If PS 85 = one of the most demanding..

[McGee]

Gosh, another "why are you losers using a mid-size racquet just because I don't" debate. Well, it has been a couple of days since the last one

Exactly. Certain posters that don't use mid sticks make it a point to start threads every couple of days to state that mids are "too demanding". Its getting old.

 

[WChiang]

These people love to blame their equpiment as being too demanding rather than blaming themsleves or simply humbling themsleves into saying >> That guy who kicked my ass today is better than me.

...... When I win a match, it is not because TW or Spencer played the match for me. Like-wise when I lose a match, I don't go calling spencer or tw and blame them.

And the above should be the same for everyone, not just me.

That makes too much sense. It HAS to be the racquet and not the player...doesn't it Heaven forbid that some of these posters actually place the outcome of their matches on their own abilities.

You're spot on drakulie.

 

[Jack & Coke]

wow you're really reaching now...

You have turned a simple thread into your personal soapbox, bursting with rhetorical rants about head sizes and whatever. My posts have NOTHING to do with putting the blameon why people lose... you are really digressing way too much.

You're reading WAY WAY WAY too much into the original topic, and running with it into your own little vendetta against imaginary insurgents of the TT community.

You have issues man.. try eating more fiber. mkay?

Each racquet company makes different racquets with different specs to suit different playing abilities and styles. The problem is that not everyone has the same playing capability to best take advantage of all these different options.

Where the 4.0+ player may have the skills to play with just about ANY racquet on the market ("player", "tweener", "beginner", etc.), the lesser skilled 1.0-3.0 player will undoubtably find some "player racquets" like (as in similar too) the PS 85, MORE DEMANDING.

 

[drakulie]

My posts have NOTHING to do with putting the blameon why people lose... you are really digressing way too much.

Then why don't you just ask what you really meant and wanted to know when you started this thread? Is that too hard?

If you want to know the opposite of an 85 the answer is a frame that fits the following description:

>one of the larger frames on the market
>one of the lighter frames on the market
>a frame that is 8 pts head heavy
> a frame that is extremely flexible
> a frame that is white in color
> a frame that does not have a leather grip
> a frame with a larger pallet.

Are you satisfied? Because when you find the aformentioned racquet you will find the answer to the above question.

If that is not your question, then ask what you meant when you started this thread, rather than asking me what the least demanding frame I am willing to play with is, and then getting huffy when I give you my answer. Additionally, don't bring "Spencer" and his opinion into the conversation>>> talk about digressing :roll:

the lesser skilled 1.0-3.0 player will undoubtably find some "player racquets" like (as in similar too) the PS 85, MORE DEMANDING.

and the lesser skilled 1.0-3.0 player will undoubtebly also find some "tweeners" more demanding than some "player racquets". Again, talk about digressing. What does this have to do with your original post? Hmmmmm :roll:

 

[drakulie]

That makes too much sense. It HAS to be the racquet and not the player...doesn't it Heaven forbid that some of these posters actually place the outcome of their matches on their own abilities.

Yeah, God Forbid!

 

[Jack & Coke]

Then why don't you just ask what you really meant and wanted to know when you started this thread? Is that too hard?

I did. But you're to too blind to see it.

Please drakulie, create your own thread if you wish to digress.

You've stated your opinion, I accept what you have to say.

Now please stop spamming this thread. All you have done is attack and ranted about what racquets that we should play with. My OP says nothing about what racquets people should play with.. you started that mess.

 

[keithchircop]

well since people choose racquets depending on how demanding they find them... drakulie didn't hijack this thread.

 

[Mick]

in my view, your opponent is the one who makes you feel your racquet is demanding or not demanding.

If he's good enough, lighter racquet, bigger headsize racquet won't help you. If he's not good enough, you would feel like you are playing with a magical racquet because it's too easy to hit winners.

 

[Jack & Coke]

Let's eliminate this nonsense about headsizes (mid vs. mid+ vs. OS, blah blah blah)

Suppose you take two identical racquets's that are around 11 oz.

Lead one up so it has the same balance, but is 14 oz.

Other factors such as headsize, stiffness, length, etc. are the same, but the SW is different.

Over the course of a 3 set match, do you think it's possible that the 14 oz racquet would feel "more demanding" than the 11oz racquet, due to it's weight, and not nessessarily the skill level of your opponent?

When compared to each other, imo, the 14 oz racquet is the "more demanding" racquet over the 11 oz racquet.

 

[keithchircop]

absolutely not.

i would find it more demanding to keep the ball in with an 11 oz racquet, the way i swing. different strokes for different folks, jack.

 

[Jack & Coke]

i would find it more demanding to keep the ball in with an 11 oz racquet [than a 14 oz. racquet]

..more demanding?

..over a 3 set match?

lol, yeah ok. :roll:

Thanks for your input.

 

[keithchircop]

jack, im used to taking long swings hitting the ball hard without heavy topspin - i'm not used to playing with anything less than 12oz. he11, my first racquet weighed 12oz. how could i say i find playing with an 11oz racquet easier than a 14oz, when i'd have trouble keeping the ball from sailing? you said you find the TiS6 less demanding in an earlier post. my girlfriend uses that rocket launcher. i win every set. the one time we switched racquets i lost.

playing 4 sets with an old wooden dunlop maxply mcenroe didn't kill my arm - i dont know how much it weighed. the ball was going in, not out.

you're going to tell me which racquets i find more demanding?

 

[drakulie]

All you have done is attack and ranted about what racquets that we should play with. My OP says nothing about what racquets people should play with.. you started that mess.

Show me where I have stated THAT "x" PLAYER should play with "X" frame. In fact, show me one post in any thread on these boards where I have ever made such a statement. You will never find it, because I have NEVER TOLD ANYONE TO PLAY WITH A PARTICULAR FRAME.

You have me confused with someone named Jack & Coke:

Where the 4.0+ player may have the skills to play with just about ANY racquet on the market ("player", "tweener", "beginner", etc.), the lesser skilled 1.0-3.0 player will undoubtably find some "player racquets" like (as in similar too) the PS 85, MORE DEMANDING.

 

[drakulie]

Suppose you take two identical racquets's that are around 11 oz.

Lead one up so it has the same balance, but is 14 oz.

Other factors such as headsize, stiffness, length, etc. are the same, but the SW is different.

Over the course of a 3 set match, do you think it's possible that the 14 oz racquet would feel "more demanding" than the 11oz racquet, due to it's weight, and not nessessarily the skill level of your opponent?

When compared to each other, imo, the 14 oz racquet is the "more demanding" racquet over the 11 oz racquet.

Your opinion.

What I find hilarious is you can't accept keith's answer. What?? YOUR opinion applies to everyone?

You know what, you are obviously one of those posters I spoke about earlier that loves to blame their equipment. You can't even accept responsibility for this thread and the mess YOU created with your original post.

Oh, and by the way, you state the SW is different. Which one has a heavier SW? The 11 ounce or 14 ounce? Again, your posts are incomplete.

 

[Jack & Coke]

I'm sorry, I missed the part where I said "I can't accept keith's answer".

tsk tsk... you and your ASSumptions.

I said "yeah"

I said "ok"

I said "thanks for the input".

Now please resist the urge to continue trolling this thead - using it as your soapbox to push your views on people.

Also the agressive and beligerant tone of your attacks are really quite petty.

My original post was a simple question, you gave your answer (Viktoriya Kutuzova's racquet), now move along... and thanks for participating.

 

[drakulie]

tsk tsk... you and your ASSumptions.

My assumptions? Apparently there are at least two people who read into your post the same way.

you're going to tell me which racquets i find more demanding?

By the way, you still haven't shown me where I have stated that "x" player shoudl play with "x" frame. Like those who balme their equipment, you can't take responsibillity and say "I was wrong".

Additionally, you still haven't stated which has a higher SW in your scenario.

Learn how to communicate properly.

 

[keithchircop]

lol, yeah ok. :roll:

a man states his opinion after yours - it disagrees with yours. what do you do? you laugh out loud and roll your eyes.

sounds to me like not accepting an answer as plausible. i was nice enough a guy to explain myself in further detail in the next post. your not accepting my opinion is fine by me, mind you, as i dont need your approval on my views.

if by laughing out loud and rolling your eyes you mean you are accepting one's views, i agree with drakulie: learn how to communicate properly.

 

[Rabbit]

I have a dream...that one day players with OS rackets will play doubles with players who use wooden rackets..

I have a dream...that one day a player will be judged on the content of his game, not the size of his racket...

I have a dream...that one day everyone will be able to choose the size of their frame without having to endure the pontifications of those who try to claim that they have an ulterior motive for playing with a particular size...

I have a dream.....

-or-

Everyone knows that 98 square inches is the optimal size for a tennis racket and anyone who plays with anything any different is either clinging to some outdated notion of what a tennis racket is, or over buying their equipment.

 

[superstition]

How difficult a racquet is to use depends on the shot you're trying to hit. For instance, I have a lot of trouble hitting high smashes with my PS 85 (with a lot of lead on the hoop), but hitting them with a Prince Precision 730 (longbody Graphite II) was easy. Yet, I find the PS less demanding than the Prince overall, because more of my shots land in the court, go where I expect them to, etc. When it comes to producing power and slice, the Prince has the edge, because it's stiffer and has a less dense string pattern. Everything has a trade-off.

However, the people here who try to say that no racquet is too demanding overall are wrong, given the current tennis environment. Certainly, if 70 sqin racquets were the only legal ones, then a 70 sqin racquet would not be too demanding. Given that the current head size restriction is much bigger, a player with a 70 sqin frame is going to be at a disadvantage against a player with a larger racquet. There is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to the angles and control a small racquet offers. I have played and won matches with a Wilson Ultra II standard head size, but it IS more demanding than a PS 85, period.

Given all the variables in the current tennis environment, I'd say a racquet that's in the middle/average of every spec is probably the one for a beginner to pick. Middle stiffness. Middle head size. Middle weight. Middle balance point. Middle beam width. Etc. This isn't going to yield the optimal racquet for most players, but it will at least make it likely for a player to choose one that's manageable.

 

[hrstrat57]

I once bought a wilson hammer 6.2 in a weak moment. Took it to the courts in lieu of the ps 85's I was hitting at the time, guess this was about 12 yrs ago. A friend told me it is light, easy to hit and I would love it. It sure was pretty nice looking too!!

I hit about 5 balls over the fence in a row.

Then as I dialed it in my elbow started to cry....

Now for me that stick was hard to hit.....

Everything is relative.

What works for me doesn't have to work for anybody else.

What I say works for me is not a personal attack on you.

My friend now plays hyper hammer 5.3's....

He is still my friend and we have some great matches.

 

[superstition]

Wilson Hammer racquets tend to be head-heavy, not evenly balanced. Some of them, like the "skunk" are also lighter than average.

 

[Jack & Coke]

keithchircop, drakulie,

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/accept
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agree

"accepting" an opinion, is not the same as "agreeing" with an opinion

I "accept" both of your views.

I "accept" that is how you think, and that is ok with me.

I don't care to change your mind. I really don't..

I don't "agree" with your questionable logic or views..

If you still fail to grasp this elementary concept, then there's nothing more I can say to you.. it's just a lack of reading comprehension on your behalf.:sad:

 

[hrstrat57]

Wilson Hammer racquets tend to be head-heavy, not evenly balanced. Some of them, like the "skunk" are also lighter than average.

Exactly!

Which for me translated to this hammer thing is not good....and for me hard to hit. Probably could have made it work. No need - what I had worked already.

Regarding the ps 85 orig I fear these" it is too hard to hit" threads are scaring away good players who should experience the pure heaven of the well struck shot with this stick at least once in their lives.

If you swing fast and big and you haven't at least hit with one you have missed one of the best sensations in our game IMHO. Sure is might not make it into your bag as your gamer. It is not in my bag now as my main stick.

A strong player scared away from one of our sports greatest pleasures by threads on the internet?

I think that is a shame.

....but it isn't a personal attack, just my heartfelt opinion.

 

[superstition]

I've seen players try to play with PS 85s, players who would have done better with something bigger. If a player can handle the 85, that's OK. But, even though I use it, I recognize that some parts of my game are worse because of it, like the smash and groundstroke power. I am an all-courter who prefers the baseline and tends to counterpunch (with angles) in order to try to force an error. Brute power is often not quite as important as consistency, which is why I tend to avoid larger heads. But, returning huge serves with the 85 can be very difficult, especially since mine is leaded.

 

[Jack & Coke]

oh this thread is not about scaring away people from the PS 85 or racquets like it... it may sound like it because of a couple of "the sky is falling", "we are under attack - orange alert!" attitudes hijacking this thread.

but really, I love my PS 85 SV and hit with it all the time. The original intent of this thread, as shown in the OP, was to talk about the few other racquets out there with completely opposite playing characteristics and level of demand as the those similar to the PS 85.

Not racquets on the deep end (i.e. ultra lite $50 noobie sticks), but "playable" racquets that offer less demanding traits with similar performance characteristics.

Maybe, the best "tweener" or "game improvement" stick?

 

[fgs]

i think the trouble starts with what each person understands by "too demanding". drakulie said that he found a babolat too demanding because he couldn't hit the court with it. while i do understand that point (i couldn't either), i'd rather find that racquet "not appropriate" for his and my swingstyle than "too demanding". i once hit a couple of shots with a n1 and they all went into the backfence no matter how much spin i tried to hit.
my take of "too demanding" would be a racquet which basically fits my gamestyle but gives me a hard time either because it is too heavy, or has a too high swingweight or why not a too small/big headsize. so, it all comes down to a very subjective evaluation in the sense that flathitters will not enjoy bigger frames, and i'm not talking about 110+, and spinmeisters will not enjoy small frames. but it is not possible to single out something like headsize or swingweight, because it is the mix of it that in the end makes up for the frame. flathitters will not enjoy balanced or headheavy frames, western grip topspinners will not enjoy headheavy frames, etc. but then, these sort of combinations are not appropriate. a n1 isn't developed for a player with fast swings as a k90 is not developed for a player with compact swings. so, we will definitely have a hard time to find a common ground on this issue.

 

[drakulie]

fgs, that is a nice sum up. Especially related to what each person may find demanding and/or appropriate. I also agree most flat hitters (that I know, inclduing me) would go for something smaller and headlight. We also tend to be more all-court players and enjoy the maneuvarability of a smaller frame around the net.

The oppopiste typically holds true for pure baseliner, and guys that enjoy putting tons of spin on the ball.

 

[Jack & Coke]

i think the trouble starts with what each person understands by "too demanding". drakulie said that he found a babolat too demanding because he couldn't hit the court with it. while i do understand that point (i couldn't either), i'd rather find that racquet "not appropriate" for his and my swingstyle than "too demanding".

I agree.

Good post.

The inability for drakulie to find the court with a medium weight, powerful, mid+ to large size head racquet like the babolat is probably due to a mismatch in swing styles, and adaptability, and not nessessarily due to it being "too demanding".

Attributes and developed skills such as racquet head manipulation (speed and control), proper swing timing (relative to swing style), and follow-through are greatly affected by the physical characteristics of each racquet. The effort required by each individual to "wield" these weapons relates to the concept and interpretation of how "demanding" these racquets are.

 

[drakulie]

It's not that I couldn't find the court with the frame. When I have hit with that frame, I have (compared to the 85) a noteable drop in control. I can't swing out and control the ball as well as with other frames. I have to adapt to the frame and change my swing by slowing it down and changing my angle of attack on the ball. I have to swing more upwards to generate more spin. As a result of swinging slower and putting more air under the ball, the pace of my shots slows down (loss of power).

Additionally, I found the swing to be heavier than that of the 85. So yes, fgs is correct when he states it is not appropriate for my style of play. But whether one wants to call this "not appropriate" or "demanding", the point remains the same.

On another side, I absolutely loved the Head i Radical OS. If memory serves correct, I believe it is a 107 square inch frame. I loved the feel, weight, sw, and balance. Ultimately, what I didn't like was it's lack of maneuvarability around the net (although it was solid on volleys), and since I use a one-hander, I wasn't comfortable with it. I felt clumsy hitting a one-hander with it. So I felt this racquet on my backhand was very demanding.

 

[Jack & Coke]

I absolutely loved the Head i Radical OS. If memory serves correct, I believe it is a 107 square inch frame. I loved the feel, weight, sw, and balance.

Have you tried the

Head Agassi Radical Limited Edition Racquet

[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica][/FONT]

([FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]Review, Customer Feedback)[/FONT]


I read it was very nice as well... if you have, how do they compare?

 

[Mick]

I like that Agassi racquet a lot. So much that I bought 3 of them and then Serve 'em Hard told me it's unfair to my opponents, so I have gone back to playing my Wilson PS racquets

I think Serve 'em Hard was right, it improved my game too much.

 

[drakulie]

I read it was very nice as well... if you have, how do they compare?

Yes, that is another all-around solid frame. Lots of spin potential, control, and plow thru. Much more so than the i radical. It has been a while since I hit with that frame but I believe it was a bit heavier than the i radical, and sw may have been a bit heavier as well.

Serves were very good. Great placement, and spin. (I liked the i radical better for serves. >> a much more comfortable ride on the swing path)

This one, like the i radical are both solid on volleys as well. Very good control. However, they are not as maneuvaerable as smaller frames.

The Radical line is one of the few lines that I have played with that the OS versions are just as good on volleys as the midplus versions. The difference of course is the maneuverability.

By the way, I played with the original version of this racquet. I'm not sure how this special edition plays, or if it is the same.

 

[Jack & Coke]

Agassi's racquet model specs (retail)

For reference:

(sorry I don't have the info for his old Donnay)

 

[Jack & Coke]

opps!

I made a mistake on the last couple of specs for the Head Liguid Metal.. should be:

Grip Type: HydroControl String Pattern:
18 Mains / 19 Crosses
Mains skip: 8T,10T,9H
Two Piece
No shared holes String Tension: 54-64 pounds

 

[keithchircop]

choosing between the POG and the Radical Limited Edition, is choosing between the best spin-friendly OS and the best control-oriented OS, right? where does the Fischer MSpeed 105 fit in?

in the MSpeed 105 review, TW says the MSpeed is better than the POG OS. In the Radical Limited Edition review, chis says the Radical is better than the MSpeed. Hence, Chris thinks the Radical Limited Edition is better than the POG OS.

here's what chris said in the Fischer MSpeed 105 review: "While hitting with the M Speed Pro Number One 105, I re-acquainted myself with the Prince Graphite Original Oversize and the HEAD Flexpoint Radical Oversize to see how it stacked up. There was no doubt in my mind that the Fischer came out as number one. It offered a softer and more forgiving response compared to the Prince, and more control when compared to the HEAD. While it could not match the topspin potential of the Prince or the power of the HEAD, it's overall performance off the ground made it the better choice for me."

and in the Radical Limited Edition review: "During the test I compared it to the M Speed Pro One 105, the Gamma IPEX 7.0 Oversize and the Flexpoint Radical Oversize and none came close to the performance of this one."

the Limited Edition must be a fricken good racquet.