeHitsHard93]

The only other 6.1 I've hit is the psc 6.1. I'm demoing the amplifeel right now. Wayyyyyy less power with the new one, and it seems to have a lot of unwanted vibration.

 

[SC in MA]

I have one of each year's 16x18 model. I find the 2010 version to be less powerful with better control when both were equally strung. (Pacific Tough Gut 16g in mains and Gosen Micro 16 syn gut in crosses, both at 60lb.)

I definitely prefer the 2010 version so I haven't played with the 2012 version in quite awhile (I've been using the nCode version as my backup).

Sorry I don't have the weight specs. From what I recall, I believe I thought the 2010 version played a bit lighter and had better feel.

Both are very solid with great plow in stock form. I've been experimenting with some lighter rackets, but its the solid plow that keeps me coming back to this racket.

I'll probably give the 2012 version another try in the near future, stringing it tighter than my normal 60lbs to see if I can harness the power a little better.

 

[DonDiego]

Played with the 2012 model yesterday, after a year playing with the former BLX (2010-2011).

I must say the feel, which I didn't like that much when I first tried it last year, is spectacular. It IS enhanced by the Amplifeel (although the BLX has great fell too). It has indeed a lower swingweight, and that helps at the net (better than the BLX for volleys, I'm sure) and for overheads. It is also as solid as the previous model, despite my first impression last year.

The only irritant I have when I play with it, is that I don't seem to get as much spin with this one. Or rather, the launch angle of the ball doesn't seem quite the same as with the BLX. I feel like I have to get down more on my knees to produce the same arc. Anyone else noticed something similar? It might have to do with the narrower head (although just a quarter of an inch smaller). TW University also shows a slightly smaller spin window for the new model. I know it's so small a difference that it shouldn't be noticeable, but that's the experience I got yesterday.

 

[DonDiego]

I remember trying RPM Blast 18 gauge in the 2012 Amplifeel, and really liked it. It can seem lively in an already lively racquet, but it grabbed the ball so well...

 

[Silent]

I played with the BLX (2010) for the past year, and liked it a lot. But just bought the new one (on sale for 129$, how could I miss that?), and can't wait to play with it and compare it to the previous model, one year later.

Anyone else want to weigh in? If you played with both (or just the new one), which one do you prefer?

I just bought the 2012 model. Never played with the 2010 but own the ncode as well. Have demoed the K95 but didn't like it, a while ago.

Strangely/Luckily enough, if you look at my signature, both have very similar specs. With the same gauge of strings, the BLX would become slightly more head light, but slightly lighter too.

Unfortunately, I haven't really tried it yet. I wanted to try the stock grip, but it only lasted 2 minutes as it made the handle too round to my liking, so I switched to the ncode right away.

As a side note, the Babolat Leather grip weighs exactly the same as the stock grip, the Wilson Pro Hybrid. The racquet weighs 359g with the stock or with the Babolat grip.

 

[Fintft]

I just bought the 2012 model. Never played with the 2010 but own the ncode as well. Have demoed the K95 but didn't like it, a while ago.

Unfortunately, I haven't really tried it yet. I wanted to try the stock grip, but it only lasted 2 minutes as it made the handle too round to my liking, so I switched to the ncode right away.

Ah, I too have been having grip problems with the 2012 (Amplifeel model); don't recall having them in the 2010 (BLX).

The but cap seems too raised and that caused me not to grip it properly on the FH, for months, i.e. I'd be having 2 fingers hanging etc.

And if I've focused on the grip, guess what happened to my shots?

Someone gave me the basic idea (duh to me!) to use the over grip(Yonex Supergrab) to ease the slope of the but cup and it helps...I'll also mention it to my stringer, today, when he changes the grip (Head Hydrasorb Tourb)

 

[Fintft]

Played with the 2012 model yesterday, after a year playing with the former BLX (2010-2011).

I must say the feel, which I didn't like that much when I first tried it last year, is spectacular. It IS enhanced by the Amplifeel (although the BLX has great fell too). It has indeed a lower swingweight, and that helps at the net (better than the BLX for volleys, I'm sure) and for overheads. It is also as solid as the previous model, despite my first impression last year.

The only irritant I have when I play with it, is that I don't seem to get as much spin with this one. Or rather, the launch angle of the ball doesn't seem quite the same as with the BLX. I feel like I have to get down more on my knees to produce the same arc. Anyone else noticed something similar? It might have to do with the narrower head (although just a quarter of an inch smaller). TW University also shows a slightly smaller spin window for the new model. I know it's so small a difference that it shouldn't be noticeable, but that's the experience I got yesterday.

You first point:

I'm glad we agree!

As for your second, that might explain some of the problems I've been having Working on them though: playing lower, moving on the balls of the feet, don't forget the split step etc.

 

[DonDiego]

You first point:

I'm glad we agree!

As for your second, that might explain some of the problems I've been having Working on them though: playing lower, moving on the balls of the feet, don't forget the split step etc.

Yeah, seems like the 2012 model has been brought in to make us better players!

As an aside, I was at the Rogers Cup yesterday in Montreal, and as I always do I spent the day watching the guys practice (the hell with my seat in the stadium, games are boring!), and the Amplifeel 6.1 was by far the most popular racquet out there, especially among double players. Although it was mostly the 18x20 pattern (from what I could see). Also saw a lot of frames from the prestige line, as always.

 

[Fintft]

Yeah, seems like the 2012 model has been brought in to make us better players!

As an aside, I was at the Rogers Cup yesterday in Montreal, and as I always do I spent the day watching the guys practice (the hell with my seat in the stadium, games are boring!), and the Amplifeel 6.1 was by far the most popular racquet out there, especially among double players. Although it was mostly the 18x20 pattern (from what I could see). Also saw a lot of frames from the prestige line, as always.

Ah, to make us better players One other reason I've like the Amplifeel vs the BLX was the lower swing weight, allowing me to try to learn faster racket head speeds/swings (while also driving through the ball etc).

Last night when both my sticks were broken and my spare one was at home, I had to hit for an easy practice with a lighter frame (35g lighter, 10g less Swing weight), size 4 1/4, it was kinda crappy, wobbly lol (Wilson BLX Pro Open 100, instead of my regular 6.1 95 Amplifeel). But I had to swing faster while still trying to maintain form (i.e. finish high on the 1H BH etc).

I've also realized in the process that there might be some things I was getting away at times with the heavier frames (6.1 even Amplifeel)....

Nice to hear about your trip! I passed on Montreal and instead went hiking to Lake Placid (as preparation to a harder trip starting Thursday in Carpathians).

Many of my friends like you went and loved watching the pros practice....

As one can see on TV, the 6.1 Amplifeel is pretty common and as a matter of fact, historically speaking the 6.1 95 has been the most popular model among all pros that use Wilson.

 

[coolschreiber]

I'm just curious why TW rates the 16x18 as a 4.5 - 7.0 player stick. I don't get it. I'm guessing its only because of the unpredictable nature of the 16x18 pattern???
When so may pros use this frame - delpo, kohli etc. Obviously theirs are customized but the string pattern is still 16x18.

 

[DonDiego]

I'm just curious why TW rates the 16x18 as a 4.5 - 7.0 player stick. I don't get it. I'm guessing its only because of the unpredictable nature of the 16x18 pattern???
When so may pros use this frame - delpo, kohli etc. Obviously theirs are customized but the string pattern is still 16x18.

I only know of Kolschreiber using the 16x18 pattern.

 

[Overdrive]

I recommend neither. These racquets hurt my arm faster than a Babolat PD. Heck, I play with a 15 oz racquet, and it still had more comfort.

 

[Fintft]

I'm just curious why TW rates the 16x18 as a 4.5 - 7.0 player stick. I don't get it. I'm guessing its only because of the unpredictable nature of the 16x18 pattern???
When so may pros use this frame - delpo, kohli etc. Obviously theirs are customized but the string pattern is still 16x18.

I prefer the 16X18 open pattern in both BLX and Amplifeel 6.1 95, with full bed natural gut.

I've reached this conclusion, although initially, I thought that the 18X20 closed pattern in the 6.1 95 KFactor would give me more control and here is why:
with an open pattern you get more spin (especially with frayed natural gut) and that stops the balls from sailing long (as natural gut is most powerfull string).

I've also probably improved a bit by racket head speed since the KFactor, so, spin factors even more.

Just my 2c.

Cheers!

 

[Fintft]

I recommend neither. These racquets hurt my arm faster than a Babolat PD. Heck, I play with a 15 oz racquet, and it still had more comfort.

Humm, I've only demoed the PD, owned a Aerostorm Tour and hit often (in the family) with an APD cortex....Never had any arm problems with any, but then again spoiling myself with full bed natural gut. All the Babolats had more power then the 6.1 95, especially the APD, while the Aerostorm Tour is close enough in specs and feel (just a tad more power and 100 sq inches).

 

[coolschreiber]

I prefer the 16X18 open pattern in both BLX and Amplifeel 6.1 95, with full bed natural gut.

I've reached this conclusion, although initially, I thought that the 18X20 closed pattern in the 6.1 95 KFactor would give me more control and here is why:
with an open pattern you get more spin (especially with frayed natural gut) and that stops the balls from sailing long (as natural gut is most powerfull string).

I've also probably improved a bit by racket head speed since the KFactor, so, spin factors even more.

Just my 2c.

Cheers!

@Fintft, thanks for sharing your experience. Do you find the 16x18 unpredictable response-wise?

 

[DonDiego]

@Fintft, thanks for sharing your experience. Do you find the 16x18 unpredictable response-wise?

If I may: I used to have this problem, but I was playing with an 18 gauge poly. Since I switched to a 16 gauge, low-power poly, it's much better.

 

[Fintft]

If I may: I used to have this problem, but I was playing with an 18 gauge poly. Since I switched to a 16 gauge, low-power poly, it's much better.

The gauge is probably a factor as well, since I use 17 in VS natural gut...
And when I try a multi like NXT Max( probably 16, I forgot since the darn thing won't break on my third, spare, racket) I definitely get more control.

Short answer: I'm not sure, since now I don't vary the pattern (to a close 18X20), nor the string usually (from VS 17 strung at 57/55).

In general, the string and pattern setup are ok (and with heavy Slazenger Wimbledon balls), the problems being usually caused by:
a) poor movement.
b) technique and/or nerves.
c) string job.
d) court quality.