I've seen people go on and on about how certain rackets just "can't" do something and how they do certain things "well" and such, and I agree to some extent, but to label a racket as "uncontrollable" or just flat out "bad" seems a bit.. false (??). Recently read a thread where it labeled a racket as "-The racquet lacked pop -This racquet is for amuetures -no control -unable to acess spin " and yet I really doubt that. I mean, even the 20 dollar rackets from Wal-mart are playable. Sure you aren't going to get 100% of what you're used to, but its definately not unplayable. I've been switching rackets around lately (popped strings, curiosity, lots of reasons) and its made little to no difference on my shots, the biggest would be using a LM Instinct Tour + which made my forehand easier to hit (I normally use a n6.1 95). Getting back on topic, IMO a racket can't make or break a player. Am I wrong to think this? Is it really just impossible for a 3.0 to use say, the 6.0 Classic?